Covid-19 News


  • Very frustrating.


    The Food and Drug Administration issued a warning in early April that ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, should not be used in the treatment of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19. https://www.avma.org/javma-new…proved-covid-19-treatment



    Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) that allowed for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate donated to the Strategic National Stockpile to be used to treat certain hospitalized patients with COVID-19 when a clinical trial was unavailable, or participation in a clinical trial was not feasible. https://www.fda.gov/news-event…orization-chloroquine-and


    I realize this has been noted before, but now Doctors are becoming more and more aware of this. Discussing with some physicians in my search to find a doctor who will use Ivermectin in case I am diagnosed positive, has resulted in "we cannot use it even if we want to. the official issuance of these orders would negate our malpractice insurance."


    So we have several countries and doctors continuing to give strong support for these two medicines, yet our government agencies have formally forbade their use. :cursing:


    Now to make to make my point even more :


    Q: What treatments are available for COVID-19?

    A: Currently there are no FDA-approved medicines specifically for COVID-19. However, the FDA has granted emergency use authorizations for some medicines to be used for certain patients hospitalized with COVID-19. https://www.fda.gov/emergency-…requently-asked-questions


    So.... there are NO approved medicines and yet, despite the very large amount of physician based support for HCQ and Ivermectin, these two drugs have been specifically banned! Both of these drugs have had VERY long histories and have very minimal and well understood side effects. Yet they are banned!

    Remedisvir, on the other hand, very negative side effects, not a long history, thus not well understood and less evidence / support than either HCQ or Ivermectin, is OK'd by the same agencies.


    I could understand if Ivermectin or HCQ had serious side effects on a majority of people, was not well understood / little history and had little field support, but that is simply not the case.


    So, one tests positive... no approved medicines, but DO NOT TAKE medicines that are being heralded, proven safe and low cost! This is insanity! Doctor's HAVE been effectively banned in the US from using these simply because of these statements and the resulting insurance consequence.


    So no approved drugs yet statements that effectively ban supported drugs! I do not want to hear about RCT because there are none for any drugs ;yet! Covid can kill within a week....some here have lampooned the guy who went to a Covid party, caught it and died. Rightly so.... but if some here want to wait on RCT's then be my guest!..... you might very well end up the same as the ignorant person who went to the party! Ignorance runs both ways!


    The big problem is that my choice has now been taken away by liberal politicians.... something they are always good at! :( (Yes, I say this because the studies involved seemed to all have had very political bias to them indeed.)


    Anyone have any ideas on how to get Ivermectin?

  • Tell www.1800petmeds.com your dog has these symptoms, or order it from India/Mexico.


    It interests me that a medicine on the WHOs List Of Essential Medicines isn’t licensed for humans in western countries. I’m struggling to find a reliable source of information as to why that is. Perhaps we just don’t suffer form enough parasitic infections to warrant the expense of testing it?


    Links appreciated if your reply mentions any sort of mafia, thank you.

  • TrialSite News (July 15) interviews two Florida doctors using ivermectin --


    Dr. Jean-Jacques Rajter and Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz Rajter Discuss Ivermectin In Broward County

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Also worth noting is that the "RECOVERY TRIAL" has just published their preprint --

    Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19:

    Preliminary results from a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial

    -- which has been hailed in The Establishment Media as a death blow to HCQ,

    despite their use of toxic dosing - and, a google search makes it almost impossible

    to find criticisms of the study.


    Another interesting study indicates that fasting blood glucose is a good predictor of Covid mortality --

    High Blood Sugar Doubles the Risk of COVID-19 Death

    https://www.trialsitenews.com/…e-risk-of-covid-19-death/

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/r…/2020/07/200710212247.htm


    • Official Post

    An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 — Preliminary Report

    List of authors.

    Lisa A. Jackson, M.D., M.P.H., Evan J. Anderson, M.D., Nadine G. Rouphael, M.D., Paul C. Roberts, Ph.D., Mamodikoe Makhene, M.D., M.P.H., Rhea N. Coler, Ph.D., Michele P. McCullough, M.P.H., James D. Chappell, M.D., Ph.D., Mark R. Denison, M.D., Laura J. Stevens, M.S., Andrea J. Pruijssers, Ph.D., Adrian McDermott, Ph.D., et al., for the mRNA-1273 Study Group*


    Abstract

    BACKGROUND

    The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late 2019 and spread globally, prompting an international effort to accelerate development of a vaccine. The candidate vaccine mRNA-1273 encodes the stabilized prefusion SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.


    METHODS

    We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial including 45 healthy adults, 18 to 55 years of age, who received two vaccinations, 28 days apart, with mRNA-1273 in a dose of 25 μg, 100 μg, or 250 μg. There were 15 participants in each dose group.


    RESULTS

    After the first vaccination, antibody responses were higher with higher dose (day 29 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay anti–S-2P antibody geometric mean titer [GMT], 40,227 in the 25-μg group, 109,209 in the 100-μg group, and 213,526 in the 250-μg group). After the second vaccination, the titers increased (day 57 GMT, 299,751, 782,719, and 1,192,154, respectively). After the second vaccination, serum-neutralizing activity was detected by two methods in all participants evaluated, with values generally similar to those in the upper half of the distribution of a panel of control convalescent serum specimens. Solicited adverse events that occurred in more than half the participants included fatigue, chills, headache, myalgia, and pain at the injection site. Systemic adverse events were more common after the second vaccination, particularly with the highest dose, and three participants (21%) in the 250-μg dose group reported one or more severe adverse events.


    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/…39373-8a93e2b69c-44567417

  • They say that due to the long half-life, rheumatism patients build up similar blood concentrations as were tested in the RECOVERY trial. It’s not a toxic dose but the high end of a normal dose.

    Aren't there many examples of drug toxicity related to dosing schedule as opposed to asymptotic blood levels?

    -- i.e., opioids, anti-cancer chemo, ...

    Why not stick to the standard protocol? and administer HCQ early?

  • Why not stick to the standard protocol? and administer HCQ early?


    They are agreeing with everyone here who says that if HCQ is going to work it needs to be administered as early as possible. But the time between patients being infected and in hospital cleared for HCQ is quite long anyway.


    Because it has a long lifetime in tissue, to build up that (known non-toxic) level quickly you need a very large initial dose. In most other uses it does not matter getting blood serum levels up quickly, but for this one it does.


    It is ironic, on the one hand they are criticised as no good because HCQ must be administred quickly, on the other, their careful protocol to administer it quickly is seen as wrong.


    Also, many of the claims for efficacy with treatment starting on day 5 or so and relatively low initial doses are suspect, because the correct serum levels will not be there at first.


    The claims of outstanding success using HCQ are very suspect. Even though it remains possible that pre-exposure prophylaxis can decrease overall infections and/or mortality. just very difficult to get any data on that. And long-term use does have some side effects,even though it is well tolerated.


    THH

  • They say that due to the long half-life, rheumatism patients build up similar blood concentrations as were tested in the RECOVERY trial.

    One benefit of this high dosing is that it shows that the TOXICITY of HCQ is low... it is NOT a dangerous drug..

    Here is dangerous,.. opioids... insulin... warfarin ...aspirin .. HCQ is not on the list..

    https://www.ismp-canada.org/do…ationIncidents.pdf?id=303

    "

    We did not observe excess mortality in the first 2 days of treatment with
    hydroxychloroquine, the time when early effects of dose-dependent toxicity might be expected.
    urthermore, the preliminary data presented here did not show any excess in ventricular
    tachycardia (including torsade de pointes) or ventricular fibrillation in the hydroxychloroquine arm.


    the main problem wih the WRECKOVERY arm of The RECOVERY 'trial' was that HCQ was not given early within 5 days of first symptoms..

  • Anyone have any ideas on how to get Ivermectin?


    As said many times: The horse version is safe. At least here in Europe!



    Why are Ivermectin and Praziquantel banned (or sold at 100x price) in most western countries? This happened exactly when the first chemo therapy made it to market.



    Western dogs,cats, Horses, cows, (bulls) still get it regularly but these need no high profit cancer therapy ...



    It looks like the average American is treated worse than cattle & dogs.



    They discuss this in the paper: https://www.medrxiv.org/conten….20151852v1.full.pdf+html line 261 onwards.


    One more useless paper about HCQ only given to serious ill patients. In avg. day 5 is the first line you cross on your road to death. Possibly because this is the point where the virus migrates from upper respiratory part to the lower.

  • RB - do you understand the reason for this? Look at Raoul's initial paper. His protocol delivered relatively low initial amounts of HCQ, some time after infection. If, as claimed here by HCQ advocates (and I agree) HCQ could only be active against viral infections very early on it is difficult to see how such protocols can work when the RECOVERY protocol, carefully tuned to give as fast as possible high serum levels, did not work.


    I remain mistified how so many people here (including you) can be so unable to look without prejudice at data and join the dots. It must be something to do with politics, I'm just glad I don't do that.


    THH

  • More THH rhetoric

    More THH Rhetoric,..

    Did Raoult say outstanding!!

    or "magic bullet"


    There is Dr THH spin... the circuit designer and the one who finds Dr Ascoli's statisitcs "convincing"


    This is the current view from India


    "HCQ is obviously not a panacea for severe cases of Covid-19. Given early, it helps reduce mortality by about half, compared to those not given HCQ

    . In India the drug is widely available and not expensive. A number of Indian states have already incorporated a short course of HCQ in their Covid-19 treatment protocol, and states that have not done so will do well to implement this quickly.


  • oldguy and Zeus46,


    Thanks but I do not think it wise. Animal medicine is likely not the same quality / purity approved for humans. Anyways, I should not be delegated to take animal medicine when there is significant positive reason not to. This is pure political hit job!


    If I can find valid "for human use" Ivermectin, I believe I can get physicians oversight. I,E. they did not prescribe it, but if I am going to use it, they can be informed ahead of time and give "recommendations". Using Vet stuff would be out of the question for such.


    This is crazy times! I deal with the public every day and have no real choice. My bills still come in every month and I am not retired or tenured, receiving a stable income. If I get sick, I still have to run my business, there is no one else who can do it. That is part of being an entrepreneur / small business owner. I need to have medical options and the damn liberals have taken several away for pure political gain!


    People who have not really been affected by this pandemic seem to think in black and white terms regarding these subjects. I know if your income went to zero, your house mortgage, car loan, electric bills, business loans, capital equipment loans were all still coming in at full amount, but no income, your view would be different as well.


    I have never taken a penny of government hand out. I have worked hard and earned every penny I have. (Along with associated loans as well!) I have done well and am doing well, largely because I look at possible failure modes and plan ahead. I take responsibility for my OWN situation and never look to the government for handouts or to bail me out. Currently a big problem with society.


    This is why I am looking at Ivermectin or HCQ. It is likely I will get Covid at some point. I cannot shutter myself away like a hermit as some on this site seem to do. Masks and hand washing will not be sufficient. So when I contract Covid, I need to have a plan in place to combat it. Remedisivir and such is complete BS and for last hope cases anyway. I plan ahead.... I need prophylactic or early on set medicine, such as HCQ or Ivermectin.


    Now again, I am not stating these are magic bullets... I am not stating that 6 months there will not be anything better.. I am stating that I cannot wait six months and there is no better option that these two! RCT's be damned as they will not treat me for anything. RCT's never cured anyone! They are certainly valuable and valid, IF YOU HAVE TIME. The possible up side to HCQ and Ivermectin is exponential to the very minor possible side effects, that it is silly not to use them until a proven better option becomes available. Period. Yet that option has been taken away... and for no good reason! (Remember, almost all "standard care" can still be used in conjunction with either of these if needed, so that also removes most arguments about "standard care" options.)


    (Yes, I am venting frustration caused by the freaking liberal media and politicians. "Crimes against humanity" indeed! Freakin idiots! 8o)


    https://www.newsweek.com/trump…us-tavia-galonski-1496280

  • f I can find valid "for human use" Ivermectin,

    You might have to settle for quercetin as a substirute for HCQ..

    Ivermectin will probably be locked up like HCQ.. and in very short supply very soon


    Dr Been's advice is still fairly current.. 500-1000 mg daily...

    His Vit D3 advice is not quite right... you don't need sunlight to activate it.


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • This is the current view from India


    "HCQ is obviously not a panacea for severe cases of Covid-19. Given early, it helps reduce mortality by about half, compared to those not given HCQ

    . In India the drug is widely available and not expensive. A number of Indian states have already incorporated a short course of HCQ in their Covid-19 treatment protocol, and states that have not done so will do well to implement this quickly.


    The current view from India is responding to the developing (negative) evidence from RCTs:


    https://www.hindustantimes.com…I5swOS69bk8eCzc6o1DM.html


    “Covid-19 is a new disease and it is an extremely dynamic situation that we are dealing with, and newer data is constantly being generated. What we knew of the virus’ behaviour say a couple of months ago has undergone a sea change now, and same is applicable for the drugs and other treatment modalities being given to the patients,” said one of the members of the National Task Force constituted by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), to tackle the pandemic. The person requested anonymity

    The evidence generated from across the globe is being constantly scrutinized by experts here and guidelines and protocols are being revised accordingly. The same is true for HCQ or any other drug given to Covid-19 patients. The experts will be reviewing the guidelines and protocols and if they feel a need for a revision, they will change them, the member added.


    The recommended dosage for HCQ is 400mg twice a day for one day, followed by 200mg twice a day for four days; and for treatment it was being given along with antibiotic azithromycin, as part of the Union health ministry protocol on Covid-19 management. In its review of the protocol, the health ministry had dropped the antibiotic from the regimen.


    When you start a drug for a condition based on some evidence then there is a need for even stronger evidence to withdraw that drug. Science works on evidence,” Dr RR Gangakhedkar, ICMR’s former epidemiology head said about the HCQ controversy earlier.


    A section of doctors has been saying that more evidence was required to keep the drug a part of the treatment protocol for Covid-19 management.

    “I would say I have not been as confident about this medicine now as I was earlier,” says Dr Yatin Mehta, chairman of the critical care department at Medanta Hospital.

    Based on its Solidarity Trial’s International Steering Committee recommendations, WHO also discontinued the trial’s Lopinavir and Ritonavir arms for the same reason. Both these drugs are antivirals meant for HIV/AIDS treatment, and had shown promise initially in treating Covid-19.


    India dropped these medicines from its list of drugs used to treat Covid-positive cases in April.

    “These were initially being given under the emergency use authorization but later ICMR had withdrawn these drugs from the regimen as the results weren’t really great,” said an official of the Union health ministry,requesting anonymity.

    ICMR has also collaborated with WHO in the public health emergency Solidarity Trial – an international randomised trial of additional treatments for Covid-19 in hospitalised patients, and will be stopping these arms of the trial.

    “It is a WHO trial and the rules are governed by them. Since they have suspended these arms of the trial, it will obviously be suspended at trial sites in India also,” said an ICMR official, requesting anonymity.


    Basically, they commited to HCQ early and so will keep it until evidence against is very strong. It is not good politics to change your mind every day.

  • Medcram's latest video --


    Coronavirus Pandemic Update 96: RNA Vaccine; Ivermectin; von Willebrand Factor and COVID-19

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.