Look at this tiktok of a woman saying, "I took ivermectin and got the antibodies * and I am doing fantastic!" Then in the next frame she is in the hospital and looks 20 years older. This is the face of COVID.
https://www.tiktok.com/@nurse_…video/7013729575322668294
* What antibodies?!?
Display MoreCDC Booster Safety Updates
https://trialsitenews.com/cdc-booster-safety-updates/
New data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report” involve 12,600 people who after receiving an initial mRNA COVID-19 vaccine or Pfizer booster shot reporting on their side effects. They did so by using the voluntary V-Safe CDC survey accomplished via smartphone between August 12, 2021, and September 19, 2021.
According to the CDC data, the most common impacts associated with the booster shots include the following:
Reported Side Effect Amount
Pain, at the injection site 66.6% (3 doses of Pfizer) 75.9% (3 doses Moderna)
Fatigue 51% (Pfizer) 61.8% (Moderna)
Headache 38.4% (Pfizer) 49%.8% (Moderna)
Joint Pain 23% (Pfizer) 33% (Moderna)
Fever 22.2% (Pfizer) 36.4% (Moderna)
Note, less common side effects associated with the third booster include chills, inflammation at the jab site, stomach ache/nausea, diarrhea, rash, and redness at the jab site. What about severe effects. ? Nearly a quarter of the Pfizer booster shots led to severe enough side effects leading to a lack of ability to perform daily routine (e.g., not going to work), while that number was just over a third for Moderna. These figures were slightly better than the severe response after the second shot.
Some suggest the booster program chatter dilutes attention from the core effort
According to the CDC report, the research team implies that side effects associated with the third booster are comparable to those experienced after the second jab. This implies that there aren’t any surprises to anticipate for the third jab.
Other data from around the world
TrialSite offers data from around the world, and it’s not all rosy regarding a third booster. A German physician’s society, the Medical Association of North Rhine Ärztekammer Nordrhein (aekno.de), sent a letter to their members informing them about an incident in a nursing home where 90 residents were administered the third booster shot that led to some problems. Apparently, one death occurred as well as two resuscitations and nine critically ill elderly recipients with cardiopulmonary symptoms apparently in association with the third jab.
German authorities nor the European Medicines Agency had authorized the use of the booster hence this one association urged its members to reconsider the need for the booster at least at this point.
Meanwhile, in another reported incident at a 136-bed Canadian nursing home, TrialSite sources shared that there were adverse events associated with a booster program recently. According to anonymous sources, at least seven adverse events were reported along with four deaths. However, TrialSite cannot verify these claims involving Sunnycrest Nursing Home in Whitby Ontario.
Official U.S. Government Report
CDC reports for the period cover indicate no red flags or serious risk indicators. TrialSite will continue to monitor the situation.
You should do a more careful research to not end up spreading fake news….and use the analyzed data and not initial hypothesis…
The „incident“ in a German nursing home had NO relation to the 3rd vaccination.
See in the same source you quoted…German, but Google translation helps.
COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Event Stories in Israel Covered by ‘The Testimonies Project’ Documentary
A documentary produced in Israel produced by the Israel’s People’s Committee chronicles the suffering of the victims of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Produced by the Israel People’s Committee, the film’s narrator covers dozens of interviewees who have experienced several adverse events from myocarditis and pericarditis to skin disease to other adverse outcomes.
Hundreds of thousands of adverse events have been reported in the CDC VAERS in America. Israel has been at the forefront of the COVID-19 vaccine programs. A large percentage of the population has been vaccinated as part of what are now three vaccine waves.
Created to offer a platform for all people who have been adversely affected after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, the Testimonies Project includes categories of adverse events, including Heart Problems, Neurological and Vaginal bleeding.
Covering a range of truly unfortunate situations, from skin diseases to severe neurological conditions, Israelis stand up and share their painful experiences for the world to experience. Although the interviews share their experience in Hebrew, the documentary makers include subtitles in English for audiences in the English-speaking world. Hosted on Rumble—YouTube, of course, would immediately censor such a video project—the video should be reviewed for those that want to better understand the price that many will pay for public health.
Call to Action: Check out The Testimonies Project and if you like their work, contribute.
NIH altered documents filed in federal court
NIH altered documents filed in federal court
PeterYim
September 30, 2021
0 Comments
Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.
On September 8, 2021, the National Institutes of Health filed 18 documents with the US District Court, District of New Jersey. The documents were attached to a “Status Report”(Electronic Case File 16) in the case of Yim v. National Institutes of Health (3:21-cv-07031). Three of those documents, Exhibits G, H, and I, were altered.
In their original form, the documents contained a URL to the ivermectin recommendation located on the NIH website. In contrast, in the altered documents filed with the court, the URLs are non-functional. The URLs were altered by replacing the “hyphen-minus” character (ASCII 45) with the “hyphen” character (ASCII 8208). The URL in the original document and in the document filed in the court are shown below and are visually identical. The URL from the original is first and the URL from the document submitted to the court is second.
The URL was also changed in the NIH “Statement of Material Facts” filed on September 24, 2021 (Electronic Case File 19). In the case, the URL was changed by insertion of the character “s”, by replacement of two of the “hyphen-minus” characters (ASCII 45) with “hyphen” characters (ASCII 150) and by the insertion of a “space” character.
https://files.covid19treatment…delines/archives/statemen t-on-invermectin-01–14–2021.pdf.
I am the plaintiff in this case. The lawsuit was filed to compel the NIH to disclose whether a vote was held to endorse the NIH recommendation on ivermectin. The URL is important because it is the NIH response to the following Freedom of Information Act request:
“All updates to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Guidelines that were endorsed by a vote of the Panel. (Date Range for Record Search: From 01/01/2021 To 01/28/2021)”
The motivation for making the alterations is not known. However, alteration of the documents is likely a felony.
It is not hyperbole to describe the NIH as a criminal organization.
https://files.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/guidelines/archives/statemen
Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Is Mediated by the IgG Receptors FcγRIIA and FcγRIIIA but Does Not Contribute to Aberrant Cytokine Production by Macrophages
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.01987-21
ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has raised concerns about the detrimental effects of antibodies. Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection is one of the biggest concerns in terms of not only the antibody reaction to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) upon reinfection with the virus but also the reaction to COVID-19 vaccines. In this study, we evaluated ADE of infection by using COVID-19 convalescent-phase plasma and BHK cells expressing human Fcγ receptors (FcγRs). We found that FcγRIIA and FcγRIIIA mediated modest ADE of infection against SARS-CoV-2. Although ADE of infection was observed in monocyte-derived macrophages infected with SARS-CoV-2, including its variants, proinflammatory cytokine/chemokine expression was not upregulated in macrophages. SARS-CoV-2 infection thus produces antibodies that elicit ADE of infection, but these antibodies do not contribute to excess cytokine production by macrophages.
IMPORTANCE Viruses infect cells mainly via specific receptors at the cell surface. Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection is an alternative mechanism of infection for viruses to infect immune cells that is mediated by antibodies and IgG receptors (FcγRs). Because ADE of infection contributes to the pathogenesis of some viruses, such as dengue virus and feline coronavirus, it is important to evaluate the precise mechanism of ADE and its contribution to the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. Here, using convalescent-phase plasma from COVID-19 patients, we found that two types of FcγRs, FcγRIIA and FcγRIIIA, mediate ADE of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although ADE of infection was observed for SARS-CoV-2 and its recent variants, proinflammatory cytokine production in monocyte-derived macrophages was not upregulated. These observations suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection produces antibodies that elicit ADE of infection, but these antibodies may not be involved in aberrant cytokine release by macrophages during SARS-CoV-2 infection
What pushed Israel out of herd immunity? Modeling COVID-19 spread of Delta and Waning immunity
ABSTRACT
Following a successful vaccination campaign at the beginning of 2021 in Israel, where approximately 60% of the population were vaccinated with an mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine, it seemed that Israel had crossed the herd immunity threshold (HIT). Nonetheless, Israel has seen a steady rise in COVID-19 morbidity since June 2021, reaching over 1,000 cases per million by August. This outbreak is attributed to several events that came together: the temporal decline of the vaccine’s efficacy (VE); lower efficacy of the vaccine against the current Delta (B.1.617.2) variant; highly infectiousness of Delta; and temporary halt of mandated NPIs (non-pharmaceutical interventions) or any combination of the above. Using a novel spatial-dynamic model and recent aggregate data from Israel, we examine the extent of the impact of the Delta variant on morbidity and whether it can solely explain the outbreak. We conclude that both Delta infectiousness and waning immunity could have been able to push Israel above the HIT independently, and thus, to mitigate the outbreak effective NPIs are required. Our analysis cautions countries that once vaccines’ will wane a highly infectious spread is expected, and therefore, the expected decline in the vaccine’s effectiveness in those countries should be accompanied by another vaccination campaign and effective NPIs.
DISCUSSION
In this study, we used a spatio-dynamic Monte Carlo algorithm to estimate the effect of the Delta variant on the COVID-19 outbreak that started in Israel in June 2021. We compared four different models with a combination of varying VE and theoretical reproduction rate. Based on the analysis, both the introduction of Delta and its higher reproduction rate as well as a time-decline in VE can explain this outbreak. Interestingly, we observe that the time-decline VE is responsible for the fact that the first to be infected are those vaccinated first, which are most prominently older populations, who are also at higher risk for severe disease. It is therefore recommended that counties that have vaccinated their elderly population in recent months monitor not just the number of confirmed cases, but also their age distribution and immunization status, and be aware of when this population will lose some of its immune defenses. Such monitoring will allow to detect in real-time the protective attenuation of the vaccine and provide this population another dose of the vaccine on time, which according to recent studies, has been found to be very effective against the delta variant [21, 22].
It is important to keep in mind that our models attempt to predict events that did not appear in reality. In the real world all the parameters of the model are inter-dependent. Increased reproduction rates might cause the government to impose restrictions sooner and cause a reduction in social interactions. A high reproduction rate may also result in more people getting vaccinated. As such, our analysis focuses on factors contributing to the June outbreak in Israel and its global implications, not on the prediction of cases in alternative scenarios.
Interestingly, when we examine the effect of Rt on the spread of the pandemic (Supplementary Figure 1) we find that in case of decline in the effectiveness of the vaccine against infection (which is the case today) the theoretical reproduction number, Rt should be relatively low (Rt < 2), in order not to push Israel above the HIT, which could be the case with a less contagious variant and/or presence of effective NPIs.
In summary, we argue that both the Delta variant higher infectiousness and the reduction of effectiveness of the vaccines contributed to pushing Israel above the HIT. If this is the case, the booster shots provided to all Israelis since August, are expected to reduce severe cases and the burden on hospitals, but not to bring Israel back to herd immunity without reinstating effective NPIs.
Merck to seek emergency authorization for oral Covid treatment after ‘compelling results’ in trials
KEY POINTS
A phase 3 trial of Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics’ oral antiviral treatment molnupiravir showed it reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by around 50% in Covid-19 patients.
Merck plans to seek Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S. and submit marketing applications to other global drug regulators.
If authorized by regulatory bodies, molnupiravir could be the first oral antiviral medicine for Covid-19.
Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics plan to seek emergency authorization for their oral antiviral treatment for Covid-19, after the medicine showed "compelling results" in clinical trials.
The drug, molnupiravir, reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by around 50% for patients with mild or moderate cases of Covid-19, the companies announced on Friday. Molnupiravir is administered orally and works by inhibiting the replication of Covid-19 inside the body
An interim analysis of a phase 3 study found that 7.3% of patients treated with molnupiravir were hospitalized within 29 days. Of the patients who received a placebo, 14.1% were hospitalized or died by day 29. No deaths were reported in patients who were given molnupiravir within the 29-day period, while 8 deaths were reported in placebo-treated patients.
All 775 trial participants had laboratory-confirmed symptomatic Covid-19 and were randomly allocated either molnupiravir or a placebo within five days of the start of their symptoms.
Every participant was unvaccinated and had at least one underlying factor that put them at greater risk of developing a more severe case of the virus. The most common risk factors included obesity, being over the age of 60, diabetes and heart disease
The phase 3 part of the trial was conducted at more than 170 sites, in countries including the U.S., Brazil, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Taiwan and Guatemala.
Molnupiravir's efficacy was not affected by the timing of symptom onset or patients' underlying risk factors, the study showed. It also proved to be consistently effective in treating all variants of Covid-19, including the widely dominant and highly transmissible Delta strain.
Adverse events were comparable in both the molnupiravir and placebo groups, with around 10% reporting adverse events. Just 1.3% of the molnupiravir group discontinued therapy due to an adverse event – less than the 3.4% of the placebo group who did so.
Recruitment into the study is being stopped early due to the positive results, at the recommendation of an independent Data Monitoring Committee and in consultation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Merck is currently also trialing molnupiravir in a separate global phase 3 study to evaluate its efficacy in preventing the spread of Covid-19 within households.
Profound impact'
Robert M. Davis, CEO and president of Merck, said in a press release on Friday that the company would do everything it can to bring molnupiravir to patients as quickly as possible.
"With these compelling results, we are optimistic that molnupiravir can become an important medicine as part of the global efforts to fight the pandemic," he said
Ridgeback Biotherapeutics CEO Wendy Holman added: "With the virus continuing to circulate widely, and because therapeutic options currently available are infused or require access to a healthcare facility, antiviral treatments that can be taken at home to keep people with Covid-19 out of the hospital are critically needed."
"We are very encouraged by the results from the interim analysis and hope molnupiravir, if authorized for use, can make a profound impact in controlling the pandemic," she said.
Emergency Use Authorization
Merck said on Friday it plans to seek Emergency Use Authorization for the drug in the U.S. as soon as possible. The company also plans to submit marketing applications to other international drug regulators.
If authorized by regulatory bodies, molnupiravir could be the first oral antiviral medicine for Covid-19. Antiviral treatments currently in use, such as remdesivir, are administered intravenously.
Merck has already begun producing molnupiravir. The pharmaceutical giant expects to produce 10 million courses of treatment by the end of 2021, and more doses in 2022.
Earlier this year, Merck agreed to supply the U.S. with around 1.7 million courses of molnupiravir. This agreement is dependent on molnupiravir receiving Emergency Use Authorization or approval from the FDA.
Merck has also entered supply and purchase agreements for the drug with other governments – pending regulatory authorization – and is in discussions with other governments about the supply of molnupiravir.
The firm said on Friday that it plans to implement a tiered pricing approach based on World Bank country income criteria to ensure molnupiravir can be accessed globally. Merck has previously announced that it had entered into non-exclusive voluntary licensing agreements for molnupiravir with generic manufacturers, a move intended to assist low and middle-income countries in gaining access to the treatment. Those agreements are also pending approvals or emergency authorization by local regulators.
Profit share
Ridgeback received an upfront payment from Merck as part of the companies' collaborative development of molnupiravir. The company is also eligible to receive contingent payments depending on developmental and regulatory approval milestones.
Profits arising from the collaboration will be split between Merck and Ridgeback equally.
Pfizer Launches Final Study For COVID Drug That's Suspiciously Similar To 'Horse Paste'
Another piece US anti-Ivermectin puzzle may have emerged. On Monday, Pfizer announced that it's launching an accelerated Phase 2/3 trial for a COVID prophylactic pill designed to ward off COVID in those may have come in contact with the disease.
Coincidentally (or not), Pfizer's drug shares at least one mechanism of action as Ivermectin - an anti-parasitic used in humans for decades, which functions as a protease inhibitor against Covid-19, which researchers speculate "could be the biophysical basis behind its antiviral efficiency."
Lo and behold, Pfizer's new drug - which some have jokingly dubbed "Pfizermectin," is described by the pharmaceutical giant as a "potent protease inhibitor."
As Zero Hedge readers might recognize, that's exactly what ivermectin, the prophylactic used for a number of reasons in both humans and animals, does. And unlike Pfizer's experimental drug, ivermectin already may have saved hundreds of thousands of lives from India to Brazil.
We aren't the only ones to have put this together, as twitter users have commented on the similarities. The timing - which coincides with the whole "horse dewormer" smear campaign - just seems odd.
The similarity between Pfizer's upcoming offering and Ivermectin has not gone unnoticed.
Krena
@WGrrrl
In other news, Pfizer is testing Ivermectin, now renamed PF-07321332, to help with Covid. They have done this so they can make this drug more expensive than Ivermectin, despite the fact, they are the same drug.....
/sarcasm.
Reuters Science News
@ReutersScience
Replying to @ReutersScience
The mid-to-late-stage study will test Pfizer's drug, PF-07321332, in up to 2,660 healthy adult participants aged 18 and older who live in the same household as an individual with a confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 infection 2/4
11:04 PM · Sep 27, 2021
635
See the latest COVID-19 information on Twitter
Kwanghoon Seok
@khoonseok
After a crafted "horse dewormer" smear campaigns on a 35yr old safe, effective, off-label drug, i.e. Ivermectin, media brazenly started to praise unproven pills for which Pfizer & Merck are pushing EUA following that of experimental vaccines.
A daily pill to treat COVID could be just months away, scientists say
At least three promising antiviral treatments for COVID-19 are being tested in clinical trials, with results expected as soon as late fall or winter.
pbs.org
3:58 AM · Sep 25, 2021
332
See the latest COVID-19 information on Twitter
But Pfizer, Moderna and their executives have already shown the world with their actions that they see COVID as "manna from heaven" - to quote legendary defense attorney Johnny Cochran - a new 'profit center' that will keep shareholders in butter brickle, especially since the companies have quietly raised prices on their vaccines.
But since a large portion of the American market has rejected the vaccines, Pfizer needs another medication that can be used to treat them as well (otherwise, the company is missing out on nearly one-third of the American market).
According to Reuters, Pfizer said on Monday it has "started a large study testing its investigational oral antiviral drug for the prevention of COVID-19 infection among those who have been exposed to the virus."
Pfizer isn't the only drugmaker hoping to develop a prophylactic treatment for COVID exposure (especially since variants raise the possibility that vaccinations just might not be enough). Merck and Swiss rival Roche have been racing to develop an easy-to-administer antiviral pill of their own - so the clock is ticking for Pfizer.
Reuters explains that the mid-to-late-stage study will test the Pfizer drug's - known as PF-07321332 ability to prevent COVID symptoms in up to 2,660 healthy adult participants aged 18 and older who live in the same household as an individual with a confirmed symptomatic COVID infection.
The drug, designed to block the activity of a key enzyme needed for the coronavirus to multiply inside the human body, will be administered along with a low dose of ritonavir, an older medication widely used in combination treatments for HIV infection.
At present, Gilead's much-hyped but not-all-that-effective IV drug remdesivir is the only approved antiviral treatment for COVID in the US. Several antibody cocktails have also been widely tested and trials are ongoing - including Merck and partner Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, which recently launched a late-stage trial for experimental COVID prophylactic, molnupiravir.
In the mean time, concerned citizens should keep an eye out for any new information about Ivermectin - if you can find it.
Symptoms and Health Outcomes Among Survivors of COVID-19 Infection 1 Year After Discharge From Hospitals in Wuhan, China
Key Points
Question What are the long-term health outcomes associated with COVID-19 infection 1 year after hospital discharge?
Findings In this cohort study of 2433 patients who had been hospitalized with COVID-19, the most common symptoms at 1 year after discharge were fatigue, sweating, chest tightness, anxiety, and myalgia. Patients with severe disease had more postinfection symptoms and higher chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test scores.
Meaning This study reported prolonged symptoms of COVID-19 and found that severe disease during hospitalization was a risk factor for more symptoms and higher chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test scores.
Abstract
Importance The long-term health outcomes and symptom burden of COVID-19 remain largely unclear.
Objective To evaluate health outcomes of COVID-19 survivors 1 year after hospital discharge and to identify associated risk factors.
Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted at 2 designated hospitals, Huoshenshan Hospital and Taikang Tongji Hospital, both in Wuhan, China. All adult patients with COVID-19 discharged between February 12 and April 10, 2020, were screened for eligibility. Of a consecutive sample of 3988 discharged patients, 1555 were excluded (796 declined to participate and 759 were unable to be contacted) and the remaining 2433 patients were enrolled. All patients were interviewed via telephone from March 1 to March 20, 2021. Statistical analysis was performed from March 28 to April 18, 2021.
Exposures COVID-19.
Main Outcomes and Measures All patients participated in telephone interviews using a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms, along with a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) assessment test (CAT). Logistic regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for fatigue, dyspnea, symptom burden, or higher CAT scores.
Results Of 2433 patients at 1-year follow-up, 1205 (49.5%) were men and 680 (27.9%) were categorized into the severe disease group as defined by the World Health Organization guideline; the median (IQR) age was 60.0 (49.0-68.0) years. In total, 1095 patients (45.0%) reported at least 1 symptom. The most common symptoms included fatigue, sweating, chest tightness, anxiety, and myalgia. Older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02; P < .001), female sex (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06-1.52; P = .008), and severe disease during hospital stay (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.18-1.74; P < .001) were associated with higher risks of fatigue. Older age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P < .001) and severe disease (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.14-1.99; P = .004) were associated with higher risks of having at least 3 symptoms. The median (IQR) CAT score was 2 (0-4), and a total of 161 patients (6.6%) had a CAT score of at least 10. Severe disease (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.31-2.58; P < .001) and coexisting cerebrovascular diseases (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.07-3.54; P = .03) were independent risk factors for CAT scores of at least 10.
Conclusions and Relevance This study found that patients with COVID-19 with severe disease during hospitalization had more postinfection symptoms and higher CAT scores.
Time for the Town Criers to jump in and promote Merck's new drug and tell us how it has more evidence than HCQ and IVM.
The „incident“ in a German nursing home had NO relation to the 3rd vaccination.
This is obviously wrong. As the reports shows::
Ein ursächlicher Zusammenhang zwischen den Reanimationen und den verabreichten Auffrischungsimpfungen ist nach unseren Informationen bislang nicht belegt.
Two reanimations immediately after a vaccination cannot be explained by any natural cause. But these patients anyway have reached end of live ( are in palliative care). So why do they harm them for the last few months in their live? Just to make more money out of them as CoV-19 would terminate the high income stay...
A phase 3 trial of Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics’ oral antiviral treatment molnupiravir showed it reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by around 50% in Covid-19 patients.
Ivermectin leads to a > 99% reduction in death when early administered the indian way with Doxycycline zinc, V-D, V-C.
So Merck basically is a bunch of criminals trying to sell barely working stuff that still lets 50% die. This is 50x more than with dirt cheap Ivermectin!
Symptoms and Health Outcomes Among Survivors of COVID-19 Infection 1 Year After Discharge From Hospitals in Wuhan, China
Please stop siting Wuhan papers.... In Wuhan about 90% of the hospital patient died. So the survivors are all heavily damaged people that are 100% irrelevant for normal CoV-19 sick people. See also:: 759 were unable to be contacted. Most likely died too.
Time for the Town Criers to jump in and promote Merck's new drug and tell us how it has more evidence than HCQ and IVM.
Don't give money to big pharma and Pfizemectin, take your shot.
You will save few thousand dollars of medicine, and if unlucky, a hundred of thousand dollar of ICU, plus a good chance to pay for a brand new coffin.
Seriously, bigpharma does not make much money with vaccines (something like 8% margin, and pfizer reinvested in cancer therapy)...
they prefer fake medecine like Boiron's business, or chronic medicines for cardiovascular disease, or wellness supplements...
If you are afraid of crooks, I have a long list, but not where people are looking today.
Franckly, the conspiracy fan are not wize, like on LENR they don't know where are the crooks...
„Only puny secrets need protection. Big secrets are protected by public incredulity.“
Source: https://quotepark.com/quotes/1…otection-big-secrets-are/
Only an army of Towne Criers and FM agents could gaslight people enough to make even physicians confused that antivirals don't work (like HCQ) for 1.5 years and now suddenly a huge spectrum of antivirals are being invented within 1.5 years!
They love deception, they are very happy they have confused you!
As I understand it, every opinion etc contrary to your view (and that of the 4 other anti-vaxers here) can be conveniently dismissed as all art of a conspiracy.
Still, for everyone else, the standard view is that anti-virals are not easy to make work well.
If HCQ and ivermectin are so good broad-range anti-virals why are they not used as SOC for Flu etc. I realise they do both have some activity which is why rather than suppress them establishment science has given both very high quality large trials.
HCQ failed, dismally. Ivermectin is still in process so we don't know, but enough large RCTs have come out negative that it can't be very good as is claimed by its advocates. Unless you believe all the people doing large RCTs trying to find cheap repurposed drugs are delierately avoiding the best options - and falsifying their results to make them look bad, while finding less good but still useful options, your view is not sustainable.
Personally, I have some sympathy with your view that drug companies are in it for money (true) and capable of profiteering (proved so in the past, and Pfizer seems so now). I have no sympathy with the idea that independent researchers and doctors throughout the western world are all in on some conspiracy.
Your idea that I and a few others who post here trying to counteract a very unpleasant and dangerous to life and limb tide of antivax disinformation are part of a global conspiracy is as batty as your other ideas.
The problem you have is that your ideology means you cannot trust what any scientist says. You do not have the expertise or ability to contextualise research (I am speaking here purely based on your mistakes here - no idea about other stuff) to evaluate conflicting academic papers for yourself. Yet, you do not trust anyone else to do this. So you will go with whatever youtube video aligns with your preconceptions.
I don't normally feel so strongly about lies when they are wrapped up in a warped ideology which is internally coherent. After all, the people posting them probably truly believe their own delusions. Antivaxers have that, as long as they don't take their tin hats off and look outside the doctored social media feeds of the world they inhabit. That is easy enough. Anyone with a contrary viewpoint is either part of the conspiracy or an idiot taken in by it. A perfect excuse to ignore any amount of inconvenient scientific data.
It is pathetic, which I would politely stay clear of and leave you alone except it is also increasing vaccine hesitancy and killing people. I feel very, very, strongly about people claiming to be sources of scientific knowledge superior to most scientists, who then harm others through disinformation.
THH
Ivermectin leads to a > 99% reduction in death when early administered the indian way with Doxycycline zinc, V-D, V-C.
So Merck basically is a bunch of criminals trying to sell barely working stuff that still lets 50% die. This is 50x more than with dirt cheap Ivermectin!
Close to max Wyttenfact here.
Ivermectin 99% reduction in death. False
Merck bunch of criminals. False
Selling barely working stuff (5X fewer deaths!!!). False
50X more than with ivermectin. False
I am hopeful about the trend though. As with the speed of light when 100% Wyttenfact is surpassed surely any change from 100% falsehood must surely logically result in more accuracy?
Some facts among breakthrough cases.
Bottom of page shows the vaccination segmented by age class and above hospital cases and breakthrough cases.
The critical class 80+ did see a 4x increase in beak through cases if we compare 1.June..1.August with 1.August..1 October(here we miss 6 days!) . Even a bit stronger among class 70+. and also the same for 50+,60+.
So we can clearly say vaccine protection vanishes exponentially among all critical age classes.
Merck bunch of criminals. False
Dear FUD-er. We still wait for your ONS correction for the age class 40..50...
Without delivery I expect that you now must confirm your are simple minded FUD-er...
But I agree as a circuit design teacher, the last two things you will forget are TRUE & FALSE...
Don't give money to big pharma and Pfizemectin, take your shot.
You will save few thousand dollars of medicine,
You just revert the facts:: A Ziverdoo kit costs about 1$. 2 shots cost anything between 100..200$ in total.
So early treatment is 100x cheaper than 2 shots but only if you have no nice after burn. Else 2 shots can cost up to a million $$$$$.
