Covid-19 News

Quote from Fm1

Call to Action: What does the TrialSite community think? Is Merck indirectly benefitting from such programs?

Big pharma likes poor and corrupt states. This trial has been made out of any regulation just based on $$$$$ bribes. 50% claimed reduction has no value in relation with Ivermectin, HCQ, Nitazoxanine, or even black Kummel... You also can be sure that not a single figure in this report is not based on selected data.

Remember the cheating of Pfizer's phase III study? 300 early Pfizer induced CoV-19 cases simply have been kicked out! So please remember this. Pfizer committed fraud and everybody that lost a relative after the first Pfizer dose can sue them because the national protection only covers the legally disclosed facts. But this side effect has not been disclosed. The same will happen with Pfizer-vectin Merck-vectin.

$$$$$$ --> FDA ---> eyes closed.

Quote from Fm1

Persistence of robust humoral immune response in COVID-19 convalescent individuals over 12 months after infection

This is the 4th version of the Japanese CoV-19 recovered study. It is serious work and important for politics. It shows that infected have a much better protection (severe cases 100% !! against delta) than vaccinated (0% for delta after 6 months).

The definition of their mild cases in my view still covers moderate ones. We have two classes below this. 75% that don't even notice CoV-19 and the 80% (of remaining 25%) that only have short term 3-5 days mild (not including loss of taste!) symptoms.

Further: The prime defense are mucosal T-Cells that give you a sterile protection. So blood samples are only dealing with (the important) 5% of the story covering the ones with medium to severe degree of CoV-19.

Northern California researchers representing both University of California, Berkeley and University of California, San Francisco recently uploaded their study results to the preprint server medRxiv declaring that based on a systematic analysis of 869 samples from two population centers in Northern California. The team collected samples from individuals seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing from two demographically distinct populations including a community-based organization called a Unidos en Salud (UeS) in San Francisco’s barrio known as the Mission District and an outlying area near Davis, CA, called Healthy Yolo Together (HYT). Key to this investigation was the identification of cycle threshold values (Ct) among fully vaccinated as well as unvaccinated people—both asymptomatic and symptomatic during the actual testing in the community. Note the investigation occurred during a “high transmission” period when the Delta variant raged throughout the region from June 17 to August 31, 2021. In what some experts might consider bombshell findings, the study authors concluded that they found “no significant difference in cycle threshold between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta.” One key takeaway from this study:  whether in the densely populated San Francisco Mission to Davis California a one-size-fits-all vaccinate to eradicate approach currently embraced by political and health leadership needs a second look.

Funded by the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Healthy Yolo Together, the University of California, San Francisco, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and the University of California, Davis, the study’s lead included co-corresponding authors Richard Michelmore (UC Davis, Genome Center) and Diane Havlir (University of California, San Francisco).

The authors embarked on this study to better understand viral load dynamics with Delta variant as “effective epidemic control requires contemporary data to guide public health mitigation measures.”  Thus, these authors sought out Ct-values among the vaccinated and unvaccinated as well as symptomatic and asymptomatic during the actual time of testing.  Undertaken during a major Delta variant surge across Northern California the study sites couldn’t be more diverse.  From a heavily and traditionally Hispanic, working-class Mission to the college town of Davis the study authors most definitely secured distinct population samples via a partnership with community-based organizations including a Unidos en Salud (UeS) and Healthy Yolo Together (HYT).

Findings

The authors ultimately discovered that these findings aligned with other comparable studies indicating “similar viral loads among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in settings with transmission of the Delta variant.”

Noteworthy, this UCB and UCSF-led study indicates that at least during the Delta surge “neither vaccine status nor the presence or absence of symptoms should influence the recommendation and implementation of good public health practices including mask-wearing, testing, social distancing, and other measures designed to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2.”

This means that in the case of virulent highly transmissible strains the vaccinated are serving as vectors, a phenomenon TrialSite has written about for months.

What Do These Findings Mean for Original Vaccine Thesis?

Dr. Antony S Fauci during the last year continuously raised the figure he thought it would take to reach herd immunity as reported by the New York Times. The nation’s top doctor was always adamant that the primary prerequisite for herd immunity, whether it was 60% up to 90% once he sensed more Americans would be accepting—was vaccination.   Meaning that mass vaccination would eradicate the pathogen because it wouldn’t be able to infect people, and therefore, they wouldn’t be able to spread the disease.

But that’s not what this class of vaccination will do. Like an influenza shot, it reduces the probability of severe disease, including hospitalization, and gives people more protection, however it does not lead to complete elimination of the flu. Of note, the Northern California researchers mention one study where viral loads diminish faster in vaccinated people meaning that viral transmission could be impacted positively, but perhaps not at the scale, scope, or wide-reaching impact as initially contemplated.

The Northern California researchers shared during their summary that “a substantial proportion of asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals in our study had low Ct-value, indicative of high viral loads. Given that low Ct-values are indicative of high levels of virus, culture positivity, and increased transmission, our detection of low Ct-values in asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals is consistent with the potential for transmission from breakthrough infections prior to any emergence of symptoms.  Interestingly, the viral loads decreased more rapidly in vaccinated than unvaccinated individuals in Singapore, suggesting that vaccinated individuals may remain infectious for shorter time periods.”

Lead Research

Diane Havlir, MD

Richard MIchelmore, Ph.D.

Call to Action: This study hasn’t been peer-reviewed and consequently shouldn’t be used in any formal evidence declarations until the data is scrutinized

No Significant Difference in Viral Load Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated, Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Groups Infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant

Quote from Fm1

This means that in the case of virulent highly transmissible strains the vaccinated are serving as vectors, a phenomenon TrialSite has written about for months.

CoV-19- politics now is just made by big pharma marketing. Nowhere in the world we have high death rates anymore. Everywhere we have 70+ being 80% of CoV-19 victims with short phases like here, with comorbidity in 50+, doing a week long party vacation...

All state statistics shows that there is 0 correlation between CoV-19 cases = the pandemic and vaccination. Also the death rate did decline from alpha--> gamma --> delta by a factor of ten without vaccines.

All states publish plenty of fear mongering news to hurry parents into dangerous vaccinations for their kids. In my view a crime against humanity as all CoV-19 gene therapies (vaccines) are still experimental.

Most prominent last week Long-Covid = a fictive illness or once more shrinking brain volume. The later one "brain volume" must be the dominant factor behind big the pharma mafia. It's most likely caused by drug/alcohol abuse that is >50% wide spread in these circles. (E.g. 30% of the New York banker take Coke.)

This has been extrapolated from sewage water probes. Same in Zürich...

The durability of immunity against reinfection by SARS-CoV-2: a comparative evolutionary study

DEFINE_ME

Summary

Background

Among the most consequential unknowns of the devastating COVID-19 pandemic are the durability of immunity and time to likely reinfection. There are limited direct data on SARS-CoV-2 long-term immune responses and reinfection. The aim of this study is to use data on the durability of immunity among evolutionarily close coronavirus relatives of SARS-CoV-2 to estimate times to reinfection by a comparative evolutionary analysis of related viruses SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, human coronavirus (HCoV)-229E, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-NL63.

Methods

We conducted phylogenetic analyses of the S, M, and ORF1b genes to reconstruct a maximum-likelihood molecular phylogeny of human-infecting coronaviruses. This phylogeny enabled comparative analyses of peak-normalised nucleocapsid protein, spike protein, and whole-virus lysate IgG antibody optical density levels, in conjunction with reinfection data on endemic human-infecting coronaviruses. We performed ancestral and descendent states analyses to estimate the expected declines in antibody levels over time, the probabilities of reinfection based on antibody level, and the anticipated times to reinfection after recovery under conditions of endemic transmission for SARS-CoV-2, as well as the other human-infecting coronaviruses.

Findings

We obtained antibody optical density data for six human-infecting coronaviruses, extending from 128 days to 28 years after infection between 1984 and 2020. These data provided a means to estimate profiles of the typical antibody decline and probabilities of reinfection over time under endemic conditions. Reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 under endemic conditions would likely occur between 3 months and 5·1 years after peak antibody response, with a median of 16 months. This protection is less than half the duration revealed for the endemic coronaviruses circulating among humans (5–95% quantiles 15 months to 10 years for HCoV-OC43, 31 months to 12 years for HCoV-NL63, and 16 months to 12 years for HCoV-229E). For SARS-CoV, the 5–95% quantiles were 4 months to 6 years, whereas the 95% quantiles for MERS-CoV were inconsistent by dataset.

Interpretation

The timeframe for reinfection is fundamental to numerous aspects of public health decision making. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, reinfection is likely to become increasingly common. Maintaining public health measures that curb transmission—including among individuals who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2—coupled with persistent efforts to accelerate vaccination worldwide is critical to the prevention of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

Funding

US National Science Foundation.

Sen. Ron Johnson: There is not an FDA approved COVID vaccine in the US

Johnson explains the FDA approved the Comirnaty version that’s not available in the US

Sen. Ron Johnson: There is not an FDA approved COVID vaccine in the US | Fox News

SEN. RON JOHNSON: We do not have an FDA-approved vaccine being administered in the U.S. The FDA played a bait and switch. They approved the Comirnaty version of Pfizer drugs. It’s not available in the U.S. They even admit it. I sent them a letter three days later going "What are you doing?" What they did is they extended the emergency use authorization for the Pfizer drug vaccine that’s available in the U.S., here that’s more than 30 days later, they haven’t asked that very simple question. If you’re saying that the Pfizer drug is the same as the Comirnaty, why didn’t you provide FDA approval on that? So, there’s not an FDA-approved drug and, of course, they announced it so they could push through these mandates so that people actually think, "Oh, OK now these things are FDA approved." They are not and again, maybe they should be, but the FDA isn’t telling me why.

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=6275154580001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="https://www.foxnews.com">foxnews.com</a></noscript>

Quote from Fm1

The durability of immunity against reinfection by SARS-CoV-2: a comparative evolutionary study

We obtained antibody optical density data for six human-infecting coronaviruses, extending from 128 days to 28 years after infection between 1984 and 2020.

We provide the first estimates of the expected probability of infection given IgG antibody levels to the spike protein for ..

This is a typical Lancet - big pharma hit piece based on wrong assumptions. The method above is only relevant for revered people that either have no mucosal antibodies or high initial virus load...

As we all know now vaccines produce no mucosal IG-A but infections do. So all papers about re-infection that do not deal with mucosal = sterile immunity are a waste of time. For comparing severe infection this method is more adequate.

Quote from Fm1

but the FDA isn’t telling me why.

Because then Pfizer had to pay for all damage...

Mr. Miles Guo’ s Statement Verified by Scientists and Medical Experts – CNBC’s Slander Against Him Got Smacked in the Face - GNEWS

Many scientists, medical experts, and tens of thousands of people have verified that Mr. Guo is correct about the CCP virus vaccine, ivermectin,…

gnews.org

A summary of drugs (IVR,HCQ, Arteminisin) working against CoV-19. Plus many references also to pro vaxx FUD...E.g. claiming vaccines cut down infection rates where we now know from UK data its exactly the opposite way.

The only thing we know:: Vaccines reduce death among victims (= untreated patients) of vaccine terror states. Early treated patients will most likely > 99.5% not die from CoV-19.

As said my uncle (90) got a very high initial virus dose (the spender directly went to ICU and died). We started treatment before symptoms!! He today looks more healthy than before.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

I'm not believing in it - I'm using to take Ivermectin (6-9 mg) and HCQ (200-300 mg) combo against all symptoms of cold and flu instead of aspirin, not even bothering if it's Covid-19 or not. A single dose is usually enough for it if taken in time and it works great, much better than aspirin or paracetamol. This is because HCQ not only kills virus - it also inhibits cytokine storm and all symptoms of runny nose and headache (i.e. edema) which follows common respiration diseases and which coronavirus utilizes for entering the organism. Ivermectin also blocks entering virus into cell nucleus, not its replication. From these reasons it's important to take these drugs once first symptoms emerge without any hesitation. I guess, once the disease develops (as it's common for people entering the hospitals), these drugs stop being effective, which may explain poor experience of hospitals with them. Although I suspect that imbecile methodology of clinical tests is also responsible for it - these drugs aren't supposed to be taken without vitamin and mineral zinc supplements, whereas clinical tests usually test single medical for to avoid interference.

For somone who does not trust 90% of research scientists and doctors in the western world you sure are very trusting of the claims of FLCCC.

FLCCC was founded by Kory and Paul Marik. Marik has past history at publicising miracle cures that don't make sense but are followed by many until proved dud.

Paul E. Marik - Wikipedia

Marik is inventor of the "Marik protocol", also known as the "HAT" protocol, which proposes a combination of hydrocortisone, vitamin C, and thiamine as a treatment for preventing sepsis for people in intensive care. Marik's own initial research, published in 2017,^[12] showed a dramatic evidence of benefit, leading to the protocol becoming popular among intensive care physicians,^[13] especially after the protocol received attention on social media and National Public Radio, drawing criticism of science by press conference from the wider medical community.^[14][4] Subsequent independent research failed to replicate Marik's positive results, indicating the possibility that they had been compromised by bias.^[4][15] A systematic review of trials in 2021 found that the claimed benefits of the protocol could not be confirmed.^[16]

Given the weak, indeed negative, lab evidence, we have only trials.

For me, the crucial observation is that the more clearly unbiassed the trials are, the more they show negative results. Taking all the trials, they are highly positive - the actual evidence from many of these trials (like the now thoroughly discredited El gazzar) looks a bit surprising and too good to be true. When you stick with only the high quality RCTs there is lots of evidence that ivermectin does not do much. it might do a bit - you need very high numbers to be sure it does not. But it might equally have a small negative effect.

The people who are doing real metastudies, and doing real large trials of ivermectin, are not biassed against it. It has had a lot of interest based on those many fraudulent (in some cases we know) high bias studies. The meta-studies are negative except for Bryant - a metastudy run by FLCC which has refused to change its findings when a large highly positive study it relies upon (Elgazzar) was withdrawn for very strong reasons.

Now, any reputable academic with metastudy would re-evaluate it when its results depend on a large study that turned out not to be real. FLCC do not - they are clear that they know ivermectin works and there is no point in doing trials. That fanaticism is the opposite of science and should worry you.

• Against that, everyone else is not saying ivermectin does not work - just that the evidence for it working is not strong, and as time goes on and more negative RCT results come in it is looking worse.
• The idea that is is eng supprssed because it is cheap is absurd. dexamethasone is dirt cheap - out of patent - and was the first 9and best so far) drug found by the UK RECOVERY program.
• The idea that ivermectin only works with a very specific cocktail of other drugs is highly unliklely. But, if it were true, you cannot take the evidence form all those trials as evidence for the ivermectin cocktail because most do not use it. It is no good explaining away nagatives by saying you need different conditions, biut allowing positives when they also don't meet those conditions.
• Anyway, for from bias against, there are several large public funded studies of ivermectin. We will find out more surely over the next few months. All we can know now is that the incredible claims made by FLCC for very high effectiveness of ivermectin are all wrong.

Now, I'm betting Zephir will not understand that argument and tries to wiggle out from it, but I'll happily be proven wrong.

15 year old girl, no underlying health conditions, dies of covid.

What was that about no-one under-30 who is healthy dies?

Portsmouth girl, 15, dies of Covid on day she was due jab

Jorja Halliday, from Portsmouth, was due to have her coronavirus vaccination on the day she died.

www.bbc.co.uk

A 15-year-old girl has died from Covid-19 on the day she was due to be vaccinated.

Jorja Halliday, from Portsmouth, died at the Queen Alexandra Hospital on Tuesday, four days after she received a positive PCR test result.

Her mother, Tracey Halliday, 40, said the GCSE student was a "loving girl, talented kickboxer and aspiring musician".

Jorja had cancelled her vaccine appointment because she was isolating.

She said: "They realised how serious it was and I was still allowed to touch her, hold her hand, hug her and everything else. They did allow me that.

"I'm at the point where I can't comprehend that it's happened. I was with her the whole time."

Hospital staff tried to put Jorja on a ventilator so her body could recover, but Ms Halliday said her heart rate didn't stabilise and "couldn't take the strain".

Ms Halliday confirmed her daughter had no underlying health conditions.

Preliminary results after she was admitted to hospital indicated Jorja had Covid myocarditis, heart inflammation caused by the virus.

Jorja, the eldest of five siblings, was described by her mother as a "loving girl" who had lots of friends.

Ms Halliday added: "Growing up she turned into a beautiful young lady, always wanting to help others, always there for everybody.

"It's heart-wrenching because your kids are always meant to outlive you, and that's the one thing I can't get over."

Which is why I think W, jox, navid, Seatrout, FM1 (sorry - you liked that antivax post), Shane??? the 5 antivaxxers are spreading lies that can kill.

Quote from Wyttenbach

As said my uncle (90) got a very high initial virus dose (the spender directly went to ICU and died). We started treatment before symptoms!! He today looks more healthy than before.

So we need to be more worried about 15 year old girls than 90 year olds?

You can argue anything from anecdote. covid has < 50% mortality even at 90 year old.

w - you did not say - was he vaccinated?

Quote from THHuxleynew

Given the weak, indeed negative, lab evidence, we have only trials.

How drunk are you? You repeat your FUD at a very fast rate and never deliver any evidence. We still wait for your ONS adjusted UK vaccination rate for the age class 40..50!!

Quote from THHuxleynew

Jorja had cancelled her vaccine appointment because she was isolating.

Congratulations to the Oxford killers! No treatment - just isolation - is the best argument for vaccines... You seem to like criminals and try hard to justify it.

And now we wait for the section result...

Quote from THHuxleynew

w - you did not say - was he vaccinated?

No he got a vaccine 6 months later. I personally had to bash the arrogant doctor to stop giving him 2 doses.

Yes, sadly, it has come to this. The UK's Mirror goes undercover to investigate the black market in..."horse parasite medicine":

Conman selling horse drugs for Covid as anti vaxxers lure Brits on web forum

The Sunday Mirror goes undercover and buys horse parasite medicine Ivermectin from a conman, discovering anti vaxxers are spreading lies online

www.mirror.co.uk

Quote from Shane D.

Yes, sadly, it has come to this. The UK's Mirror goes undercover to investigate the black market in..."horse parasite medicine":

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/…orse-drugs-covid-25123790

Shane - ivermectin is parasite medicine.

Equine ivermectin (easiest way to get it) is horse parasite medicine. Not controlled quite the same way as when used for humans, though I'm not sure it is very dangerous. Doctors don't like people taking vetinerary products though.

The idiots who get in to trouble with it are ODing themselves.

Quote from Wyttenbach

We still wait for your ONS adjusted UK vaccination rate for the age class 40..50!!

Actually W, I was waiting for the Wyttenfactual population subgroup data. I could not find it. I cannot do the subgroup calculation without accurate population numbers for that age group, and as you know the given MIMS database numers are highly innacurate, we do not know (for that subgroup) how innacurate.

Which is why I gave up on the subgroup analysis of those PHE figures. For the reason I said.

But then, I don't deal in Wytenfacts. Nor do I spend my time cherry picking subgroups in the hope I can find something that half-supports my half-arsed idea - because I do not need to. The non-subgroup data is very clear.

For people like me who actually need facts before they post, subgroups are a real pain. especially adding age subgroups onto "is healthy" subgroups makes finding data really difficult.

Which is why that poor 15 year old UK healthy girl dying of COVID-induced myocarditis (and note that no child in the whole of the US to my knowledge has dies of vaccine-induced myocarditis) was informative. 15 years old is close to lowest for age-related COVID risk.

At least Wyttenbach has some common sense. This whole COVID issue was solved from the start by using ANTI-BAT ingredients as we originally specified.. The occasional dose of nicotine from a cigarette, a gin and tonic to boost your quinine levels and alcohol to sterilize your throat and internal organs (as advised by Schwartz) etc Ivermectin too as necessary , Zn, with the odd anti-biotic ie doxycycline or azithromycin was all what we needed. Avigan or other more sophisticated antivirals too......put it all in one 2g pill with nigella sativa or whatever as specified before.....what else is there to say on the subject?????

Committed to Medical Evidence, a Prominent Ivermectin Group is Eradicated from the Memories of Cyberspace

Committed to Medical Evidence, a Prominent Ivermectin Group is Eradicated from the Memories of Cyberspace

Tess Lawrie is perhaps one of the sweetest, most intelligent, and caring people we know. She is a committed, dedicated, and passionate health professional

trialsitenews.com

Tess Lawrie is perhaps one of the sweetest, most intelligent, and caring people we know. She is a committed, dedicated, and passionate health professional who cares about patients, with a particular proclivity to helping the poor worldwide. An expert in developing medical evidence, she founded the UK’s Evidence Based Medicine Consultancy and has advised many prominent health agencies such as the World Health Organization. With sorrow and some anger, we report the organization she helped launch—British Ivermectin Recommendation Development or more commonly known as the “BIRD” Group—was just eradicated from the memories of Twitter. At this point, the line has been crossed. Social technology companies like Twitter and Facebook, which have all but monopolized communications, have turned into levers for a particular government imperative—all hinting of imminent authoritarianism. Controlling and overcoming COVID-19 is merely the cover to a deeper, nefarious, far-reaching power grab. The victims in this sad state of affairs—patients, doctors, and much of society. TrialSite’s emphasis has always been to pursue the truth in biomedical and health-related research—for the patient, the doctor, and healthcare professional involved with care or research; the investor and/or drug sponsor or whoever else needs to understand a particular investigational therapy, research center (e.g. a trial site), or an industry sponsor. But when a committed scientist’s work is just wiped out because a preprogrammed algorithm doesn’t like the word ivermectin, then TrialSite must publicly acknowledge that war has been declared. This is an information war, and whatever topic or subject doesn’t fit neatly into what the current administration approves is conveniently removed. When this is done at the request of the executive branch, it crosses into Constitutional violation territory.

Jen Psaki was very clear at that White House press meeting back in July that the White House assigned high-level staffers interacting with the tech companies such as Facebook and Twitter to flag what they deemed misinformation. A chilling move, Psaki should be removed immediately for orchestrating such blatant disregard of Constitutional boundaries. And who are they to declare what is true and what is not? What law affords a few staffers in the White House the ultimate authority to direct or strongly influence near communication monopolies to allow some information to live on and other information to die? This isn’t anything close to science but the makings of a government-medical authoritarian power grab.

Ivermectin is a great drug that has saved hundreds of millions of lives thanks to the Mectizan program. As much as we are angered with Merck’s unacceptable antics dismissing their own product because they received hundreds of millions to develop a branded antiviral targeting COVID-19, they are to be celebrated for that life-changing program—where they donate the ivermectin, known as the “Wonder drug.” The two scientists that discovered the drug just received the Nobel Prize a handful of years ago! Of course, Fact Checkers had to come and declare that this doesn’t prove its effectiveness against COVID-19—but no one claims that. TrialSite attests that we have followed ivermectin studies longer than anyone out there, interviewed more doctors and researchers, and have never declared it’s a certainty. See here for what is probably one of the more balanced and accurate fact checks out there.

Sixty-five studies, as of this writing, investigated the use of ivermectin targeting COVID-19. The consensus among doctors involved that we interviewed suggests that the drug is not, of course, a magical cure (there are none for COVID-19), or even a certainty, but the drug seemed to help millions of people disrupt the viral replication while somehow impacting inflammation. There is plenty of research and real-world evidence that the drug seems to help. But a cadre of federal health authorities, academicians, and industry summarily discounted any positive results (which were the majority of studies), declaring the studies were improperly designed, not statistically powered, or any excuse they could find. Instead, they turned their attention to a couple of questionable studies indicating neutral response and improper, fudged data in one Egyptian case. They never cared about the good studies, which frankly mostly come from developing, Brown-skinned countries. That elitism with tinges of underlying racism exists among the health elite of America is clear. They have scorn for the real world, for empowered doctors and providers/researchers in low-to-middle-income countries (LMICs) attempting to solve health problems in real-time. Their false sense of superiority—and comfort—doesn’t allow them to demonstrate any curiosity as to what could be working in some parts of the world. The fact that ivermectin was used as a key public health tool in India’s largest state—Uttar Pradesh—is censored and summarily rejected by Fact Checkers.

We certainly found misrepresentation, obfuscation, and lies coming out of the mainstream press—that this drug was dangerous and thus any mention of it should be banned. Actually, the drug is safe if used as prescribed by a licensed competent doctor—similar to the safety record of aspirin. However, like most over-the-counter drugs, misuse can cause problems. The same happens with alcohol, where dozens die a day from alcohol poisoning—but do we ban it? No, actually, we celebrate it with commercials all the time.

Much of the press, the FDA, the CDC, and the American Medical Center used a report from the American Association of Poison Control Center (AAPCC) declaring that calls concerning ivermectin increased three-fold. That’s correct. We obtained and analyzed that data and found 80% of those calls were nothing, and only 1% (11) were serious—it wasn’t clear if there was hospitalization involved. However, it certainly resulted from self-medication with the veterinary variety of the drug. That piece can be read here.

We discovered that during the pandemic no one died from ivermectin (no one involved with the AAPCC calls at least), while at least four people died from swallowing hand sanitizer. Yet this report was the basis for the CDC and AMA to prevent access!

Tess Lawrie’s BIRD, the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), and other groups don’t promote the use of veterinary ivermectin at all. Doctors actually prescribing off-label did so legally and safely. So all the tactics to instill FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) sought first to conflate the legitimate use of ivermectin off-label (e.g., a licensed doctor writes a prescription to a consenting patient) for COVID-19 and the consumer buying an animal product and self-medicating.

But shame on the authorities, academicians, medical societies, and those in the industry that care about money, status and power over patient care to indirectly conspire to initiate a very well-orchestrated anti-ivermectin campaign. Dr. Anthony Fauci is at the top of this shameful list. He has built a powerful fiefdom in the NIH—no one dares critique him lest they won’t receive any grants. But remember that’s taxpayer money, and Fauci is nothing more than a federal bureaucrat working for us.

Through fear and the use of alarmism, pharmacies are now afraid to prescribe the drug. TrialSite has reported that it becomes far more difficult to access the drug for off-label use. The Biden administration has taken other questionable measures with monoclonal antibodies. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) took over the supply of those investigational therapies early in September because just a few states were using most of the supply. That’s actually because a few states had a great majority of the very ill people. The move smells rotten—of political motion. The government probably cannot do a better job than the marketplace in efficiently allocating important life-saving resources, but this administration has done just that.

TrialSite isn’t a political place, and frankly, we don’t care what party is in office. We work to shine the light of truth on biomedical and health-related research in the hopes of empowering patients and their loved ones, doctors and medical professionals involved with research or care, investors whose money makes new therapies possible, and industry sponsors themselves.

But when governments and industries conspire to suppress important information, not only does it become a potential constitutional rights issue, but in the case of a drug that can help treat someone, it becomes an act of war on the people of a nation—with deadly consequences.

In an email to TrialSite, BIRD informed us that the BIRD Twitter account had over 25,000 followers and was removed with no explanation. They discovered that they were blocked at the same time and for no apparent reason. All that occurred the same day that Merck’s competitive drug was announced (costing $700). The BIRD team’s message was, “In the light of this blatant censorship, please make sure you and others follow us on other channels to continue to hear the facts about ivermectin

Ivermectin treats and prevents covid - British Ivermectin Recommendation Development group

APPROVE IVERMECTIN NOW! It’s safe, low cost and beats Covid BIRD Group is a non-profit organisation campaigning for the safe medicine ivermectin to be approved…

bird-group.org

Dr. Fauci at it again as He Calls Merck’s COVID-19 Pill “Impressive:” True Trial Outcomes Less Impressive

Dr. Fauci at it again as He Calls Merck’s COVID-19 Pill “Impressive:” True Trial Outcomes Less Impressive

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite. Dr. Ron Brown – Opinion

trialsitenews.com

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.

Dr. Ron Brown – Opinion Editorial

October 1, 2021

An interim analysis of Merck and Ridgeback’s new COVID-19 antiviral pill, Molnupiravir, reports an approximately 50% reduction in risk of deaths or hospitalizations for patients with mild or moderate COVID-19. Molnupiravir reduces risk of hospitalization or death. Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, calls this outcome “impressive.” Fauci says new pill ‘impressive’.

The phase 3 clinical trial’s approximate 50% reduction in deaths is reported as the relative risk reduction (RRR), which is actually 48.3%. Confidence intervals (95%) are 20% – 66.5%.

More importantly, what is not reported in the trial results is the absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is a more meaningful outcome to assess the pill’s potential clinical and public health applications. According to the Food and Drug Administration, trial results should report both the RRR and ARR. Communicating Risks and Benefits.

Compared to the Merck trial’s RRR, the missing absolute risk reduction not reported in the Merck trial results is a considerably less “impressive” 6.8%. Confidence intervals (95%) are 2.4% – 11.1%.

Does Dr. Fauci know the ARR of the Merck trial is only 6.8%, and does he know that he should report the ARR to the public? Of course he does, but since when does Dr. Fauci tell the public the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? For more information on calculating and reporting the ARR and RRR, see Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines.

Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials

Relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction measures in the evaluation of clinical trial data are poorly understood by health professionals and the…

www.mdpi.com

Fact-Checker Disinformation Strikes Again: Target This Time of Natural Immunity

Fact-Checker Disinformation Strikes Again: Target This Time of Natural Immunity

AP Fact Checkers skip over some critical evidence regarding their latest “fact check” on naturally acquired immunity vs. vaccine-induced immunity for

trialsitenews.com

AP Fact Checkers skip over some critical evidence regarding their latest “fact check” on naturally acquired immunity vs. vaccine-induced immunity for COVID-19. In what looks like a painfully biased attempt to make vaccine durability look utterly rosy compared to natural immunity, they failed to include large real-world studies from Israel. They also failed to mention the Cleveland Clinic study that included thousands of people. Instead, they cited much smaller studies and provided opinions from experts. But one must wonder…if you’re an established media site writing about natural immunity vs. vaccine-acquired immunity, why would you ignore three large and recent studies on the topic? Such an obvious omission makes one wonder what sort of credentials one needs to become a fact-checker, or are they more concerned with padding support for an agenda versus searching for the truth?

Two large and recent studies out of Israel, one comparing antibody decay in vaccinated individuals versus unvaccinated individuals who recovered, and one comparing breakthrough infections in vaccinated people to unvaccinated people who recovered, were both a win for natural immunity. The first study showed that antibodies derived from vaccines decreased each month exponentially compared to antibodies formed after recovery. The second study, involving hundreds of thousands of data points, showed that the vaccinated had a 13-fold increased risk of breakthrough infections from the Delta variant than those who had recovered. It also showed that natural immunity provided longer-lasting protection against symptomatic infections and hospitalizations. To date, this is the largest study on the topic, yet the esteemed AP Fact Checkers did not mention it. Logical people can only wonder why.

AP Fact Checkers also didn’t mention the Cleveland Clinic study that looked at thousands of employees and concluded that vaccination provided little benefit to people who had COVID-19 and recovered. Due to their findings, Cleveland Clinic researchers recommended that vaccines be prioritized for the unvaccinated who have not recovered from COVID-19 and are most at risk.

The fact-checkers also did not mention the ZOE COVID Symptom study that showed that people who recovered from COVID-19 and received vaccination reported twice as many side effects to vaccination. While this phenomenon needs to be explored more, it is worth considering why that happens. It’s also valuable for someone considering vaccination to know. TrialSite also acknowledges that studies have shown that one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine provides added protection for individuals recovered from COVID-19. Whether or not that dose is needed is still a topic of debate.

TrialSite is a proponent of unbiased, scientific inquiry in pursuit of the truth. While tough decisions must be made during a pandemic with imperfect data and many unknowns, it is important to always approach scientific questions honestly and ensure preordained agendas don’t guide the answers. By ignoring a huge chunk of research on this topic, AP Fact Checkers clearly didn’t do their job. One could even call this fact check mostly “misinformation.” See AP Fact Check on Twitter. The question is, why did they ignore massive amounts of data? Ignorance, incompetence, or purposeful exclusion? Do we need to organize a group of fact-checkers for the fact-checkers? Tell us in the comments.

AP Fact Check on Twitter

“Posts continue to circulate online falsely claiming that COVID-19 survivors don’t need vaccines because of natural immunity. In fact, that protection is…

mobile.twitter.com

Moderna COVID-19 shot linked to higher rates of heart inflammation - Canada

Moderna COVID-19 shot linked to higher rates of heart inflammation - Canada (NASDAQ:MRNA)

The Public Health Agency of Canada says that the rates of heart inflammation rarely linked to messenger-RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are higher following the…

seekingalpha.com

The Public Health Agency of Canada says that the rates of heart inflammation rarely linked to messenger-RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are higher following the administration of Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) vaccine compared to that from Pfizer (NYSE:PFE)/BioNTech (NASDAQ:BNTX).

Citing vaccine safety data, the country’s Council of Chief Medical Officers of Health said in a statement on Friday that the cases of myocarditis and/or pericarditis after immunization with mRNA-based vaccines continued to be reported most often after the second dose.

They mostly occurred among adolescents and adults under 30, more frequently in males than females, and within seven days of the vaccination.

Despite hospitalizations, the affected individuals experienced relatively mild illness and recovered quickly, responding to the conservative treatments.

Canada has administered more than 56 million vaccine doses, but serious side effects remained at 0.008% of all doses, the government agency added.

In addition to Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech (BNTX) and Moderna (MRNA) vaccines, Canada has authorized COVID-19 vaccines developed by AstraZeneca (NASDAQ:AZN)/ University of Oxford and the Janssen unit of Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ).

The Canadian data come ahead of a meeting scheduled by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Oct. 14 for an expert panel to discuss whether to endorse an additional dose of Moderna (MRNA) vaccine for fully immunized individuals.

However, early this week, it was reported that the regulator was leaning towards authorizing the booster shot at half the dose level used in the initial vaccinations.

In June, the FDA updated the vaccine fact sheets of Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech (BNTX) and Moderna (MRNA) COVID-19 shots to indicate the information on the rare cases of heart inflammation following their use.

However, the health regulators worldwide, including the World Health Organization (WHO), have backed the vaccines, noting that their benefits continued to outweigh the risks in cutting the COVID-related hospitalizations and death.