Covid-19 News

  • They developed a model, which gave results with vaccines which were within 2% of the actual deaths. They then turned off vaccines in the model.

    How many lives have been saved by atomic bombs ??

    The same here. Ziverdo kits for 2$/treatment make you free of CoV-19 and immune for the next 5 years at least. Vaccines just delay your death, if you do not treat your weakness.

    So I never read fake papers looking at a made up reality. These alpha versions of gene therapy "vaccines" for 1000% will at the end kill far more people than any early treatment.

  • It only seems to be working because they have younger population demographics - and in some cases juts let people die without treatment.

    You have no evidence their health system copes with covid any better than developed countries - none at all.

    I agree - it is observational - and therefore cannot be used to give quantitative ratings. It might for example show specific relationships that could be of interest. that is not the way this data is used by the antivax crowd who have jumped onto ivermection - there is no evidence.

    I am balanced about these things - I don't always come down on one side juts cos I like it. But i'm not patient with travel stories masqerading as science - especially when told by people with an agenda larger than a skyscraper.

    BTW - I'm sure there are many things wrong with the US health system - I'm not denying that. Just that rejection of ivermectin (except under trial conditions) is not one of them.

  • Kory’s data was corroborated by Dr. Andrew Hill, a renowned University of Liverpool pharmacologist and independent medical researcher,

    Do you mean this Andrew Hill? Wyttenfact. To be fair, it was a time-limited fact that turned into a Wyttenfact quite a while ago.

    Ivermectin debacle exposes flaws in meta-analysis methodology
    Health researchers warn that taking studies at face value is a luxury that they can no longer afford

    Supporters of this anti-parasitic drug pointed to a meta-analysis from the University of Liverpool, which reported that the death rate in those taking ivermectin was 56% lower, but this is now rejected by those who led the study.

    ‘When we take out the trials at risk of bias or fraud, we don’t see any effects of ivermectin on survival and don’t see any effects on clinical recovery,’ says Andrew Hill at the University of Liverpool, who led the meta-analysis. Twenty-four randomised clinical trials of ivermectin with 3328 patients were assessed.

  • Ziverdo kits for 2$/treatment make you free of CoV-19 and immune for thr next 5 years at least

    How can an antiviral drug that seems to kill the virus (not your immune system?) generate full immunity? If you take IVM proactively in a case where you think you got a boatload of virus from an infected, or if you start to feel sick and take IVM, what biological mechanism creates your full immunity, if you don’t run through that infection?

    Isn’t it more having a weapon in standby when needed? Why then store tons of IVM pills if you just need one kit???

  • How can an antiviral drug that seems to kill the virus (not your immune system?) generate full immunity?

    A simple question. You treat after first symptoms or a heavy contact. No problem to treat 5 times in cases you missed the contact.

    Only meta analysis of other fake meta analysis show no effect...

    Our clown above is spinning like mad. The poor people in India have lost all older ... that's why Ivermectin works. It is well known that people age 0..40 cannot be infected as India (3/4) shows since 4 months ...

    to many Hoaxly facts... is the wimp still begging for a booster ?

  • How can an antiviral drug that seems to kill the virus (not your immune system?) generate full immunity? If you take IVM proactively in a case where you think you got a boatload of virus from an infected, or if you start to feel sick and take IVM, what biological mechanism creates your full immunity, if you don’t run through that infection?

    Isn’t it more having a weapon in standby when needed? Why then store tons of IVM pills if you just need one kit???

    Stop asking complex questions. You are probably a member of the (can't remember the letters) mafia.

  • Do you mean this Andrew Hill?

    Wow, it looks like he did a 180 on Ivermectin. Fascinating. And, I thought he was actually treating people, when now it appears he wasn't, but rather acting more in an academic function and receiving data from two dozen clinics around the world. Very excited about Ivermectin at first, then he apparently decided there was widespread fraud and bias involved. Odd, and fascinating.

  • Canadian Doctor of 15 Years Relieved of His Duties After Prescribing IvermectinCanadian Doctor of 15 Years Relieved of His Duties After Prescribing Ivermectin

    Canadian Doctor of 15 Years Relieved of His Duties After Prescribing Ivermectin
    A Canadian emergency room doctor of over 15 years has been stripped of his title after prescribing ivermectin to three elderly patients. This is despite

    A Canadian emergency room doctor of over 15 years has been stripped of his title after prescribing ivermectin to three elderly patients. This is despite the fact that two out of the three patients experienced a noticeable recovery. Traditionally, physicians are able to prescribe approved medicines off-label if, in their good judgment, it can help and they discuss the risks and potential benefits with their patients. That long-standing ability is now under fire as federal/national usurpation of medicine is now underway. In the case of this situation in Canada, Dr. Daniel Nagase decided to call attention to this situation on the steps of the Vancouver Art Gallery during an event commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Nuremberg trials. The event was hosted by a nonpartisan local group called “Common Ground.”

    The Situation

    Dr. Daniel Nagase prescribed his elderly patients one dose of Ivermectin, along with antibiotics, vitamins, and inhalers—which set two out of the three on a quick road to recovery. However, once health authorities caught wind of what he was doing, all the medications, including the inhalers, were taken away, and Nagase was relieved of his duties.

    Below is an excerpt from his speech.

    We are here to remember every doctor who stopped patients from having a live saving medication.

    And what for? To boost mortality? To create an ICU “crisis”? To create a state of emergency?

    All to push a vaccine?

    We must remember, the people of the past. And the people of today.

    History repeats itself.

    Nuremburg will happen again.

    We must remember.

    Call to Action: Read his full speech on American Greatness.

    Canadian Doctor Says ‘Something Malicious is Going On’ After He’s Punished For Treating COVID Patients with Ivermectin › American Greatness
    A Canadian emergency room physician has been banned from practicing medicine in Alberta after he defied the province's COVID treatment protocols by prescribing…

  • What happens if Israel fails the stress test?

    What happens if Israel fails the stress test?
    Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite. Israel got an early start on

    Israel got an early start on vaccinating its population and began offering a third dose of mRNA vaccine in July to the older age group (≥ 60 years). The results from an observational study comparing the clinical outcome of participants who received a third shot to those in the same age group who had received only two shots over the same period clearly indicated that the risk of severe disease dropped by a factor of almost 20. Additionally, those who received the third dose were also enjoying some level of protection against infection as they were also less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 (1).

    These are strong results, and at first glance, many of those within this age group and not yet boosted might feel ashamed for their indifference in protecting themselves and others! However, there is a catch, and it’s not about potential biases in the analysis of the study results or criticism from a public health perspective of delivering additional shots to individuals while many others have not even had their firs

    The caveat is much more fundamental and has to do with immunology: a discipline that seems to have been largely reduced since the crisis began to measuring antibodies (Abs) in the blood. The results above were obtained after a very short observation period (12 days), and there is no data yet on the long-term outcome of repeated booster immunizations. This prompts an interesting question: could the immune-protective effect observed within 2 weeks of a booster injection trigger a short-term replenishment of the ‘lost’ protection against infection while at the same time not translating into long-term protection against infection or disease? The answer is most definitely ‘yes’ and can only be understood if one brings into play the single most important confounder of all Covid-19 vaccine efficacy studies conducted thus far: innate immunity. It is well known that regardless of any induced antigen (Ag)-specific adaptive immune response, all vaccines (including mRNA vaccines) have an adjuvant effect: they stimulate innate immune effectors, some of which have antiviral activity and/or facilitate adaptive immunity (2, 3, 4). Without going into mechanistic detail, there is no doubt that some of these innate, nonAg-specific immune responses have a short-lived antiviral effect. This could already explain why booster doses in the population described above can prevent viral infection while recalling anti-spike Abs. It may also be tempting to assume that these recalled Abs are now responsible for enhanced protection from both infection and disease. However, from an immunological viewpoint, it is difficult to understand how a rapid recall of the very same anti-S Abs in a previously vaccine-primed population would now all of a sudden enable better protection from infection and disease. If innate immunity is indeed the confounder, then the outcome of long-term surveillance studies would look very different. Given the more potent neutralizing Abs booster shots are generating against variants (5), the S(pike)-directed immune pressure in the population will only continue to rise while still failing to curtail the spread of the predominantly circulating highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 variant (e.g., Delta variant). On the contrary, it would be reasonable to assume that upon an additional booster shot the more potent Abs further contribute to selecting S-directed immune escape variants and, therefore, turn the previously primed population into an even more fertile breeding ground for the highly infectious Delta variant. As vaccine-elicited Ab responses have a much longer duration (and can be memorized) than that induced by short-term innate immune activation, and as vaccinal Abs suppress the functional capacity of pre-existing CoV-reactive innate Abs, short-term vaccine-mediated innate immune protection against viral infection or disease does not automatically imply a positive effect of the vaccine on viral infection or morbidity rates in the longer term. Interpretations from scientists who only conduct short-term surveillance studies in vaccinees, the majority of whom are adults or elderly, lead to erroneous, although peer-reviewed conclusions such as: ‘Although vaccines are less effective against asymptomatic disease or against transmission than against severe disease, even in populations with fairly high vaccination rates the unvaccinated are still the major drivers of transmission and are themselves at the highest risk of serious disease’ (6). This clearly illustrates their lack of understanding of the contribution of innate immunity in providing short-term protection after vaccination, and in the more durable protection of young and healthy unvaccinated age group

    Based on all the above, it is reasonable to expect booster injections to only enable the virus to more rapidly evolve resistance to the vaccines. This evolution would be dramatically expedited by vaccinating and boosting more and more younger age groups. More potent anti-S Abs induced by additional booster injections will further erode their innate Ab-mediated immunity and accelerate the pace at which SARS-CoV-2 evolves from more infectious variants into variants that increasingly escape from neutralizing anti-S Abs. The single earliest and most potent indicator for such an unfortunate evolution would be the failure of the infection rate to drop below a relatively high baseline level. A peak of cases that tails off at an elevated baseline level of viral infectivity in the population would reflect the diminished sterilizing immune capacity of the unvaccinated population. It is reasonable to assume that when the booster-mediated, nonAg-specific innate immune activation wanes, the vaccinees will resume their breeding of more infectious variants (e.g., Delta variant) and become more susceptible to Covid-19 disease. At the same time, the resulting growth in infectious pressure would also increase the likelihood for unvaccinated, previously asymptomatically infected individuals to become more rapidly re-exposed to the virus. This would contribute to a further rise of the infection rate in the population and, therefore, also augment the susceptibility of the unvaccinated to Covid-19 disease

    Israel’s top virologist, Dr. Rivka Abulafia-Lapid, is convinced that the booster will keep existing variants under control and prevent the spread of other variants for around 6 to 8 months. She believes that Israel is currently witnessing the end of the fourth surge because of 3 million people taking a booster (7). A more thorough understanding of the interplay between the virus and host immunity at a population level clearly predicts, however, that the infection rate will not only halt its decrease but will also tail off at a level that is much higher than previously seen before while preparing for the next large surge in cases (see graph below). More specifically, Israel’s booster efforts are likely to generate a spectacular surge of morbidity and mortality rates in the population as a combined result of increased S-directed immune selection pressure in vaccinees (i.e., optimizing the breeding ground for the Delta variant) and enhanced infectivity rates in the unvaccinated. From a scientific viewpoint it is, therefore, difficult to understand how booster immunizations using vaccines which are not evolution-proof could prevent a highly mutable virus from escaping neutralizing anti-S Abs while driving the pandemic in a catastrophic direction, both in Israel and worldwide. How can the WHO stand by and watch as this additional experiment unfolds, soon to be followed by other countries?

    . s.t.


    COVID-vaccine booster shot shows promise in Israeli study
    Risk of severe disease drops by factor of almost 20 in people over 60 — but some dispute the benefits of offering a third dose.

    HTTP500 内部服务器出错

    COVID super-immunity: one of the pandemic’s great puzzles
    People who have previously recovered from COVID-19 have a stronger immune response after being vaccinated than those who have never been infected. Scientists…


    Top virologist says Delta defeated, predicts 6+ months of COVID quiet for Israel
    New variants will be held at bay for now, says Rivka Abulafia-Lapid, whose optimism comes as number of new serious COVID cases per day almost halves over two…

  • Wow, it looks like he did a 180 on Ivermectin. Fascinating. And, I thought he was actually treating people, when now it appears he wasn't, but rather acting more in an academic function and receiving data from two dozen clinics around the world. Very excited about Ivermectin at first, then he apparently decided there was widespread fraud and bias involved. Odd, and fascinating.

    Hill's change of heart was because the evidence (he is a scientist) on which he was relying turned out fraudulent. That is Elgazzar. And (probably) Niaee. Those were the two very big "more positive than ever happens in drug trials" RCTs that were outliers from otherwise negative results.

    They alone swing the meta-analysis - and if they are properly conducted then ivermectin has the goods.

    It seems amazing to some that scientists would change their mind in this way - yet that is what good scientists have to do - follow the data.

    It is not so very surprising is that fake studies should have been done on ivermectin. It is more surprising that at least in one case (Elgazzar) this must be deliberate fabrication, not juts poor practice.

    Blame the pandemic - and those preprints where anything can get an airing without the normal 12 months to and fro with corrections and requests for clarification of loose ends from reviewers.

    Now, on the other side. I think there is a natural counter-reaction. When very strong evidence turns into weak evidence people tend to over-compensate and in this case be more negative about ivermectin than they should be.

    Without those RCTs we have consistent negative results from RCTs, and a whole load of positive low quality observational trials (some of which also have such large problems they seem deliberately faked). But that would not matter, the RCTs, on a matter like this, trump the observational trials, they also trump the anecdotal evidence from doctors. Remember how strong that was (now forgotten) for HCQ?

    If ivermectin had good lab support for some activity the negative status quo would not stop me from hoping for some positive effect. We value drugs with even 20% reduction in mortality - then in combination treatment, used for the right set of people, they end up really useful.

    ivermectin still has that as possible. The big RCTs happening now will not show a bit effeect (or interim results would have been announced and the drug added to SOC). they might end up with a small effect.

    Now - FLCC excuses:

    • Dosage is wrong. The dose everyone uses is what is known to be safe and broadly the same as what FLCC recommends (I can only see a change in whether the drug is taken with food, or without food. without food is the normal way. FLCC are upping the activity between what is expected safe by using the same amount with food. If that makes a big difference it might be an issue for safety).
    • ivermectin will not work without supplements. highly unlikely. And drugs are always tested individually because otherwise you can't get clear data. If a drugs works in combo with vitamin supplements, it will also work (maybe a bit less well0 individually.

    1. People here are welcome to call themselves experts and reckon they know better than everyone else how to test new drugs. I am not an expert, but what FLCC says does not make sense to me, what the other testers say does make sense. In any case, I'd have to be very arrogant to let my view, of that of my fave kook websites, against so very many independent scientists working in the area of drug testing and repurposing.
    2. What about - "it does not do harm so let us just use it - it might work"? That tempts me. It did at the start of pandemic (the homebrew cocktail idea) till I thought about it more. It is another topic - are doctors wrong, in a pandemic, not to encourage dosing with homebrew cocktails? Why so negative about ivermectin dosing? We have evidence from posts here what is the reason.
  • The Unvaccinated Are Looking Smarter Every Week

    By Thomas T. Siler, M.D.

    The Unvaccinated Are Looking Smarter Every Week
    There is a massive propaganda push against those choosing not to vaccinate against COVID-19 with the experimental mRNA vaccines. Mainstream media, the big tech…

    There is a massive propaganda push against those choosing not to vaccinate against COVID-19 with the experimental mRNA vaccines. Mainstream media, the big tech corporations, and our government have combined efforts to reward compliance and to shame and marginalize non-compliance. Their mantra says that this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Persons who choose not to vaccinate are characterized as unintelligent, selfish, paranoid people who don’t read much and live in a trailer park in Florida (or Alabama, or Texas, or name your state). Never has there been such an effort to cajole, manipulate through fear, and penalize people to take an experimental medical treatment.

    However, as time has passed with this pandemic and more data accumulates about the virus and the vaccine, the unvaccinated are looking smarter and smarter with each passing week. It has been shown now that the vaccinated equally catch and spread the virus. Vaccine side effect data continues to accumulate that make the risk of taking the vaccine prohibitive as the pandemic wanes. Oral and IV medications ( that work early in the treatment of COVID-19 are much more attractive to take now as the vaccine risks are becoming known, especially because the vaccinated will need endless boosters every six months.

    First, let’s address the intelligence of the unvaccinated. Vaccine hesitancy is multi-factorial and has little to do with level of education or intelligence. Carnegie Mellon University did a study assessing vaccine hesitancy across educational levels. According to the study, what’s the educational level with the most vaccine hesitancy? Ph.D. level! Those can't all have been awarded to liberal arts majors. Clearly, scientists who can read the data and assess risk are among the least likely to take the mRNA vaccines.

    The claim that there’s a pandemic of the unvaccinated is, therefore, patently untrue. As a retired nurse from California recently asked, “Why do the protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing the unprotected to use the protection that did not protect the protected in the first place?” If the vaccine works to prevent infection, then the vaccinated have nothing to worry about. If the vaccine does not prevent infection, then the vaccinated remain at some risk, and the unvaccinated would be less likely to choose a vaccine that does not work well.

    The mRNA vaccine efficacy is very narrow and focused on the original alpha strain of COVID-19. By targeting one antigen group on the spike protein, it does help for the original alpha strain, but it is clear now it does not protect against Delta strain and is likely not protective against any future strains that might circulate. It also appears that the efficacy wanes in 4-6 months, leading to discussions about boosters.

    Several authors have pointed out that vaccinating with a “leaky” vaccine during a pandemic is driving the virus to escape by creating variants. If the booster is just another iteration of the same vaccine, it likely won’t help against the new strain but will, instead, produce evolutionary pressure on the virus to produce even more variants and expose us to more side effects. Why, then, is this booster strategy for everyone being pursued?

    This vast Phase 3 clinical trial of mRNA vaccines in which Americans are participating mostly out of fear is not going well. It is abundantly clear for anyone advocating for public health that the vaccination program should be stopped. Iceland has just stopped giving the Moderna vaccine to anyone which is a good step in the right direction. Sweden, Denmark, and Finland have banned the Moderna vaccine for anyone under the age of 30.

    VAERS, our vaccine adverse effect reporting system, showed at the beginning of this week 16,000 deaths, 23,000 disabilities, 10,000 MI/myocarditis, 87,000 urgent care visits, 75,000 hospital stays, and 775,000 total adverse events. The VAERS system is widely known to under-report events, with an estimated 90 to 99% of events going unreported there.

    Eudravigilance, the European reporting system now associates 26,000 deaths in close proximity to administration of the vaccine. Whistleblower data from the CMS system (Medicare charts) showed close to 50,000 deaths in the Medicare group shortly after the vaccine.

    An AI-powered tracking program called Project Salus also follows the Medicare population and shows vaccinated Medicare recipients are having worse outcomes week by week of the type consistent with Antibody Dependent Enhancement. This occurs when the vaccine antibodies actually accelerate the infection leading to worsening COVID-19 infection outcomes. Antibody Dependent Enhancement has occurred previously with trials of other coronavirus vaccines in animals. The CDC and the FDA are suppressing this data and no one who receives the vaccine has true informed consent.

    The Rome declaration has 6,700 medical signatories attesting that the handling of the pandemic amounts to crimes against humanity for denying the best medical treatment and continuing to advocate for harmful vaccines. The evidence is right in front of Americans to end the propaganda and mass mask psychosis.

    The media narrative of perpetual fear is falling apart. Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have ended all COVID restrictions and are doing much better than the US, UK, and Israel, three countries that continue to vaccinate into the pandemic. Mexico, Guatemala, Indonesia, almost all of Africa, and parts of India have low vaccination rates and are doing much better than the US, something attributed to their managing the pandemic by using Ivermectin.

    Over 500,000 people attended the Sturgis motorcycle rally in August and there was no super spread of COVID-19. Football season started in August and stadiums around the country are packed with 80,000 fans yelling and screaming with no masks. There have been no superspreader events, yet the students are forced to go back to masking in class. This makes no sense.

    If the vaccine is so important why do our government leaders and illegal aliens not have to take it? Currently, 13 states that are Democratic with high vaccination rates have the highest “case” rates (using a faulty PCR test), while Republican states are all doing better. How does this happen?

    It should be clear that the government has manipulated COVID to create perpetual fear, so we’ll hand it our liberty. In this giant battle between our government and the unvaccinated, I hope enough people will refuse to comply so that we can unite to stop this madness.

    I know this decision is very difficult for many people when it comes to losing their job. To the vaccinated, please don’t take any boosters for you’ll just be perpetuating the risk of side effects and new variants.

    If we allow the government to decide this medical decision for us, it is a short step for the government to say it can decide other medical decisions for you, e.g., all persons over 75 never be resuscitated; people may have only three children (or two or one) with mandatory sterilization for women; or refusing the government’s demands will see you denied health care.

    Is this the totalitarian state you want to live in? If you are proudly vaccinated now and on the government side, what about the next government mandate, when you’re on the other side, coerced into a decision you don’t want, how will you feel then?

    It is obvious that the government (with the Fauci subset), the media, and big tech, are trying to divide us and take away the freedoms we have enjoyed as Americans. I am praying that all who call themselves Americans can unite to end this medical tyranny and regain a free America before it is too late. Peacefully resist and do not comply.

    Image: Vaccine by Daniel Schludi. Unsplash license.

    To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


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

    Let the madness stop! In the last year and a half, we have gone from ‘let’s flatten the curve’ to mandatory vaccination; and now vaccine passports are a reality. We all chipped in initially, by locking down, masking, and isolating as needed. Then we were all told to wait for the magic vaccine and herd immunity so that we could move out of the pandemic. Has it worked? I would have to say a resounding ‘NO’ to that question! Why? Let’s look at what has happened.

    The Numbers Game. We kept getting numbers every day from mainstream media and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), but what did they mean? Some people sounded the alarm early on about the PCR test saying that it overestimated the cases. That is correct, because depending on the cycle threshold (Ct) the test can be positive in people whose viral loads are minimal and who are asymptomatic. I don’t think that ever before in medicine have we relied on a test without so much as a mention of symptoms! Symptoms are the sine qua none of diagnosis. It’s symptoms -> health care practitioner -> examination/testing -> diagnosis. Not testing -> diagnosis! Public Health will probably tell you it was done that way because it was a pandemic; but frankly that’s no excuse to pervert course of medicine. So, we got inflated ‘cases’. What is a case? It’s just a positive PCR. Even the inventor of the PCR has stated his test was not to be used this way. These inflated case numbers began the fear cycle. Never mind the fact that SARS Cov2 has infected over 190 million people and killed 4 million! That’s a 98% survival rate with essentially no treatment. And that is using the ‘inflated’ numbers. It’s likely there were less cases due to over-‘diagnosis’ and less deaths due to Covid due to simple fudging of causes of death, many patients dying with Covid rather than of Covid. In the USA some hospitals paid a premium for citing SARS COV2 as a primary cause of death.

    No Treatment. Probably the worst mistake of all that we made is that we didn’t treat the illness until people were in the ER headed to the ICU. There is no other illness where we tell people to go home, take Tylenol, and come back when they cannot breathe – it’s even worse than the old aphorism: “take two ASA and call me in the morning”. But that’s essentially what we did. We have failed miserably to objectively and scientifically look at the evidence for potential treatments in an apolitical fashion. We dismissed hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment because it was tied to a President we did not like–despite he was a President in another country. We dismissed Ivermectin as an early treatment because there was ”insufficient evidence”, despite over 60 RCTs showing huge prevention effects, decreased death rates, and virtually no side effects. This is an utter scientific disgrace. Instead, we embraced a mediocre drug Remdesivir, with much less evidence to back it than Ivermectin, and serious side effects. Of course Ivermectin is off patent and costs a few dollars whereas patented Remdesivir costs $3000 per treatment. Now Merck, the manufacturer of brand-name Ivermectin Stromectol, actively discouraged the use of ivermectin and overinflated its danger. Now it has the audacity to be “looking for an effective antiviral” to help with early treatment–on patent of course.

    The Vaccine. So we put all our eggs in one basket. The mainstream narrative was ‘get vaccinated and you can stop wearing masks and go back to congregating as normal’. But no – that didn’t happen! There were and are ‘breakthrough infections’, and the delta variant reared its ugly head. The vaccine, whatever kind you get, doesn’t stop the delta variant which is much better at transmission but less deadly. There are some who have posited that vaccinating during a pandemic, something never done before, might actually place selective evolutionary pressure on the virus to allow any mutations that are occurring to manifest more quickly. This possibility makes sense – if you are a virus, mutating 1000s of times a day and suddenly your host produces a spike protein that prevents you from replicating what would you do? Pick up on a mutation of course and start spreading that.

    So now we are in a worse mess! Even if the above hypothesis is invalid the spread of the delta variant is wreaking havoc with the most vaccinated countries like Israel. As of 15 August, 514 Israelis were hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19, a 31% increase from just 4 days earlier. Of the 514, 59% were fully vaccinated. Of the vaccinated, 87% were 60 or older. Now, in September infection rates are skyrocketing, even after a third booster shot. And vaccine efficacy is now waning. Is anyone questioning the validity of this approach?

    What about vaccine side effects? This is another travesty. Not only is the vaccine experimental and was under emergency use authorization, but the side effects are simply not being reported. I was on a Canadian professional physician Facebook page since the pandemic started until about 6 months ago when I was ‘removed’. Physicians and Nurses on the site were reporting a significant number of adverse effects beyond the usual ‘sore arm and fever’ effects you might expect. There were reports of long lasting neurological adverse effects (paresis and paralysis), (and lately increased Guillain Barre); polyarthritic symptoms especially in those with auto-immune conditions, increases in Shingles and reactivation of other latent inflammatory conditions. Now I know the argument for ignoring these are that they are ‘not above the baseline rate’. But the point is that we do not know that unless we count them. I was shocked to hear that several physicians in Canada were ignored when they brought their concerns to Public Health authorities – yes ignored! They were told that these effects could not be due to the vaccine – even though it is new and experimental! The Facebook page I was on removed me partly because I kept bringing up these important facts and I was not being ‘kind to our Public Health colleagues’! What’s going on here? Are we no longer interested in facts; curious about the potential negative nuances of our treatments? Well, clearly physicians on the ground in the often rural practices are very much interested; but not so the PHAC who are not even counting adverse effects properly. I do not wish to be ‘unkind’ but that is an egregious mishandling of important data. The VAERS system in the USA has markedly increased AE’s and deaths way beyond baseline. When the ‘scare’ about myocarditis in young kids came out there was barely a murmur of concern. In fact, in Canada, there was a push on to vaccinate more kids and give them ice cream for getting the shot.

    Now the adverse effects may be rare – although we do not actually know that – for reasons I made clear above; but if you are kid or the parent of the kid who gets myocarditis then that’s something to take seriously.

    Censorship. As if this was not bad enough, the suppression of alternate views has been worldwide. Calling everything that is beyond the narrative of the PHAC a “conspiracy theory” just does not cut it. The advancement of science has always relied on disparate views being discussed, argued about, published, replicated, and finally accepted, or not. Instead we have individual physicians being shut down, fired, and ridiculed when they present ideas that are contrary to public health. YouTube, Google, and Facebook have become the arbiters of what is “scientific fact”. Since when did social media platforms and journalistic fact-checkers become the judges of what is truth?

    Immunity in population. There have been some significant studies showing that there are likely high rates of immunity to COVID-19 in the population. And of course there are those who have had Covid who undoubtedly have a natural immunity which is robust. However, the mantra is that “everyone must be vaccinated”. Instead of seriously considering who is immune in the population and vaccinating everybody else, we have unwisely followed the dictates of public health mass vaccination.


    To say that this is a mess is a bit of an understatement. At every turn it seems as though we have lost all scientific rationality. Could this be a part of some underlying postmodernism creep? Or is it just that we have been mass hypnotized into thinking that we could be saved by a vaccine? I do not know the answers to these questions, but I do know if we continue on the same path then we are headed into a disaster of extreme proportions. We cannot keep doing the same thing–vaccinating everybody and hoping for herd immunity – and expecting a different result. Our way out of this pandemic is to do what we should have done in the first place–emphasize early treatment protocols and prevention, vaccines should rightly have been secondary not mandatory.

    Edward Leyton MD FCFP MDPAC(C)

  • The Battle in Maine Continues as Vaccine Mandates Threaten Major Loss of Health Care & First Responder Professionals

    The Battle in Maine Continues as Vaccine Mandates Threaten Major Loss of Health Care & First Responder Professionals
    By Laurie Dobson with Gail Geraghty Healthcare workers have been waging to stop Gov. Mills from requiring them to get the Covid-19 vaccine.  Meanwhile,

    By Laurie Dobson with Gail Geraghty

    Healthcare workers have been waging to stop Gov. Mills from requiring them to get the Covid-19 vaccine. Meanwhile, the first responders, working within the state’s Emergency Management System, have already been plagued by a shortage of volunteers and trained EMTs. As of midnight Friday, under the deadline for the state’s emergency rulemaking for healthcare workers – EMTs, Paramedics, ambulance drivers, volunteer firefighters, and police also faced the decision to either get the jab or leave their profession.

    Vaccine or Out—No Compromise

    In response, many have quit. Or been “expelled”, or fired. Some have already been removed just for questioning forcing mandates on all Mainers.

    Their refusal to submit to the vaccine mandate will most certainly exacerbate the EMS shortage that has been ongoing since the pandemic began. It will add precious minutes, perhaps hours, to response times to accidents and life-threatening medical emergencies.

    In some counties, observers say, small town EMS providers may not be able to respond at all to 911 calls.

    This was put in the spotlight Friday night as Tucker Carlson discussed the dire situation with State Senator Lisa Keim, and she lamented the lack of news coverage on Maine’s crisis. In Maine, all other legal avenues have closed, except this last hope of a ruling Friday.

    With no ruling by Justice Murphy, which was expected, workers have been abandoned over the weekend after the deadline passed to decide to leave or get jabbed.

    Enter the Liberty Caucus

    State EMS Director Sam Hurley is working with a group of Republican legislators that have formed the Liberty Caucus to provide hard numbers by Sunday on how many EMS workers have quit since midnight Friday, when the emergency order went into effect.

    Liberty Caucus member Sen. Lisa Keim on Tucker Carlson’s show sounded the alarm about the “dire consequences” coming from the crisis, which is not being reported at all the mainstream press.

    “We don’t know (yet) on the state level how many (EMS providers) have been let go,” Sen. Keim said on the show. “But there will be 911 calls that will go unanswered in the state of Maine.”

    Carlson said, “So people who suffer heart failure or have a stroke, and call for an ambulance and it doesn’t come, some of those people will die as a result of this.” Keim nodded, saying “That’s the most dire consequence of all, and the major concern we have.”

    Keim added that it is the height of mismanagement to impose the mandate on people who are actually the most careful of anyone in our society. Who were the first responders throughout this crisis, “and now we’re kicking them out and saying their services are no longer needed. And the Maine people don’t know.”

    Severe Labor Shortage Coming to Maine?

    Maine people also don’t know that in some small towns with ambulance services, anywhere from 50% to 80% of their workers will be quitting or not answering calls. EMS workers are particularly upset because they don’t work in a hospital setting, and thus have been exempt from having to get the other 6 vaccines the state requires. They will still be exempt from having to get the other 6 vaccines under the amended rules, yet they will have to get the cv vax.

    “What makes the covid vaccine more important than the other six?,” asked York County Fire Administrator Roger Hooper during oral testimony on the CDC’s amended rules. “It just adds to the skepticism of the vaccine, and fuels some more of this debate. This whole process has been rushed,” he said.

    Speaking as a certified Maine EMT, I consider this an abuse of the Maine system of emergency care which we are licensed to provide to Mainers in need. Paying lip service to the needs of our health care workers, during this crisis, and then deserting us to the whims of politicians? Forcing experimental vaccines we know are risky and acting like they know more about our health than we do

    It’s no longer tolerable.

  • Over a year ago I posted lab studies of blckseed oil and honey and Sutherlandia, that both showed a very strong anti viral effect on Covid in the lab. Both called for larger studies and possible trials. No action taken as of this post!

    What are the health benefits of black seed oil? A dietitian explains

    What are the health benefits of black seed oil? A dietitian explains

    Black seed oil 101

    Black seed oil, also known as black cumin, comes from the Nigella sativa (N. sativa) L. (Ranunculaceae) plant and has been used in plant medicine for thousands of years. The oil is made by extracting it from the seeds of the plant. Fun fact: it was even found in King Tut’s tomb! Black seed oil is known to be beneficial for a multitude of ailments, and has been used anecdotally, for everything from headaches to toothaches to parasites. It’s nutrient profile (which includes calcium, iron, zinc and more) and long history of being a cure-all, make this herb an interesting study to researchers looking for treatments of varying conditions and diseases.

    What are the health benefits of black seed oil?

    Black seed oil is high in antioxidants, specifically thymoquinone. As a refresher, antioxidants neutralize free radicals, which are the “bad guy” atoms that can damage cells. Since free radicals exist throughout the body, fighting them off with antioxidants can have wide-ranging effects that impact multiple systems. Think lower risk of chronic diseases, slowing the aging process, and more. A meta-analysis of five studies using 293 human subjects suggests that black cumin supplementation may have a beneficial role as an antioxidant. This may be why it’s no surprise that black seed oil is used frequently in the Mediterranean region for its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-cancer properties, allthough more research is needed to fully understand the protective functions of black cumin.

    Aside from the antioxidant compounds, black seed oil also contains sterols, compounds in plants that may help the body reduce blood cholesterol. The presence of significant levels of sterols may make black cumin a capable natural agent in lowering blood cholesterol and thus, helping to prevent cardiovascular diseases.

    Other research has looked at the possibility of black seed oil helping to control blood glucose levels and improve lipid profiles. A small meta-analysis where subjects supplemented with black seed oil significantly improved fasting blood sugar.

    If you’re looking for a little brain boost, black seed oil may have neuroprotective potential due to the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. The ability to reduce inflammation specifically in the brain may help prevent conditions such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. Research here is limited but also, hopeful.

    The anti-inflammatory properties have also shown promise for asthma, as a possible treatment for male infertility and even for weight loss. There are also beauty gurus who believe it to be a valuable treatment for clogged pores, acne and dark spots when used topically. Most of these proposed beauty benefits are likely due to the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. You may just see black cumin listed in the ingredients in the next beauty product you pick up.

    More research is needed and not all medicinal uses have been proven, but black seed oil does seem promising. And, it makes sense. Black seed oil has an impressive nutrient profile including powerful antioxidants which we know are important for preventing many conditions and diseases.

    Is it safe?

    When used in a culinary setting (as in drizzled over grilled veggies) black seed oil is likely to be very safe. When used in supplement form, in a pill or a powder, it’s also likely safe and doses usually range from ½ to 2 grams daily. However, there aren't adequate long term human studies and it is always important to check with your doctor for any possible drug supplement interactions. Most people suffer no reactions but some do report gastrointestinal distress when taken orally and allergic type rashes when used on skin

  • Nigella Sativa (BLACK Seed Oil) is as good an anti-covid medication like GOLDEN VIRGINIA tobacco and Cannabis Sativa. So the occasional joint with your Gin and TONIC which contains sufficient Quinine to boost your immune system to fight this virus. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\a low level of RADIATION as found from RADON release from GRANITE rocks in CORNWALL is also effective in pepping up the immune system, just don't go overboard and smoke too much!!!! Everything in MODERATION, CHAPS!! :) :) :)

  • Nigella Sativa (BLACK Seed Oil) is as good an anti-covid medication like GOLDEN VIRGINIA tobacco and Cannabis Sativa. So the occasional joint with your Gin and TONIC which contains sufficient Quinine to boost your immune system to fight this virus. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\a low level of RADIATION as found from RADON release from GRANITE rocks in CORNWALL is also effective in pepping up the immune system, just don't go overboard and smoke too much!!!! Everything in MODERATION, CHAPS!! :) :) :)

    So a wake and bake needs more consideration?

  • Aspirate before you vaccinated. Pretty simple ! Dr. John Campbell has been screaming for months but the experts know better, based on their new injection toys!!!!!!!!!!! Idiots!!!!!!!!!!!

    Can the COVID-19 Vaccine's Most Troubling Side Effect Be Easily Prevented?

    Why are teenage boys most liable to suffer from myocarditis after being vaccinated against COVID? Does the heart inflammation have anything to do with the way the shot is administered? New studies are trying to answer these questions, or at least to generate a more transparent discussion about the side effects

    Last weekend, the Health Ministry’s Facebook page carried a “Fake News Warning” in glaring red font. The warning referred to a post by Dr. Yoav Yehezkelli, an internist and a member of the “Public Emergency Council for the COVID19 Crisis,” who a few hours earlier had attacked the ministry over insufficient research into the side effects of COVID vaccinations.

    Like previous posts about side effects, this one by the Health Ministry also drew thousands of angry responses. Another ministry post, maintaining that reports on side effects were being monitored and examined regularly, triggered a storm when surfers claimed that the ministry had deleted thousands of responses from people who had reported side effects. The ministry retorted that only posts containing obscenities had been deleted, and in response surfers posted screenshots of “clean” responses that had been removed.

    The agitated public discourse on the vaccinations has developed a centrifugal force that is flinging the participants as far as possible from one another. It is making them cling to their positions far beyond the circumscribed zone in which one can ask questions and make comments without being considered a complete heretic or, alternately, a blind follower.

    At this stage the debate seems to be bipolar. At one pole are those who personally know 10 people who died within minutes of being vaccinated, and who are convinced that an organized whitewashing conspiracy effort is underway with the aim of controlling the public. At the other pole are those who roll their eyes and dismiss the question of side effects as one of boring trivialities that only hysterics or those with vested interests make a fuss about.

    The time has come for a saner, more balanced discourse that also addresses complexity. The possibility of achieving this may have arrived at last. Last week, two large-scale studies by two groups of Israeli scientists were published in the New England Journal of Medicine – one by the Health Ministry, the other by the Clalit health maintenance organization – which examined the possible connection between vaccination against COVID-19 and myocarditis (heart inflammation). Their findings were quite similar, but because the Health Ministry study was more comprehensive (in fact it is the most comprehensive in the world, because it’s the only one that included everyone vaccinated in a single country), and because its follow-up of those who were vaccinated was more prolonged and it also distinguished between recipients of the first and second jabs – I will refer to the data it contains.

    Among all those who received the second shot – 5,671,471 people through May 31, 2021 – 142 cases of myocarditis were found. The ratio, then, is 1:40,000 vaccinees. The question is whether this is a low value or a high one. One way to read the findings is: “Only 142 out of five million vaccinated Israelis suffered heart inflammation.” That approach, which was how Haaretz headlined the story, “diminishes” the figure. Or, one could “augment” the number – for example, by adding a worrisome exclamation mark: “More than 140 of those vaccinated developed myocarditis!” Either way, the result requires substantive clarification.

    In trying to determine whether a connection exists between heart inflammation and vaccination, we adopted several approaches,” says Prof. Dror Mevorach, who is the first signatory on the NEJM article reporting on the study, and the head of the committee established by the Health Ministry to examine the subject. “Among other criteria, we compared the frequency [of myocarditis] in those vaccinated with those not vaccinated, and we discovered that the number of cases was twice as high. We also examined the pattern of its appearance, and we saw that in 90 percent of the cases, it manifested three to four days after the second shot. We concluded that there is a connection between the two phenomena.

  • Quote

    How can an antiviral drug that seems to kill the virus (not your immune system?) generate full immunity?

    Isn't it quite obvious? Such a drug essentially generates attenuated virus vaccine in-situ: Ivermectin prohibits virus in replication, so it can be outnumbered with white cells, which get occasionally trained against it in similar way, like against adenovirus from AstraZeneca/Sputnik/Sinovac vaccines.