We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2),
This study is also in vitro. It does not prove that the much smaller doses you can give to a person would be effective. This study was published in April 2020. Subsequent double-blind tests with patients showed the ivermectin does not work.
Don't laugh about that Thomas as stupid as it may be. Remember every time you step out of your home you are under some sort of video surveillance all available to authorities through judicial process.
I do not see what that has to do with implanting microchips in people's arms to track them. That is not possible. It is ridiculous. The only thing you can implant are RfID devices that only work from a meter or two away. Video surveillance is nowhere near as effective as following cell phones, credit card transactions and social media. The latter we do to ourselves, voluntarily. If you are seriously concerned about being watched, you should not use a cell phone or Facebook.
I myself don't have a cell phone, but only because I have no use for one. I am not concerned about being watched. Partly because I have experience living in small towns (mainly in Japan) where everyone knows everyone else's business. When you step out of your house people know who you are and where you are going. Before the growth of large cities, starting around 1870, in most place privacy did not exist. There was not much anonymity. Yes, there were large cities such as London or New York, but most people lived in places where everyone knew their business, including local authorities and the police. Privacy is a modern invention, lasting from around 1870 to 2000. There were few references to the right of privacy before 1900, and the concept is now more or less defunct.
When privacy began to erode in the 1990s, I thought this would bother me, but I find that I care less about it than I thought I would. I make no effort to cover my tracks on the internet. In all online forums, such as this one or the New York Times, I always use my full name, and you can find my name, address, e-mail address and phone number at LENR-CANR.org. Many people use made-up names. Especially the people at Wikipedia. I think that should not be allowed at Wikipedia. I often say that when you evaluate cold fusion, you can look at peer-reviewed papers in mainstream journals written by scientists with CVs at university websites, or you can look at anonymous comments at Wikipedia by people who name themselves after comic book characters. Which do you think has more credibility?
This study is also in vitro. It does not prove that the much smaller doses you can give to a person would be effective. This study was published in April 2020. Subsequent double-blind tests with patients showed the ivermectin does not work.
Yes, I know it was in vitro. I was responding to this THH comment to show him Ivermectin has a strong in vitro effect, and at safe levels:
"I have one respectable reason for being more positive (slightly) about remdesivir than about ivermectin: the lab (in vitro) antiviral evidence. Remdesivir is an effective anti-viral against related virusses at concentrations safely obtained. ivermectin is not, and the concentration required to knock out covod was much higher than that used by anyone."
A different approach to fighting C.V.
and the concentration required to knock out covod was much higher than that used by anyone.
Shane you have been faked by a free masons papers. The wording used in the paper shows these people have been dilettantes with the top order to show something positive with a huge negative bias.
The is no LD 50 factor for virus. For virus CD is used to indicate how much the replication is suppressed.
But this was never the intention of the Aussi FM group. Their goal was to show that virus do disappear. 1000% nonsense.
We know that Ivermectin works at far lower than standard doses!! E.g. for scabies its 1/4. For prevention 3/4 is enough. 1/2 still gives about 90% protection.
Scientists are anxiously tracking a descendant of the Delta coronavirus, which is responsible for a growing proportion of Covid-19 cases in the UK, and could be more infectious than the original Delta variant, they say.
of course this affects vaccinated first...But they will not tell you.... It is known since a long time that at least two mutations do circulate that for 100% evade Pfizer/Oxford crap. This is the reason to avoid boosters a buy some IVR.
Yes, I know it was in vitro. I was responding to this THH comment to show him Ivermectin has a strong in vitro effect, and at safe levels:
What do you mean by "safe levels"? Do you mean it does not kill the cells in the sample? That may be true, but the levels are much higher than a human dose. You would kill the patient with that much. Furthermore, very little of the doses that have been administered reach the lungs. Not enough to have any effect even if there is an antiviral effect. See:
You means like these on going trials?
Studies Prophylaxis Early treatment Late treatment Patients Authors All studies 63 86% [75‑92%] 66% [52‑76%] 36% [21‑48%] 47,461 625 Peer-reviewed 44 86% [74‑93%] 71% [54‑82%] 38% [16‑55%] 17,126 466 With GMK/BBC exclusions 47 84% [69‑91%] 73% [63‑80%] 45% [22‑61%] 37,558 518 Randomized Controlled Trials 30 84% [25‑96%] 62% [43‑75%] 20% [-6‑39%] 6,368 357 Percentage improvement with ivermectin treatment
So - if you have followed the discussion here of the science there are three things:
I'd be happy to go through the details of this, with links etc - it seems that many people here just don't want to read them. But they have all been posted here before.
It still may be true that ivermectin works a bit. You need very big studies to see exactly what is the effect given that there is no obvious positive effect. Those studies are happening.
Display Morehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7129059/
Abstract
Although several clinical trials are now underway to test possible therapies, the worldwide response to the COVID-19 outbreak has been largely limited to monitoring/containment. We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2), with a single addition to Vero-hSLAM cells 2 h post infection with SARS-CoV-2 able to effect ~5000-fold reduction in viral RNA at 48 h. Ivermectin therefore warrants further investigation for possible benefits in humans.
As we have observed previously (Lundberg et al., 2013; Tay et al., 2013; Wagstaff et al., 2012), no toxicity of ivermectin was observed at any of the timepoints tested, in either the sample wells or in parallel tested drug alone samples.
That paper showing in vitro anti-viral activity finds it at 5uM concentartion
This is 35X higher than that found from the approved (known safe) dose of ivermectin
Introduction Caly, Druce (1) reported that ivermectin inhibited SARS-CoV-2 in vitro for up to 48 h using ivermectin at 5μM. The concentration resulting in 50% inhibition (IC50, 2 µM) was >35x higher than the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) after oral administration of the approved dose of ivermectin when given fasted.
NB - approved is 200ug/kg fasting
ivermectin trials double this to 400ug/kg fasting
FLCC sneakily changes this, with 400ug/kg with a meal. The food increases absorption - FLCC claim when saying the big trials using standard (fasting) doses prove nothing.
I've not seen the evidence for this. Here evidence against
Results: The final model described concentration-time profiles after fed and fasted dosing accurately, and estimated the food effect associated with relative bioavailability to 1.18 (95% CI 1.10-1.67). Conclusions: In this analysis, the effect of a high-fat breakfast compared with a fasted-state administration of a single oral dose of 12 mg ivermectin was minimal.
So my point stands - ivermectin deemed safe (at double normal) level is some 20X below the level in that paper.
Shane, please acknowledge that your link does not show what you say it does. Note that no toxicity (to cell culture) is very very different from no bad side effects when taken by humans!
EDIT - Jed got there before me with the paper I see now. I however added the numbers that links approved dose to FLCC dose!
Shane you have been faked by a free masons papers. The wording used in the paper shows these people have been dilettantes with the top order to show something positive with a huge negative bias.
The is no LD 50 factor for virus. For virus CD is used to indicate how much the replication is suppressed.
Please read the detailed (no Wyttenfacts) paper that Jed and I linked. it addresses that point.
Shane, please acknowledge that your link does not show what it says it does. Note that no toxicity (to cell culture) is very very different from no bad side effects when taken by humans!
I don't need to say that because your review clearly refutes the study I referenced. I follow the science, so will say Caly, et.al did not demonstrate strong anti-viral activity in the lab as they claim.
If that study is the last word on the matter, that leaves only one other logical conclusion....IVM must work through some other mechanism. 
Thanks for the correction.
OF course nobody will discuss with free mason clowns that want to increase the visibility of their fraudulent claims.
1'000'000'000 Indian did take part in the world largest Ivermectin trial.
The result:: No more CoV-19 since 4.5 months now. 100..1000 x less death than with vaccines, that kill you or cannot prevent that CoV-19 kills you. Not even talking about Gillead crap Remdesivir or Merck crap Moneylaundringavir that will damage more than CoV-19 can ever do.
I don't need to say that because your review clearly refutes the study I referenced. I follow the science, so will say Caly, et.al did not demonstrate strong anti-viral activity in the lab as they claim.
If that study is the last word on the matter, that leaves only one other logical conclusion....IVM must work through some other mechanism.
Thanks for the correction.
yes, or there could be effects that make the in vitro studies wrong.
My point is that we start off with no real reson (except FLCC PR) to think ivermectin will be helpful. It is an interesting dug, with lots of possible action, but no evidence that it will work against COVID. It has been tried against other virus with negative clinical results - which is why although it is a broad-spectrum anti-viral I don't think it is actually used as an antiviral for anything at the moment. Does anyone know of anything?
There is some limited evidence from the trials that it might make you feel better when you have mild COVID symptoms. I guess symptomatic relief is always welcome.
Anyway - if you have got worms it is strongly recommended.
100..1000 x less death than with vaccines,
Wyttenfact. Given the very large Indian COVID wave (70% infected) and everyone admits massive X10 or more undecounting of India's dead (e.g. - no COVID in the countryside but a nasty fever that killed lots of people).
Of course pari-passu India out in any cae to have a death rate 1/4 of developed countries due to younger demographics.
I think I've pointed this out, and linked the age dependence graphs, enough that everyone except W, who has very selective memory, knows this.
It is known since a long time that at least two mutations do circulate that for 100% evade Pfizer/Oxford crap.
It is a day for free Wyttenfacts!
read LENR Forum and get your fill...
[general point nothing is 100% in medicine except W's ability to generate Wyttenfacts]
A retired marine from Albert Lea, Minnesota, wants to take Walmart to court after a pharmacist refused to fill his doctor's prescription for ivermectin to treat his case of COVID-19.
Bill Salier, a Marine Corps veteran who served in Somalia and a former U.S. Senate candidate, shared his story Monday on the "Steve Deace Show," describing how a local Walmart pharmacist refused to fulfill a doctor's prescription for ivermectin for both him and his wife, who had each come down with COVID-19.
Salier, 53, told BlazeTV host Steve Deace that he began feeling sick on Oct. 1, and after testing he was found positive for COVID-19. After his diagnosis, Salier said he attempted to receive monoclonal antibody treatments by applying through the Minnesota Resource Allocation Platform, but his requests went unanswered.
"We never so much as heard a word back, not even in acknowledgement that the requests had been put in," Salier said.
Failing that, Salier obtained a doctor's prescription for ivermectin, a drug approved for use against parasites but not Food and Drug Administration authorized for use in treating COVID-19. The Biden administration, state health departments, and Merck, the manufacturer of the drug, have all warned against using it for treatment of COVID-19.
The FDA has specifically warned against the use of ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19, noting, "Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19."
"Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing," the agency said.
Nevertheless, groups like the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance and America's Frontline Doctors have touted the drug's benefits, claiming the Nobel-prize winning drug is very effective at treating COVID-19. Some scientists disagree, highlighting flaws in studies cited in support for ivermectin as a COVID treatment and urging people that more research is necessary before the drug should be prescribed for COVID patients.
In response, pharmacies and hospitals in the U.S. have generally followed the government's recommendations and have denied iverrmectin to COVID-19 patients. Salier says that's what happened to him and his wife.
"The prescription was sent in to our local Walmart, here in Albert Lea, Minnesota, and it was refused to be filled by the pharmacist. This pharmacist contacted my wife, telling her that he would not fill it. My wife stated that he did not have the right to stand between our physician's prescription and the patent, he asserted that he did have that right and he refused to do so," Salier said.
Salier says he and his wife were left in "limbo" after the pharmacist continued to deny them access to ivermectin, even after their physician called him to discuss the matter.
"We were faced with either continuing to suffer and quite possibly ending up in the hospital," he told Deace, explaining that they decided to take a risk and purchased a horse paste version of the drug that is not intended for human consumption and could be dangerous if overdosed.
"I was forced with this decision and I was either going to lay there, suffer, and be at life's peril of losing my time with my family, or I was going to eat that horse paste. And down the hatch it went," Salier said.
Fortunately, Salier did not overdose and reported to Deace that "within eight hours" he began to feel relief from his COVID-19 symptoms.
Now, he says he wants a reckoning with Walmart and the pharmacist who denied him access to ivermectin.
"If you ever wanted to find out what it is to punch a Marine in the face and what type of response you're gonna get, well, America, you're about to see the type of response that you get. Because if you take on me and my family, and you stand between our physician and the health care that they have prescribed to me as a life-saving thing — in my opinion that is what it did — then you have got a fight on your hands and I am coming for that fight."
Salier is partnering with We the Patriots USA, a nonprofit organization that defends civil liberties, to raise money to file a federal lawsuit against the pharmacist and Walmart.
Brian Festa, an attorney with We the Patriots USA, told Deace that it was "abhorrent" for the Walmart pharmacist to "play God" with the Saliers' lives.
He observed that even the FDA acknowledges there are circumstances where health care providers prescribe certain drugs for unapproved use "when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient."
"You may be asking yourself why your healthcare provider would want to prescribe a drug to treat a disease or medical condition that the drug is not approved for. One reason is that there might not be an approved drug to treat your disease or medical condition. Another is that you may have tried all approved treatments without seeing any benefits. In situations like these, you and your healthcare provider may talk about using an approved drug for an unapproved use to treat your disease or medical condition," the FDA stated in a FAQ on its website.
"So, this is talking about off-label usage. This has been done for years," Festa said. "We're talking about a drug, ivermectin, that was part of a treatment protocol that won the Nobel Prize in 2015 as an anti-parasitic for malaria. This is FDA-approved, it's been used for decades as an anti-parasitic, and now you're suddenly telling us in 2021 that it's unsafe because it's being used for off-label usage? Which again, is so common in the practice of medicine."
Festa added that the pharmacist "had absolutely no right to tell Bill and his wife that he was not going to fill this prescription" and that Walmart needs to be held accountable for what happened.
Festa said We The Patriots USA has committed $25,000 to Salier's legal fund and that once the group raises $50,000 to cover legal fees, they will be ready to file the lawsuit.
Of course pari-passu India out in any cae to have a death rate 1/4 of developed countries due to younger demographics.
I think I've pointed this out, and linked the age dependence graphs, enough that everyone except W, who has very selective memory, knows this.
Yes, Uttar Predesh has younger demographics, but still they have 13 million elderly. That is almost half the entire population of Kerala of 29 million.
massive X10 or more undecounting of India's dead
THH FUD alert:: There has been no under counting for 2021 in India. Read your linked paper!!
Here more anti clown graph- data for Ivermectin.
Our free mason clowns fully justify the "cricket brain" definition of their intellectual capacity. Repeating India 10x FUD we have shown its just their reading disability.
Our free mason clowns - or lets say wimps - also beg for a booster albeit vaccine give a perfect protection...
This is not even silly! We have to invent a new word for this post vaccine freakiness syndrome.
The RCTs are negative, except for two big (extraordinarily poistive) ones which are very high risk of bias due to lack of transparency and clear methodology- one (Elgazaar) of which had so many obvious issues with its raw data it is generally considered to be fraudulent and was withdrawn. The other (Niaee) also eventually coughed up data after pressure, and the data was also found to be inconsistent
In reviewing that analysis I find a few discrepancies in your statement.
I see
"Version 135 - Removed Naiee"
and
"
Elgazzar. This study was withdrawn and was removed from this analysis on the same day. There was no significant change (excluding 1 of 66 studies has very little effect, and the exclusion actually improves the treatment delay-response relationship)."
and 44 peer reviewed studies 30 positive RCT
etc etc
