Covid-19 News

  • Looks like the good ole USA taxpayers will be footing the bill for this proposal!!!!!!!!



    WHO-led program aims to buy antiviral Covid-19 pills for $10


    WHO-led program aims to buy antiviral Covid-19 pills for $10
    A World Health Organization-led program to ensure poorer countries get fair access to Covid-19 vaccines, tests and treatments aims to secure antiviral drugs…
    amp.cnn.com


    Brussels, BelgiumA World Health Organization-led program to ensure poorer countries get fair access to Covid-19 vaccines, tests and treatments aims to secure antiviral drugs for patients with mild symptoms for as little as $10 per course, a draft document seen by Reuters says.


    Merck & Co's experimental pill molnupiravir is likely to be one of the drugs, and other drugs to treat mild patients are being developed.


    The document, which outlines the goals of the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A) until September next year, says that the program wants to deliver about 1 billion Covid-19 tests to poorer nations, and procure drugs to treat up to 120 million patients globally, out of about 200 million new cases it estimates in the next 12 months.

    The plans highlight how the WHO wants to shore up supplies of drugs and tests at a relatively low price after losing the vaccine race to wealthy nations which scooped up a huge share of the world's supplies, leaving the world's poorest countries with few shots.


    A spokesperson for the ACT-A said the document, dated October 13, was still a draft under consultation and declined to comment on its content before it is finalized. The document will also be sent to global leaders ahead of a G20 summit in Rome at the end of this month. The ACT-A asks the G20 and other donors for additional funding of $22.8 billion until September 2022 which will be needed to buy and distribute vaccines, drugs and tests to poorer nations and narrow the huge gaps in supply between wealthy and less advanced countries. Donors have so far pledged $18.5 billion to the program.


    The financial requests are based on detailed estimates about the price of drugs, treatments and tests, which will account for the program's biggest expenses alongside the cost of distributing vaccines.


    Although it does not explicitly cite molnupiravir, the ACT-A document expects to pay $10 dollar per course for "novel oral antivirals for mild/moderate patients."


    Other pills to treat mild patients are being developed, but molnupiravir is the only one which has so far showed positive results in late-stage trials. The ACT-A is in talks with Merck & Co and generics producers to buy the drug.


    The price is very low if compared with the $700 per course that the United States has agreed to pay for 1.7 million courses of the treatment.


    However, a study carried out by Harvard university estimated that molnupiravir could cost about $20 dollars if produced by generic drugmakers, with the price potentially going down to $7.7 under an optimized production.


    Merck & Co. has licensing deals with eight Indian generic drugmakers.

    The ACT-A document says that its target is to reach a deal by the end of November to secure the supply of an "oral outpatient drug," which it aims to be available from the first quarter of next year.


    The money raised would initially be used to "support procurement of up to 28 million treatment courses for highest risk mild/moderate patients over the next 12 months, depending on product availability, clinical guidance, and volumes changing with evolution of needs," the document says, noting this volume would be secured under an advance purchase agreement.


    Larger additional amounts of new oral antivirals to treat mild patients are also expected to be procured at a later stage, the document says.


    Another 4.3 million courses of repurposed Covid-19 pills to treat critical patients are also expected to be purchased at a price of $28 per course, the document says, without naming any specific drug.

    The ACT-A also intends to address essential medical oxygen needs of 6-8 million severe and critical patients by September 2022.

    Investment in tests

    In addition, the program plans to invest massively in Covid-19 diagnostics in order to at least double the number of tests carried out in poorer nations, defined as low income and low-middle income countries.


    Of the $22.8 billion, ACT-A plans to raise in the next 12 months, about one third and the largest share is to be spent on diagnostics, the document says.


    Currently poor countries conduct on average about 50 tests per 100,000 people every day, against 750 tests in richer nations. The ACT-A wants to bring testing rates to a minimum of 100 tests per 100,000 in poorer states.


    That means delivering around 1 billion tests in the next 12 months, around 10 times more than the ACT-A has procured so far, the document shows.


    The largest share of diagnostics would be rapid antigen tests at a price of around $3, and only 15% would be spent to procure molecular tests, which are more accurate but take more time to deliver results and are estimated to cost around $17, including delivery costs, the document shows.


    The push on tests is meant to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, as only 0.4% of the about 3 billion tests reported across the world have been conducted in poor nations, the document says.


    It would also help spot earlier possible new variants, which tend to proliferate when infections are widespread, and therefore are more likely in the countries with lower vaccination rates.


    The document underlines that "vaccine access is highly inequitable with coverage ranging from 1% to over 70%, depending largely on a country's wealth."


    The program aims to vaccinate at least 70% of the eligible population in all countries by the middle of next year, in line with the WHO's goals.

  • Some may recall that early in 2021 Japanese researchers sought to see the effect of Ivermectin on Covid death rates in Africa, by comparing those countries that regularly use ivermectin to treat against parasites, and those who don't. I didn't realize that later that year - in early September - a nice little map and graph was made that drives the point home visually.





    Here are tables from the original study from

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254377v1.full.pdf





  • The UK does have a problem with rising case rates. There are several reasons, but the main one is that our government - and in particular our esteemed Prime Minister - have been telling everybody that 'it's all over'.


    Very few wear masks, pubs and restaurants are crowded, teenagers go on doing what teenagers have always done, meanwhile between 1-200 people die every day.


    We do need that plan B, and the government is dragging its feet again.

    Politicians use arguments like:


    "we were told masks were important - but look at X country wearing masks with a higher rate than us"


    The rate is the exponential integral of R

    R depends on lots of things, of which masks are one, population behaviour is another, as is weather, type of housing, etc, etc.


    You just can't make inter-country comparisons in any simple way.


    In the UK good sick-pay is a more important one. If you make it financially perilous for people to give up work when they have COVID, they will not do this. Given COVID has so many cases which are asymptomatic or indistinguishable from cold it is not surprising some will ignore it.


    Cases are increasing by 10% a week. Just a small reduction in R, maybe from masks + better sick pay, and that would be R < 1 and case rate soon down to 0 with everyone saying we are a miracle!


    It does annoy me when politicians in the UK make arguments as scientifically false as those of the antivaxxers here!


    THH

  • That comparison is ASAVS (anti-science anti-vaxxer spin)


    We get a lot of it here. It is an interesting comparison - it certainly sparked my interest so i found:


    COVID-19: The Ivermectin African Enigma
    The low frequency of cases and deaths from the SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 virus in some countries of Africa has called our attention about the unusual behavior of…
    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


    After controlling for different factors, including the Human Development Index (HDI), APOC countries (vs. non-APOC), show 28% lower mortality (0.72; 95% CI: 0.67-0.78) and 8% lower rate of infection (0.92; 95% CI: 0.91-0.93) due to COVID-19.


    Your link (not controlling for other factors) show an effect of 20X on mortality. The controlled effect is 30% on mortality - that is 60X smaller.


    Now that 30% effect is interesting, but only very mildly so. Your graph proves it!


    If the apparent effect without controlling for confounding factors is 60X larger than when you do control - you can be sure there will be large errors in the final result. Controlling for other factors can never be precise, because relationships are non-linear and there can be additional factors you have not controlled for.


    What makes me so annoyed here is that apparently rational, intelligent, and sane people like Mark U and... Ok, like Mark U, can't think of others with the last of those conditions - accept this obviously bankrupt argument without digging a little deeper.


    It is clear, given a better study of exactly the same thing, that that graph is worthless. Any scientist paying attention would know this.

  • Now lets dig a little deeper. (Citations of the above paper). Note the caution here: no-one is jumping to say they know what the answer is, just pointing out why in this case the effect could not be due to the therapeutic effect of APOC ivermectin


    COVID-19: The African enigma
    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov


    To the editor


    We read with interest the paper by Guerrero et al “COVID-19: The Ivermectin African Enigma” . In an ecological study they compared COVID-19 related mortality and infection rates between APOC (African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control) and non-APOC countries. After adjusting for Human Development Index (HDI) and number of performed test, COVID-19 mortality and infection rate were respectively 28% and 8% lower in non-APOC countries compared to APOC countries . The authors suggested that this difference may be related to the community directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) programs established in APOC countries.


    We agree that it remains to be explained why a lower COVID-19 mortality is observed in many APOC countries compared to other parts of the world. However, we do not believe that this is related to CDTI programs. Indeed, in APOC countries ivermectin is distributed only once (most countries) or twice a year . Moreover, April 1st 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, CDTI programs were interrupted and were only recently restarted .

    Ivermectin has an in vitro anti-COVID-19 effect and also certain clinical trials suggested a beneficial effect of ivermectin on COVID-19 disease outcome . However, in a recent small double blind, randomized control trial in Colombia, five days of ivermectin, at a 10 times the recommended dose, did not reduce the duration of symptoms of mild COVID-19 disease compared to placebo . Given the half-life of ivermectin, approximately 18h , it is unlikely that CDTI, only one dose of ivermectin once or twice a year, may be able to reduce COVID-19 related mortality.


    Many factors could explain the lower COVID-19 mortality in APOC countries . One of them could be exposure to parasitic infections and the immune response induced by these infections. For example, for P. falciparum, a parasitic infection highly prevalent in APOC countries, it has been hypothesised that the immunological memory against P. falciparum merozoites primes SARS-CoV-2 infected cells for early phagocytosis and therefore may protect persons with a recent P. falciparum infection against severe COVID-19 disease . Helminth infections, such as onchocerciasis, may down regulate immune responses and potentially inactivate the inflammatory signalling pathways that may induce acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), one of the causes of death in COVID-19 infected persons 10 .

  • Ivermectin is an approved medication that has been traditionally used o treat infections in the body that are caused by many types of parasite infestations. The Ivermectin family of compounds was discovered in 1970, along the east coast of Japan. Ivermectin was introduced in 1981. Half of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

    was awarded jointly to Campbell and Omura for Discovering Ivermectin. Ivermectin is currently being investigated for SARS-CoV2, which is the virus that causes COVID-19. There have been considerable trials that have shown significant promise. So far, trials have shown Ivermectin has reduced the number of cell- associated viral DNA by 99.9% within 24 hours. See also:

  • Very few wear masks, pubs and restaurants are crowded, teenagers go on doing what teenagers have always done, meanwhile between 1-200 people die every day.

    Tell the fascists to order Ziverdo of 2 $ a piece! this will end it within 4 weeks....

    But the concentration camp 39 (UK) likes to kill 200 every day. It must be joy to watch the heritage around the corner...

  • but molnupiravir is the only one which has so far showed positive results in late-stage trials.

    Typical big Pharma sponsored FUD: Merck-vectin had shown no effect so far. Just marketing claims it. India has stopped one out patient study due to no effect...



    India’s Ivermectin Blackout Just as Galileo proved with his telescope that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe in 1616; today, the data from India shows that Ivermectin is effective, much more so than the vaccines. It not only prevents death, but it also prevents COVID infections, and it also is effective against the Delta Variant.

    >3/4 of India is free of CoV-19 thanks to Ziverdo - Ivermectin. Only fascist clowns cannot see the reality. The same fascists that did claim that a vaccine can prevent COV-19...where now we see vaccinated get it 4x more often...


    So what did cripple the brain of these clown? The gene therapy? Money? Pr the FM order to follow or to die...

  • There have been considerable trials that have shown significant promise. So far, trials have shown Ivermectin has reduced the number of cell- associated viral DNA by 99.9% within 24 hours. See also:

    Zephir,


    I'm sure you only posted that piece for fun, because having read this thread you know better:


    considerable trials that show promise. Agreed, and all the better quality trials, averaged, do not show promise.

    reduced cell-associated DNA by 99.9%. I think that is the in vitro evidence, the question is therefore is that at an ivermetin concentration achievable safely in the body?

  • Which are these "better quality trials"? These red ones?


    https://i.imgur.com/B6EXpKil.png


    No. Read and green - just not the high bias red or green. Have a look at Bryant - and FLCC stawart and thoroughly convinced ivermectin works, who with another (batty) BIRD propagandist published a pro-ivermectin ,meta-study.

    His study is negative for what he considers low bias trials if you do not consider Elgazaar and Niaee.


    For details you could read the studies i havce posted which explain how they calculated risk of bias. And you can rely on FLCC members for most of this! they are highly biassed against ivermectin.


    Elgazaar was fraudulent.


    Niaee - every non-FLCC-controlled metastudy thinks is high risk of bias (and some think is fraudulent). That includes Hill, who was initially very positive about ivermectin.


    Many scientists, not part of W's alphabet mafia, not controlled by pharma - were originally really positive about ivermectin based on all those high risk studies. When they looked at the relationship between quality and outcome - the most reliable RCTs come out negative - few are positive now.


    The details of this, which maybe you are not interested in, are fascinating.


    Go read about Hill, Chaccour. Read really carefully the pro-ivermectin (controlled by ivermectin advocates) meta-study. Read where otehrs differ from it and why (e.g. Elgazaar and Niaee).


    THH

  • The largest Ivermectin trial ever done on 240 mio people did show break through success and ended the CoV-19 pandemic in Uttar Pradesh within 6 weeks. (Now also in > 90% of India)


    Vaccines will delay the pandemics for years with some more million deaths due do clowns (fascists) not allowing treatment.


    Why do people want to talk about small fake studies???


    Only criminals going after your money will use fake information to divert you.

  • Just because you may convincingly claim they have less risk getting a vaccine does not determine if they they should therefore get the vaccine. It is a very small margin of risk either way.

    It is larger than you realize. The risk of death is small, but the risk of severe disease, hospitalization, and "long-haul" effects is large. Much larger than for chickenpox, measles, mumps and other diseases that all children must be vaccinated against. If we are going to vaccinate children for these other diseases, why would we not vaccinate them for COVID? I do not understand why you have a different standard for this one vaccination, for this one disease.


    Birth-18 Years Immunization Schedule | CDC

  • It is larger than you realize. The risk of death is small, but the risk of severe disease, hospitalization, and "long-haul" effects is large.

    This is the (FM/R/ || /B) mafia point of view. You can treat children with Ivermectin with no added risk. It has been done all over the world. Also pregnant woman had no problems so far same for breast feeding!


    But I see: The mafia likes to kill children too... Great!

  • https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1027511/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf


    I just checked once more the consistency of the data. For group age 40..50 the 2 dose vaccination rate is around 75%.

    cases:: 130,904 unvaxx:: 13,022 vaxx 117'882 --> adjust unvaxx group size --> 39066 cases.


    for two dose::unvaxx its about 3:1 without counting the recovered. So in reality vaccinate get 6x more often CoV-19.


    Why are they cheating?? May be they use the one dose vaccination rate that is 78% or fully discount the unlinked instead of just 1/4 ...

  • Your link (not controlling for other factors) show an effect of 20X on mortality

    Don't know where you are getting 20x from. Afaik the paper doesn't present that type of figure, but if it did it would have been been 8.5x.


    What makes me so annoyed

    Why be annoyed? Most anyone reading the study or looking at the map / graph knows it was not 'corrected', and that the data is subject to the limitations of the various countries producing it.


    After controlling for different factors

    You should know that such 'controlling' is a great way to fudge. Nevertheless I can appreciate that the poorer countries - which are very often the ones using the ivermectin - would seem more likely to undercount. But as a balance to this, note that the Japanese study found that the case fatality rate in both the ivermectin and non ivermectin countries was about the same, at 2 percent. In other words, if one was sick enough to present oneself to the community centre for testing, and then tested positive, the survival rate was about 98 percent for each set of countries. So the treatment appears comparable to each set of countries. (Note : the treatment would not have included ivermectin ; ivermectin was used for something else entirely.) What is not comparable for each set of countries is the number of people who presented as sick and got tested as positive in the first place, and subsequently died. Ivermectin countries reported 7 and 8.5 times less respectively (per capita) according to the Japanese study. Note that this study came after the one you cited, which at December 2020 came at the time when the differences were not as pronounced. And now, almost a year later, it seems the differences are even more pronounced if the graph is any indication.

  • Many factors could explain the lower COVID-19 mortality in APOC countries 7 . One of them could be exposure to parasitic infections and the immune response induced by these infections. For example, for P. falciparum, a parasitic infection highly prevalent in APOC countries, it has been hypothesised that the immunological memory against P. falciparum merozoites primes SARS-CoV-2 infected cells for early phagocytosis and therefore may protect persons with a recent P. falciparum infection against severe COVID-19 disease 8 . Helminth infections, such as onchocerciasis, may down regulate immune responses 9 and potentially inactivate the inflammatory signalling pathways that may induce acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), one of the causes of death in COVID-19 infected persons 10 .

    There could well be some truth in that, but it does come off as a bit of a desperate attempt to minimize ivermectin's effectiveness. Someone could just as easily say that the poorer countries are *more* prone to getting sick from Covid or anything else, because they have less access to proper nutrition, clean water, and hygiene measures.

  • Here are the Ivermectin and non Ivermectin African countries listed in the Japanese study. Beside their names I have placed the current Worldometers Covid deaths per million figure.

    Take away: All 31 Ivermectin countries had a reported death rate below 120 per million. Only 4 out of 22 non Ivermectin countries had such a low reported death rate.


    Ivermectin 31 countries

    Covid Deaths per 1 million population (Worldometers Oct 23 2021)


    Angola 40

    Bénin 13

    Buikna Fasso 10

    Burundi 3

    Cameroon 58

    Cent Africa Re 20

    Chad 10

    De.Re.Congo 12

    Rep. Congo 42

    Côte d'Ivoire 25

    Ecuat Guinea 111

    Ethiopia 53

    Gabon 98

    Ghana 37

    Guinea 28

    Guinea-Bissau 70

    Kenya 95

    Liberia 55

    Malawi 116

    Mali 27

    Mozambique 59

    Niger 8

    Nigeria 13

    Rwanda 99

    Sénégal 108

    Sierra Leone 15

    South Sudan 12

    Sudan 67

    Togo 28

    Uganda 67

    Tanzania 12




    Non-Ivermectin 22 countries

    Covid Deaths per 1 million population (Worldometers Oct 23 2021)


    Algeria 131

    Botswana 993

    Cabo Verde 615

    Comoros 164

    Eritrea 12

    Eswatini 1054

    Egypt 174

    Gambia 135

    Lesotho 303

    Libya 712

    Madagascar 33

    Mauritania 164

    Mauritius 116

    Morocco 390

    Namibia 1363

    Sao Tome & Principe 249

    South Africa 1475

    Somalia 72

    Seychelles 1200

    Tunisia 2098

    Zambia 192

    Zimbabwe 308

Subscribe to our newsletter

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

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

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

Our Partners

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