Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

Post by fda_hates_u » Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 2:53 AM UTC

javagram wrote: post #466

fda_hates_u wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would be no emergency use authorization allowed if there was an existing possible treatment. https://www.fda.gov/media/97321/download#page12 Go to page 12 in the PDF (document page 8) then read section D. Pharma companies could not distribute experimental treatments unless they lied to us about existing useful drugs. Reminder: Pfizer: Phase 3 trial estimated end date 2023 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT…

Dexamethasone is an approved drug recommended by the FDA for treatment of Covid and it didn’t stop the vaccine EUA. The vaccines are 95-100% effective in trials, no other drug comes close.

Post by lvs » Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 2:53 AM UTC

effie wrote: post #452

lvs wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WHO statement: https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-adv...

WHO has very low credibility at this point.

Post by spadez » Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 3:01 AM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #81

spadez wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Are you claiming that some non-trivial number of patients in India were treated with this Yes, example from two states. https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/lucknow/uttar-prade... https://www.news18.com/news/india/mortality-rate-much-lower-... The testimony video in this page cites examples in many other countries https://covid19criticalcare.com/

I see no numbers on how many people were treated on either of the first two links, and certainly don't intend to comb through the dross on the third link. So do you actually have a number? It doesn't need to be exact, just a credible source on the order of magnitude will be enough. Are we talking a thousand, a million, or a billion here? To reduce R by a factor of 2 by the use of a prophylactic drug, you'd need to ha…

Post by spadez » Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 3:13 AM UTC

void_mint wrote: post #144

spadez wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If someone died because of a "Take Ivermectin and you'll survive COVID" video on YouTube, who's to blame? But who is to blame for the deaths of thousands of people, who could have been saved by Ivermectin, which in all probability is happening right now, and has been going on for many months, if not for the censorship of W.H.O, Youtube and media?

> But who is to blame for the deaths of thousands of people, who could have been saved by Ivermectin, Entirely irrelevant when discussing YouTube, which we're doing now. YouTube is not a legitimate source for medical/drug information.

Post by spadez » Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

raphlinus wrote: post #257

swader999 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the wrong side to look at this from. These are just people on the fringe with little influence and funding. If ivermectin was authorized as a viable treatment the vaccines receiving emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been possible. There were and still are billions on the line.

I'm having difficulty understanding this line of reasoning. What does the authorization of ivermectin have to do with the vaccines? Xofluza, Relenza, and Tamiflu have been approved for treating influenza, and that has had no effect on the recommendation that people get their flu shots.