Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
DR. PIERRE KORY ➝ 00:16
Our group, again, we have come to the conclusion after reviewing months of data that have all come out in last few months, this is all new data. We never believed that ivermectin was the answer. We thought it might be early on because there was some theoretical rationale that it might work.
But what we uncovered in the last three months is nothing but repeated studies in trial showing phenomenal effectiveness in multiple areas, not only in prevention, but early and late treatment.
And the most, the most overwhelming data is in the prevention of transmission of COVID-19. If you are on ivermectin, the studies and their randomized control trials, large and well done show, if you’re taking ivermectin, you will not contract COVID-19. I repeat. If you are taking ivermectin, you will not contract COVID-19.
The second statement represents his opinion early in the evaluation process.
My problem is that there is no way that not a single person became infected. I cannot imagine no one dropping out or not having side effects that would cause them to have to stop the medication.
It may work. I have not yet seen convincing evidence.
Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: meta analysis of 28 studies
• 100% of the 28 studies to date report positive effects. Early treatment is more successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.40].
• Prophylactic use also shows high effectiveness, PrEP RR 0.09 [0.03-0.26], PEP RR 0.10 [0.06-0.17].
• 100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74%, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
• The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 28 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 268 million (p = 0.0000000037).
Are all the studies wrong? How sure do we need to be for an already approved drug with a really good safety profile? 4 floors of covid patients at my local hospital.
Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19: meta analysis of 28 studies
• 100% of the 28 studies to date report positive effects. Early treatment is more successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.40].
• Prophylactic use also shows high effectiveness, PrEP RR 0.09 [0.03-0.26], PEP RR 0.10 [0.06-0.17].
• 100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74%, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
• The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 28 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 268 million (p = 0.0000000037).
Are all the studies wrong? How sure do we need to be for an already approved drug with a really good safety profile? 4 floors of covid patients at my local hospital.
"Cutaneous, systemic and/or ophthalmological reactions have been reported with other microfilaricidal drugs. Allergic and inflammatory reactions (the Mazzotti reaction) may occur with ivermectin, probably due to the death of the microfilariae. Patients treated with ivermectin therapy for onchocerciasis may experience these reactions in addition to clinical adverse reactions possibly, probably, or definitely related to the therapy itself. The treatment of severe Mazzotti reactions has not been subjected to controlled clinical studies. Oral or intravenous rehydration, corticosteroids, antihistamines, acetaminophen and/or aspirin have been used for treatment.
After treatment with microfilaricidal medications, patients with hyperreactive onchodermatitis (sowda) may be more likely than others to experience severe adverse reactions, especially edema and aggravation of onchodermatitis.
Serious or fatal encephalopathy has been reported rarely in patients with onchocerciasis, and heavily infected with Loa loa, either spontaneously or after treatment with ivermectin. In these patients, pain (including neck and back pain), red eye, conjunctival hemorrhage, dyspnea, urinary and/or fecal incontinence, difficulty in standing/walking, mental status changes, confusion, lethargy, stupor, seizures, or coma have been reported. This syndrome has been seen very rarely following the use of ivermectin therapy. Pretreatment assessment for loiasis and careful posttreatment follow-up should be implemented in all patients considered for treatment with ivermectin for any reason and who had exposure to Loa loa endemic areas of West and Central Africa."
Right now most of the adverse reactions to the new vaccine seem mild compared to this medication.
Falsified data was used in hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin studies that were promoting them. People keep posting the same things over and over regardless of the change in information which has been out there for six months. They have either a mental illness or an agenda without regard for integrity.
There are clinical trials of both drugs and one should wait on them. Odds are that there is no improvement over placebo which has been the case for all repurposed drugs so far. It's common sense that an antiviral and a steroid is needed to kill the virus and halt the cytokine storms.
Some of the signatories of the GBD have been backing off since the vaccines are now being deployed. I read some of their comments and they're completely unrealistic thinking it will only take 2 months to get to normal with a vaccine. It will take time to get enough people to accept it. I think the best approach is to target the entire population of the cities in strict lockdown, such as LA and NYC, in a short period of time so that the lockdowns can be lifted within 2-3 months. Some of the active resistors, such as the orthodox Jews, may take tougher enforcements. Require vaccination for large gatherings and the acceptance in the broader public will follow quickly.
By the way, black-footed ferrets are being wiped out by Covid. They're not using ivermecting which is typically being used to treat parasites. They're using experimental Covid drugs.
Sure you do, but what you know works best for you isn't going to work for everybody. Not all of us are 'pure humans'!
I did not say kick them out. What I did say is if you want the freedom to work, you should have the freedom of supporting yourself so you do not make the elderly, that you live with, sick. Isn't that the ultimate freedom where you release your parents so they can live their own lives without worrying about your needs and you bringing home the pandemic?
I just hate people telling me they want to be free, but they want somebody else to support them.
I am not saying that all of our young are careless and disease ridden, but isn't that what this petition is all about? You want the the young to have the right to work before the pandemic is controlled. Your basically saying: "I'm young and I can do whatever I want and your old and just stay in the house and die. Don't worry if I catch the disease, I'm young and I'll survive!"
You seem to assume that young people living with their elderly parents are all living off the parents. That's not true...many of them are caring for and supporting their elderly.
It's more the children worrying about their parents needs, not the other way around.
You don't have to be a "pure human" to have compassion and not abandon your elderly during this "pandemic".
I've never once in all my years brought disease or sickness to my elderly relatives, and I'm not about to start. My children don't come around when they're sick...but they also don't lay around looking for handouts when they're not!...they've got family to support.
I also hate people saying they want their freedom while someone else is supporting them....that's nothing new though...I see it every time half my paycheck goes for taxes to support them.
Tell me when any pandemics throughout history have punished the healthy by taking away their livelihoods, denying them access to their elderly, forcing them to wear a useless mask,.even when they're no where near other people, denying crucial diagnostic medical tests, and putting thousands of small businesses into bankruptcy....You think that's OK?
You think some vaccine is going to make that better?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
