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.
NIH is strongly against any preventative agents in their official Covid-19 prophylaxis guideline, not just Ivermectin, but even basic Vitamin D supplementation.
(https://www.covid19treatmentguidelin...of-sars-cov-2/)
I find that interesting, because their own 2009 systematic review states that Vitamin D might possess strong antiviral properties:
"Research in vitamin D immunology demonstrates a likely connection among vitamin D repletion, susceptibility to infection, and clinical outcomes in a variety of infectious processes."
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855046/)
The EU is devastated by the second wave of Covid and countries’ officials recommend citizens to take Vitamin D and C. In the UK, the government even supplies free Vitamin D to its high-risk citizens, because the statistical correlation of Vitamin D deficiency and higher Covid risk is so overwhelming.
(https://www.gov.uk/government/news/a...y-of-vitamin-d).
We have simple generic drugs that seem to be highly efficient in preventing Covid infection - frontline physicians utilize these drugs off-label with outstanding success in America. The curious question arises: what is the reason for NIH to reject the research into these prophylaxis agents while thousands of people are dying every week?
You should take a look at the research on it before dismissing it. It has shown to work along with a few other drugs.
Point us to the research study (Randomized Control Clinical Trial) proving the effectiveness and safety of this COVID "treatment" "they" are suppressing from the public.
Point us to the research study (Randomized Control Clinical Trial) proving the effectiveness and safety of this COVID "treatment" "they" are suppressing from the public.
NIH is strongly against any preventative agents in their official Covid-19 prophylaxis guideline, not just Ivermectin, but even basic Vitamin D supplementation.
(https://www.covid19treatmentguidelin...of-sars-cov-2/)
I find that interesting, because their own 2009 systematic review states that Vitamin D might possess strong antiviral properties:
"Research in vitamin D immunology demonstrates a likely connection among vitamin D repletion, susceptibility to infection, and clinical outcomes in a variety of infectious processes."
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855046/)
The EU is devastated by the second wave of Covid and countries’ officials recommend citizens to take Vitamin D and C. In the UK, the government even supplies free Vitamin D to its high-risk citizens, because the statistical correlation of Vitamin D deficiency and higher Covid risk is so overwhelming.
(https://www.gov.uk/government/news/a...y-of-vitamin-d).
We have simple generic drugs that seem to be highly efficient in preventing Covid infection - frontline physicians utilize these drugs off-label with outstanding success in America. The curious question arises: what is the reason for NIH to reject the research into these prophylaxis agents while thousands of people are dying every week?
I’ve noticed a lot of pushback on things like vitamin D. It’s almost like people don’t want to hear it. I find it to be somewhat sad. I think a lot of people forgot that we have immune systems. Having optimal stores of vitamins and minerals is a way to help ensure one’s immune system can fight of viruses, even covid.
NIH is strongly against any preventative agents in their official Covid-19 prophylaxis guideline, not just Ivermectin, but even basic Vitamin D supplementation.
The NIH has not come out against vitamin D. What it said is
"There are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of vitamin D for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19."
There are many reasons to be sure your vitamin D levels are adequate. The question is whether there is any benefit of higher doses (in which case vitamin D becomes a medication, not just a vitamin). That is what there is no solid evidence for yet.
Therefore, on an individual level it behooves us to make sure we are not deficient in vitamin D. You can ask your doctor to measure your vitamin D level or you can just take a supplement, 2000 units per day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Ivermectin has shown to prevent transmission and prevent severe cases and deaths. There’s so much more known about this drug then the vaccine. There is scientific evidence to back the use of this drug up.
If you want it you can take it off label. Just let your doctor know you want it.
There is not "so much more known about this drug THAN (not then, then means when) the vaccine.
Tens of thousands of people have participated in the vaccine trials, with appropriate randomized placebo controls and blinding. The ivermectin data are coming from a mishmash of reports, often in low risk populations and without randomized controls. That is why the formal clinical trials are being done.
Even restricting analysis to just the 15 randomized controlled trials (totaling over 3,000 patients), the majority report a statistically significant reduction in transmission or disease progression or mortality. Further, a meta-analysis recently performed by an independent research consortium calculated the chances that ivermectin is ineffective in COVID-19 to be 1 in 67 million.1
The FLCCC Alliance, based on the totality of the existing evidence, supports an A-I recommendation (NIH rating scheme; strong level, high quality evidence) for the use of ivermectin in both the prophylaxis and treatment of all phases of COVID-19.
Twitter has blocked a link to an article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that suggested the antiparasitic drug ivermectin could be useful against Covid-19. The platform claims the journal's website is “potentially unsafe.”
Twitter user Karl Denninger (@TickerGuy) posted a link to an observational study in the European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences that found healthcare workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh who were treated with ivermectin as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP) were markedly less likely to become infected with Covid-19. Just 6.9 percent of those given the drug tested positive for Covid-19, while a whopping 73.3 percent of those who did not became infected.
I am on day seven of COVID symptoms and my doctor is treating me with the I-MASK+ Early Outpatient Treatment Protocol for COVID-19 while the five other members of my house are being treated with I-MASK+ Prophylaxis (all since yesterday). These protocols are centered on Ivermectin.
For the six of us in the house the total cost for the Ivermectin and supplements was around $120.
Ivermectin is hardly suppressed. I have a tube in my tack room right now. If you want it you can order it online or pick it up at any feed store.
Would I personally take it for covid? Maybe if I had worms, but not for Covid. It's an anti parasitic, not an anti viral.
Ivermectin is an FDA-approved broad-spectrum antiparasitic agent with demonstrated antiviral activity against a number of DNA and RNA viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite this promise, the antiviral activity of ivermectin has not been consistently proven in vivo. While ivermectin's activity against SARS-CoV-2 is currently under investigation in patients, insufficient emphasis has been placed on formulation challenges. Here, we discuss challenges surrounding the use of ivermectin in the context of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) and how novel formulations employing micro- and nanotechnologies may address these concerns.
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.
