patrick.net

Antivirals are like a parachute. If you open them too late, you’re going to get hurt, badly. This doesn’t mean the parachute didn’t work. It means that you didn’t open it in time. Very similarly, if an antiviral is taken too late to effectively check the replication of the virus, any effect will be suboptimal, to say the least.

This is, of course, is very well understood by the people who test antivirals. For instance, the EPIC-HR trial—that led to Paxlovid's approval—as well as the MOVE-OUT trial—that led to Molnupiravir's approval—excluded patients that were over five days from symptom onset. MOVE-OUT had 50% of patients with less than three days from symptom onset. For EPIC-HR that was 68%. ACTIV-6 on the other hand, only had 25% of ivermectin patients with less than five days from symptom onset. As absurd as it may sound, 75% of the patients in ACTIV-6 for ivermectin would have been rejected from the Molnupiravir and Paxlovid trials for having the disease in too advanced a stage.

And let’s not forget that based on what we learned from the ACTIV-6 patient I spoke to, the drug was shipped on the first day of participation in the trial, which means most likely we should add an extra day to all the ACTIV-6 numbers above. Based on the literature review I did in this previous article, the ACTIV-6 trial for ivermectin treated its patient later than all the trials describing themselves as “early treatment” in the New England Journal of Medicine.

I don't know what my horse got yesterday, some respiratory virus, maybe the flu, but my horse took a dose of ivermectin and he's feeling much better with symptoms down about 50% within 16 hours.

My horse and my wife's horse had mixed results. I think it's most effective during the initial viral replication phase, but maybe not so much later.

Patrick says

My horse and my wife's horse had mixed results. I think it's most effective during the initial viral replication phase, but maybe not so much later.

Symptoms appeared about 48 hours ago, took a dose, 12 hours later felt 50% better. 24 hours ago took another dose, by hour 48 I am 90% better. Just a sniffle and sneeze now and again, otherwise as normal.

Bret Weinstein
@BretWeinstein
Nov 16
Interesting that the "science" we are supposed to be following on Ivermectin turns out to be riddled with FTX money. It's probably just a coincidence that has nothing to do with the utterly indefensible methods, sensational headlines and still-secret datasets.

Judge PAUL M. FULLERTON (Illinois) saves Mr. Ng, orders IVERMECTIN: "I am not forcing this hospital to do anything other than to step aside. I am not forcing any doctor in Edward Hospital to do this.

I am just asking -- or not asking -- I am ORDERING through the Court's power to allow Dr. Bain to have the emergency privileges & administer this medicine." Temporary emergency privileges to Dr. Alan Bain

Maybe this message will work?

I suppose you could inject yourself with a product made by a felon that skipped even the most basic safety testing. But the question is why would you do that!? You are not a junkie. Seriously, y’all. Knock it off.

Stone et al.: "Changes in SpO2 on Room Air for 34 Severe COVID-19 Patients after Ivermectin-Based Combination Treatment: 62% Normalization within 24 Hours"; These rapid increases in SpO2 values after IVM treatment stand in sharp contrast to declines in SpO2 and associated pulmonary function through the second week following the onset of moderate or severe COVID-19 symptoms under standard care

https://palexander.substack.com/p/stone-et-al-changes-in-spo2-on-room

In a meta-analysis of 63 studies of ivermectin versus COVID-19 in humans, 100% of these have shown positive results. Studies were from all continents except Antarctica.

The electrostatic potential of the central region of spike protein from these four lineages was studied through molecular modeling simulations. Inhibition of spike protein-induced HA was tested using the macrocyclic lactone ivermectin (IVM), which is indicated to bind strongly to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein glycan sites. The results of these experiments were, first, that spike protein from these four lineages of SARS-CoV-2 induced HA. Omicron induced HA at a significantly lower threshold concentration of spike protein than the three prior lineages and was much more electropositive on its central spike protein region. IVM blocked HA when added to RBCs prior to spike protein and reversed HA when added afterward. These results validate and extend prior findings on the role of glycan bindings of viral spike protein in COVID-19. They furthermore suggest therapeutic options using competitive glycan-binding agents such as IVM and may help elucidate rare serious adverse effects (AEs) associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, which use spike protein as the generated antigen.

Ivermectin's Mechanism of Action Against SARS-CoV-2 Described
SHAME on the hospital systems that systematically denied patients (and their begging families) this FDA-approved, Nobel prize winning, wonder drug.

Last time I ordered ivermectin from India my order got canceled. I never pursued it.

Outside of "Horse Paste" does anyone know of a safe legal place I can order domestically?

Another study was released earlier in the month that shows ivermectin was effective in the prevention of COVID-19 infection. Ivermectin showed a 72% reduction of COVID-19 infection in a study of 399 participants. All participants were unvaccinated, exposed to the virus (contact with a person who had a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) and took ivermectin tablets for 28 days.

Even better the study had zero unexpected safety signals. Compare that with mRNA that increases your risk of COVID-19 infection and comes with an exhaustive laundry list of adverse events.

Health Canada was well aware of the public’s desire for ivermectin to treat covid

Health Canada was aware of credible evidence that ivermectin significantly reduces mortality, yet outwardly claimed “There is no evidence that ivermectin works to prevent or treat COVID-19, and it is not authorized for this use.”

Health Canada searched for evidence that ivermectin is dangerous and found none (0 adverse events of any kind for oral ivermectin, 7 non-serious reports for topical ivermectin), yet outwardly claimed it “may cause serious health problems”

Health Canada says it has no jurisdiction over doctors using ivermectin to treat covid off-label, yet provincial regulators rely on Health Canada guidance when persecuting doctors for prescribing it

Ivermectin's Discoverer: A Tribute

One of Dr. McCullough’s Twitter followers just sent us this photo:




It shows Satoshi Ōmura—the discoverer of the Streptomyces avermitilis bacterium in a soil sample he collected on a golf course in Japan. The sculpture behind him alludes to the scourge of River Blindness that his discovery vanquished throughout the tropical world. Prior to Dr. Omura’s discovery and the mass production of the bacterium’s effective molecule, it was common for African children to lead their blind elders (often no older than forty) around with a stick.

I found the sculpture and photograph so poignant that I felt compelled to share it with our readers.

Dr. Omura received the Nobel Prize in 2015 for his discovery and the WHO erected this monument near its headquarters. Just a few years later—in its massive propaganda campaign against Ivermectin for treating COVID-19—the FDA smeared the drug as a “horse paste.”

The FDA's Gross Malfeasance With Ivermectin
Agency claims its smearing of wonder drug was a "recommendation" ...

In a recent interview, Dr. McCullough explains that, in waging its revolting “horse de-wormer” propaganda campaign against ivermectin, the FDA systematically harmed the American people and should be held criminally and civilly liable for its malfeasance.

“Gold-Standard” RCT from Gates-Funded Company Proves Ivermectin Works Against COVID

Truly amazing. I am starting to believe that Power = Contempt.

Yesterday, Australia’s government re-authorized the general prescription of ivermectin, lifting pandemic-era restrictions that confined use of the Nobel-prize-winning drug to dermatologists and a few other highly-specific needs. ...

The report attached to the policy change referenced the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, which had written the TGA encouraging it to KEEP the ivermectin restrictions in place, over concerns that freely-available ivermectin might cause people to … wait for it … hesitate to take the vaccines.

Why would Australia’s pharmacy guild care so much about vaccine hesitancy? So much that they officially wrote in to the government to stop people from using ivermectin? It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with how much profit is produced by each product?

I don’t want to presume the pharmacy guild has a selfish motive, but … at this point in the pandemic? Really? With the non-covid excess deaths at historical levels Down Under?

Still, the regulators re-authorized ivermectin anyways, overriding the pharmacy guild’s concerns. So take that, pharmacy guild. Now you just look greedy.

"Outside of "Horse Paste" does anyone know of a safe legal place I can order domestically?"

Watch the new short film by Oracle Films, Dr. Tess Lawrie recites a letter to Dr. Andrew Hill and asks him what made him turn his back on a potential cure for Covid-19.

In October 2020 Dr. Andrew Hill was tasked to report to the World Health Organisation on the dozens of new studies from around the world suggesting that Ivermectin could be a remarkably safe and effective treatment for COVID-19.

But on January 18th 2021, Dr. Hill published his findings on a pre-print server. His methods lacked rigor, the review was low quality and the extremely positive findings on ivermectin were contradicted by the conclusion. In the end, Dr. Hill advised that “Ivermectin should be validated in larger appropriately controlled randomized trials before the results are sufficient for review by regulatory authorities.”

The researcher seeking a global recommendation on Ivermectin had instead recommended against it. What were his reasons for doing so? Were his conclusions justified? Or were external forces influencing his about-face?

FDA Embarrassingly Claims Ivermectin Doesn’t Work While Linking to Studies That Prove It Does
June 7, 2023 • by The Vigilant Fox
Is the FDA doing science or peddling narratives? Because it looks like the agency has been caught in one of the biggest lies of the century.

Case in point: over on the FDA’s website, they maintain a page called: “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19”

However, when you dig into it, you’ll find that the clinical trials that the FDA points to (the ones that are listed on that page) say the exact opposite.

As ridiculous as it sounds: the FDA claims that ivermectin does not work against COVID-19, but in order to prove that point, they link to studies that say that it does.

It all sounds too hilarious to be true, but remember, this is the same Federal agency that wrote, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” ...

“Here is a list of compelling studies showing the efficacy of Ivermectin in treating COVID-19: https://sensereceptornews.com/?p=954,” added Twitter user Sense Receptor. ...

So, we must ask, where did the FDA’s “data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19” conclusion come from? Because when the agency links trials that indicate the exact opposite, it suggests it isn’t even reading the studies. How embarrassing.

I argue that this is not an “oops” or “we overlooked that data.” This is criminal negligence, at the very least. How many lives and taxpayer dollars could have been saved if a cheap, effective medication was readily available to the American people? And for that reason, the FDA, starting with those in leadership positions, must be held accountable.