Country Living    Country Living, Country Skills
Country People

KountryLife.com - A Country Living Resource and Community

Menu on/off







Ivermectin for COVID!!!

The place to talk with others about topics related to country life and rural living. Ask a question, help with an answer or just share some of your ideas and experiences.

Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Bkeepr » Sat Sep 04, 2021 10:34 am

Gotta love this one-- poison control centers are reporting a huge spike in Ivermectin poisonings during August, surpassing even the big increase that's occurred gradually over the past year.

So, the same eedjits who won't get vaccinated because "it wasn't tested enough," are poisoning themselves with cattle wormer-- against medical warnings that it hasn't been tested enough.

You gotta love the FDA's newest public warning: "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it."

Honestly, just how stupid can people be? :?
Bkeepr
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:47 am
Location: The People's Democratic Republic of Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby screamer » Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:48 am

The idiots are the ones who self medicate with no regard for dosage, etc. OTH, Ivermectin has been used for 60 years for respiratory viruses like zika and others. Hospitals in Australia and Florida reported substantial success with it, when used properly and at the right stage of the disease. The problem for the medical establishment is that no one has unlocked the mystery of why it works in some situations and not others.
screamer
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 8:24 am

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby smugpug » Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:50 pm

CHEAT SHEET

TOP 10 RIGHT NOW

1

Poison Control Hotline Sees Call Spike Over COVID Truther’s ‘Horse Paste’ Drug
Corbin Bolies

Published Aug. 20, 2021 12:24PM ET 

Mississippi’s poison control center was forced to send out a safety alert Friday after it received multiple reports of people ingesting an animal version of ivermectin, a drug that’s been touted and disputed as a COVID-19 treatment. It said a certain group of people has been taking a form of ivermectin made for livestock, WMC reports, and that 85 percent of those calls featured mild adverse responses. “Patients should be advised to not take any medications intended to treat animals and should be instructed to only take ivermectin as prescribed by their physician,” the alert read. “Animal drugs are highly concentrated for large animals and can be highly toxic for humans.” The version of the drug intended for people has been pushed by some conservative figures as an alternative COVID treatment but some of the studies pushing ivermectin have been discredited.

While the poison control center did not say why people opted for the animal drug, The Daily Beast previously found multiple people who resorted to Amazon to obtain the animal version due to its easy availability.
smugpug
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Bkeepr » Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:17 pm

Yeah, the problem is all over, not just Mississippi. And not all of the cases are reported to the poison control centers, many are getting taken straight to ERs.
Bkeepr
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:47 am
Location: The People's Democratic Republic of Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Alias » Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:35 am

I am happy to report that no one in my family has taken ivermectin for any reason what so ever. In fact, until just moments ago I had not even heard or read anything about it. But, I'm still certain that no in my family has taken it.

However, nothing surprises me when it comes to what some senseless people put into their bodies. Maybe somebody has spread a rumor that Ivermectin is a good substitute for crack cocaine. :lol: :lol: :lol: ........gfp
Alias
 
Posts: 12016
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:53 pm
Location: Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Red Dave » Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:51 am

It would be stupid to take medications intended for farm animals. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

However, some reports of it's use, and subsequent hospitalizations, have been greatly overblown:
"Rolling Stone 'Horse Dewormer' Hit-Piece Debunked After Hospital Says No Ivermectin Overdoses",

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/rolling-stone-horse-dewormer-hit-piece-debunked-after-hospital-says-no-ivermectin
Red Dave
 
Posts: 5313
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:41 pm
Location: Lancaster County PA

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Bkeepr » Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:41 am

Red Dave wrote:It would be stupid to take medications intended for farm animals. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

However, some reports of it's use, and subsequent hospitalizations, have been greatly overblown:
"Rolling Stone 'Horse Dewormer' Hit-Piece Debunked After Hospital Says No Ivermectin Overdoses",

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/rolling-stone-horse-dewormer-hit-piece-debunked-after-hospital-says-no-ivermectin


It isn’t like Rolling Stone is a serious news source! Not the first time they’ve been called out on a false story. e.g. https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/ba ... utType=amp
Bkeepr
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:47 am
Location: The People's Democratic Republic of Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby screamer » Sun Sep 05, 2021 6:46 pm

Not sure how anyone would know is someone had taken human ivermectin. It is commonly prescribed for worms in humans, and some times for bad cases of ring worm. Neither are the sort of thing folks brag about. But, if given for Zika or dengue fever, the patient might very well not know what they were given in the clinic. Just as there were studies that found hydrochloroquine was 98% effective against the SARS corona virus. And that was a US Army study in 2005. There needs to be far more studies, especially with these new vaccine resistant virus variants. We will be back to square one in short order if those variants take off.
screamer
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 8:24 am

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Bkeepr » Mon Sep 06, 2021 6:57 am

screamer wrote:Not sure how anyone would know is someone had taken human ivermectin. It is commonly prescribed for worms in humans, and some times for bad cases of ring worm. Neither are the sort of thing folks brag about. But, if given for Zika or dengue fever, the patient might very well not know what they were given in the clinic. Just as there were studies that found hydrochloroquine was 98% effective against the SARS corona virus. And that was a US Army study in 2005. There needs to be far more studies, especially with these new vaccine resistant virus variants. We will be back to square one in short order if those variants take off.


Screamer,

it would be pretty hard to accidentally overdose on the human version of ivermectin, as it is issued in 3 mg tablets and the normal maximum dose--for a large man--is 3 tablets. A prescription would be written for the correct number of tablets, not for a bottle. Even so, a bottle only contains 20 tablets, so 60 mg. The animal version is a paste providing about 19 mg of drug per ml of paste--a very tiny blob is already twice the max dose for a large man. So I'd guess that the amount of ivermectin in an ER patient's blood stream is a good indication about which he took.

I can't find any actual trials or scholarly articles showing ivermectin is prescribed for either Zika or Dengue, although I won't say that it isn't. The only thing I found was a report on an in vitro study (in a petri dish, not people) that said it had antiviral properties against zika. But that's a long way from Docs prescribing it, so I'd like to see some evidence that it is used for that. The only thing the FDA has approved it for in humans is as a wormer...I checked the FDA approvals. Yes, doctors can prescribe "off label," but most are hesitant to do that without some serious scientific papers filed to protect them from malpractice lawsuits.
Bkeepr
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:47 am
Location: The People's Democratic Republic of Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby Bkeepr » Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:44 am

Maybe I was wrong about doctors not prescribing overdose levels of the drug. Here's a story about a doctor (well, sort of...not board certified, and hasn't practiced medicine in a hospital in 10 years) who prescribed 30 mg per day for 21 days for a patient. The FDA approved safe dosage was 9 mg, one time (not daily), beyond which adverse effects start to become prevalent. In other words, beyond that, the FDA deems the drug unsafe.

The judge reviewed all the evidence, including testimony from the "doctor" himself, and ruled against continuing the ivermectin treatment, and for the hospital doctors under whose care the man remained.

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/07/10349473 ... rder-judge
Bkeepr
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:47 am
Location: The People's Democratic Republic of Maryland

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby smugpug » Wed Sep 08, 2021 2:20 pm

CDC recommends ivermectin for most refugees entering U.S.
Media still mocking users of 'horse dewormer'

By Art Moore
Published September 8, 2021 at 3:50pm


Late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel's first post-summer vacation monologue Tuesday night showed that the media's mendacious portrayal of people who treat COVID-19 with ivermectin as ignorant rednecks overdosing on horse dewormer has settled into popular perception.

That's despite several embarrassing corrections to widely cited stories and the CDC's recommendation that the FDA-approved drug be given to most refugees who enter the USA
"I leave you people alone for two months, and you start taking horse worm medicine?" Kimmel asked his audience, the Blaze reported.

Minutes later, he noted that White House health adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci "said that if hospitals get any more overcrowded, they're gonna have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU bed."

"That choice doesn't seem so tough to me," the TV host said. "Vaccinated person having a heart attack? Yes, come right on in, we'll take care of ya. Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo? Rest in peace, wheezy."

Aside from the issue of whether or not ivermectin is an effective and safe treatment for COVID 19 – 44 peer-reviewed studies and 31 randomized controlled trials indicate it is – the fact that the CDC recommends the drug for most refugees entering the United States gives pause to the insinuation that it can easily dismissed because a handful of people have taken the version meant for animals.

Are the media mocking ivermectin because it's actually an effective and inexpensive way to beat COVID?

The CDC states on its website that all refugees from Middle Eastern, Asian, North African, Latin American and Caribbean nation should receive "presumptive therapy" that includes two 200 mcg/kg doses of ivermectin once a day for two days before departure to the United States.

The CDC is recommending ivermectin for many people coming to the United States.
The CDC's recommendation of ivermectin, which was touted as a "wonder drug" in the Journal of Antibiotics, is for the treatment and prevention of intestinal parasites. But the drug – whose inventors were awarded a Nobel Prize – has been shown in both in-vitro and in-vivo studies long before the COVID-19 pandemic to have strong antiviral as well as antiparasitic properties.

The CDC explains its policy: "To promote healthy resettlement, CDC provides supplemental guidance to panel physicians caring for US-bound refugees. The Overseas Refugee Health Guidance provides panel physicians with supplemental guidance on vaccination, pre-departure treatments for malaria and intestinal parasites and fitness to travel. These activities are coordinated with the International Organization for Migration (IOM)."

The FDA warned in August 2020 of "consumers who may self-medicate by taking ivermectin products intended for animals." One day later, the National Institutes of Health published a guideline that "recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial."

But in its consumer guidance, the FDA admitted it has not reviewed data on the use of ivermectin to treat or to prevent COVID-19, pointed out the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, which said that to do so is to "ignore the growing body of scientific evidence from peer-reviewed research, over 40 medical trials, and results from Ivermectin’s use in medical settings worldwide, showing the safe and effective use of the drug in fighting COVID-19."

The WHO stated March 31 that the "current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive," and until more data is available, "recommends that the drug only be used within clinical trials."


The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons has pushed back on the American Medical Association's advice that physicians not prescribe ivermection for COVID-19. In a letter Saturday to AMA President Dr. Gerald Harmon, AAPS Executive Director Dr. Jane Orient charged the AMA is "contradicting the professional judgment of a very large number of physicians, who are writing about 88,000 prescriptions per week."

Can't get rid of the 'dimwits'

In his monologue, Kimmel said there are still "a lotta pam-dimwits out there," as evidenced by the poison control centers that "have seen this spike in calls from people taking this livestock medicine to fight the coronavirus."

However, the reports suggesting it's a serious problem have not panned out.

The Associated Press, for example, had to issue a correction to an article published in late August that claimed 70% of calls made to the Mississippi Department of Health were from people who had ingested the livestock version of Ivermectin, the Daily Wire reported.

Epidemiologist Dr. Paul Byers said the number of calls to poison control about ivermectin actually was about 2%.

One week ago, Rolling Stone and Rachel Maddow repeated an Oklahoma doctor's claim to media that the emergency rooms in the state were overwhelmed by patients who had taken the livestock version of Ivermectin, forcing gunshot victims to wait.

But the hospital highlighted in the story said the doctor had not worked there for more than two months, and it had not had any cases of ivermectin ingestion.

Kimmel, Tuesday night, also said that "one the reasons these Seabiscuits are opting for ivermectin is because they don't trust Big Pharma, which is fine I guess except for the fact that ivermectin is made by Merck, which is the fourth largest pharmaceutical company in the world. And even Merck is telling people to cut it out."

He then flashed a statement from Merck discouraging ivermectin's use for treating COVID-19.

"Listen, if a pharmaceutical company says, 'Please don't take the drug we're selling,' you should probably listen to them — or you can just go with the Tik-Tok posted by the disgraced veterinarian instead," he said. "Meanwhile these poor horses are like, 'Hey, I have worms; I need that stuff. There are worms in my butt, you understand?'"

However, as The Blaze point out, Kimmel didn't mention that Merck is working on a "COVID pill" that would compete with the relatively cheap ivermection.
smugpug
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby screamer » Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:28 pm

screamer
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 8:24 am

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby screamer » Wed Sep 08, 2021 4:31 pm

screamer
 
Posts: 1215
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 8:24 am

Re: Ivermectin for COVID!!!

Postby smugpug » Sun Sep 26, 2021 8:09 pm

This New Peer-Reviewed Article Could Be a Game-Changer

Rob Jenkins | Sep 26, 2021

Every now and then, right in the middle of the ongoing politicization of our universities and public health institutions, some actual science breaks out, almost spontaneously, as if it simply can’t be contained. Science, after all, is the pursuit of truth, and in Shakespeare’s immortal phrase, fromThe Merchant of Venice, “Truth will out.”

Such is the case with a recent article published in Toxicology Reports by Ronald N. Kostoff, et al., titled “Why are we vaccinating children against Covid-19?”According to Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA technology used to produce the current Covid “vaccines,” the article is peer-reviewed and appears in a reputable journal. It is not a new “study” but rather an in-depth analysis of existing data from various government sources. And it isn’t just about children. It basically confirms everything Team Reality has been saying since the push for mass vaccination began.

In early August, in an op-ed for The Washington Times, Malone and former ** Keep Politics out of the Kountry Life Forums Please ** advisor Peter Navarro (one of the driving forces behind Operation Warp Speed) called for a halt to the Biden administration’s mass vaccination program, which they argued will do more harm than good. Instead, they said, we should target the most vulnerable while allowing those at lower risk to make their own cost-benefit analysis. They likened over-vaccination to overuse of antibiotics and warned that it could produce vaccine-resistant strains or “variants.”

Looking at the latest data from Israel, the UK, and even the northeastern United States, one might conclude that Malone and Navarro were prescient—and this article certainly reinforces that impression.

But for people like me, who already find Malone’s and Navarro’s argument compelling, isn't this a classic example of confirmation bias? Aren’t we just looking for anything that seems to support our preconceived notions while ignoring evidence to the contrary? That’s a fair question. We certainly see a lot of confirmation bias in the corporate media these days. But, in my case, I would say the answer is “No.”

For one thing, like most on Team Reality, I’ve looked pretty carefully at all sides of this issue, trying to discern what is actually true. Honestly, the other side’s argument—“every single person, regardless of age or medical history, must get vaccinated forthwith and you’re a horrible person if you think that’s the least bit extreme”—is hard to miss. It’s everywhere these days, even interrupting my Saturday afternoon college football games.

But more importantly, the article itself is highly persuasive—and I suspect that’s true whichever side of the issue you currently inhabit. It is thorough and factual, its logic inescapable. And the fact that it’s peer-reviewed means an anonymous panel of fellow scientists—many of whom, we can assume, were not predisposed to agree—found merit in its arguments.

I invite you to read the whole thing for yourself and reach your own conclusions. It’s quite long and highly technical in places, but much of it is relatively accessible, especially the money passages. A few brief excerpts should serve to whet your appetite.

First, from the introduction, here’s what Kostoff, et al. have to say about the roll-out and possible impact of the vaccines: “Clinical trials for these inoculations were very short-term…had samples not representative of the total population, and for adolescents/children, had poor predictive power….Further, the clinical trials did not address changes in biomarkers that could serve as early warning indicators of elevated predisposition to serious diseases….[or] long-term effects that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades.”

About the “vaccines” themselves: “A vaccine is legally defined as any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of one or more diseases….A January 2000 patent application that defined vaccines as ‘compositions or mixtures that when introduced into the circulatory system of an animal will evoke a protective response to a pathogen’ was rejected by the U.S. Patent Office because ‘the immune response produced by a vaccine…must be protective….[It must be] a compound which prevents infection.’ In the remainder of this article, we use the term ‘inoculated’ rather than vaccinated, because the injected material in the present COVID-19 inoculations prevents neither viral infection nor transmission. Since its main function in practice appears to be symptom suppression, it is operationally a ‘treatment.’”

On the reported 600,000-plus Covid deaths: “Most deaths attributed to COVID-19 were elderly with high comorbidities….Attribution of death to one of many possible comorbidities or especially toxic exposures in combinations is highly arbitrary and can be viewed as a political decision more than a medical decision. For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death. These deaths with comorbidities could equally have been ascribed to any of the comorbidities. Thus, the actual number of COVID-19-based deaths in the USA may have been on the order of 35,000 or less, characteristic of a mild flu season.” (Emphasis mine.)

(Personally, I’d be surprised if the actual number of Covid deaths is that low. But I’ve long suspected it’s much lower than reported.)

Ultimately, the authors conclude, “There appears to be modest benefit from the inoculations to the elderly population most at risk, no benefit to the younger population not at risk, and much potential for harm from the inoculations to both populations. It is unclear why this mass inoculation for all groups is being done, being allowed, and being promoted.”

If the information contained in this article becomes widely known to physicians and other healthcare providers, not to mention the general public, it could very well change our attitude toward mass vaccination and lead to the more targeted approach Malone and others advocate. How likely that is to happen, I suppose, depends on how many read the article, draw similar conclusions, and have the courage to act on them.
smugpug
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests



[Home] [Search]

Copyright © 1999-2013 KountryLife.com
All Rights Reserved
A Country Living Resource and Community