Japan's Kowa says ivermectin showed 'antiviral effect' against Omicron in research!

a reply to: elementalgrove

No thanks ile stick with what the medical trained professionals are saying in my own nation ta very much.

And to date that's taking Ivermectin to prevent or cure COVID 19 remains inclusive never mind possibly dangerous.

a reply to: andy06shake

Depends on were you live -

Mexican Institute of Social Security Large Observational Study: Home Treatment Kit with Ivermectin Reduces Hospitalizations & Death

If it saves lives why do those pushing unproven vaccines, want it banned? Even of you have been vaccinated would it not be good to give some thing to help the immune systemfight the infection and prevent the over reaction into a covid-19 illiness.

a reply to: puzzled2

Well where i live the medical health trained professionals that work in the field suggest using Ivermectin to fight COVID to be unsafe.

Each to their own puzzled2.

I don't want to see Ivermectin banned so cant really comment as to others wishes in that department.

That don't mean it cures COVID 19 or is safe to ingest in an attempt to do so.

You wish to take an unproven antiparasitic to cure pathogens be my guest.

a reply to: andy06shake

horse paste

Doesn't say a lot for your argument that you are reduced to calling it that.

a reply to: butcherguy

How many daft arsed words and slagging's for COVID 19 have been doing the rounds?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

And people in glass houses should not chuck bricks.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: elementalgrove

No thanks ile stick with what the medical trained professionals are saying in my own nation ta very much.

And to date that's taking Ivermectin to prevent or cure COVID 19 remains inclusive never mind possibly dangerous.

Dang that is racist AF, you are a good follower of the media.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: network dude

Outside of clinical trials it can be dangerous.

www.ema.europa.eu...

Its not a COVID 19 prophylactic.

Fact is Ivermectin is not licenced to teat COVID 19, its an antiparasitic.

Of course it's not licensed. They have refused to conduct real research into it, and ignored the research done that was promising. There have been cases of patients wanting it, having an actual Dr. order it, willing to administer it, and hospitals have refused even after courts ordered them to allow it.

It is NOT dangerous outside clinical trials, it's used as actual medicine all the time.

I would say it's probably not a good idea to take prophylactically, but at the first onset of symptoms.

a reply to: elementalgrove

Its prudent so there is that.

Makes sense as we actually trust our medical community and the people who work within such no matter there race colour or creed, here in the UK.

So nothing racist about people being free to choose to listen to who they wish.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: network dude

Outside of clinical trials it can be dangerous.

www.ema.europa.eu...

Its not a COVID 19 prophylactic.

Fact is Ivermectin is not licenced to teat COVID 19, its an antiparasitic.

EMA therefore concluded that use of ivermectin for prevention or treatment of COVID-19 cannot currently be recommended outside controlled clinical trials. Further well-designed, randomised studies are needed to draw conclusions as to whether the product is effective and safe in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

but isn't that what this is?
journals.lww.com...

Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

I'm not claiming it's a wonder drug. I am stating as a fact emphatically that it is a human drug, and studies have shown and continue to show that it has efficacy in early prophylactic treatment of SARS-Cov-2. Peer reviewed studies have shown this, and so far, I have yet to see the same peer reviewed studies show they gave the patients overdoses of the medicine. Somehow, what they gave the patients seemed to help them.

And even the slow kids now understand that even though Ivermectin has a human version, and a livestock version, it's still a medicine for humans. Not sure if you are aware, but they give horses water too. So is water horse juice? Or is that just a stupid analogy cooked up by low info idiots, and parroted by the same? you decide.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: elementalgrove

Its prudent so there is that.

Makes sense as we actually trust our medical community and the people who work within such no matter there race colour or creed, here in the UK.

So nothing racist about people being free to choose to listen to who they wish.

You have completely disregarded the experts, doctors and scientists from India because of what exactly?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

But they are doing and have carried out clinical trials where ivermectin is concerned.

How that refusal?

It not used to treat COVID 19 outside clinical trials, or been proven to be effective at doing so thus far.

People are free to choose to take whatever they wish OccamsRazor04, prophylactically or otherwise, good luck to them.

Until such time as Ivermectin is licensed to treat COVID 19 ile stick to the real tools we have at our disposal ta very much.

a reply to: andy06shake

Does this look like horse paste to you?

a reply to: elementalgrove

Freedom of choice springs to mind.

But some real facts and figures that show Ivermectin cures or prevents COVID 19 might be nice.

And that's not what your doctors and scientists from India that are touting the use of Ivermectin are presenting imho.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

and until the idiots in charge are willing to at least listen to the data that isn't exactly what they wish to hear, we will have people thinking they are better off going to the livestock store and buying actual horse paste, rather than getting the human approved pills.

If the pills kill folks, I think we would have seen that as the main argument, not the idiotic claim that "it's horse paste" by the incredibly stupid.

The pushback on this is the part that will cost lives, not the actual science that shows what it does.
If it didn't work, the studies would just say that, they don't.

a reply to: chris_stibrany

Looks like an antiparasitic called Ivermectin.

The stuff is licenced to treat a variety of maladies in humans as you are well aware.

COVID 19 is not one of them yet.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

But they are doing

Are doing ... because they refused for a very long time. Ivermectin was talked about in 2019, why are we just now in 2022 doing trials?

The mean durations of dyspnea were 2.6 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group and 3.8 (0.4) days in the control group (P = 0.048). Also, persistent cough lasted for 3.1 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group compared to 4.8 (0.4) days in control group (PP = 0.019). The mean durations of hospital stay were 7.1 (0.5) days versus 8.4 (0.6) days in the ivermectin and control groups, respectively (P = 0.016). Also, the frequency of lymphopenia decreased to 14.3% in the ivermectin group and did not change in the control group (P = 0.007).

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Here is an example of how they love to lie about Ivermectin

The primary outcome of hospitalization was met in 14/250 (5.6%) individuals in ivermectin group and 21/251 (8.4%) in placebo group
Conclusion: Ivermectin had no significant effect on preventing hospitalization of patients with COVID-19.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Wait, so 50% MORE people in placebo group were hospitalized, and they conclude Ivermectin has no effect? 50% is not statistically relevant?

a reply to: andy06shake

I dont think mandates are the way forward but you get that compulsory vaccinations have been around for centuries right?

Which vaccines are compulsory in Scotland?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

But they are doing

Are doing ... because they refused for a very long time. Ivermectin was talked about in 2019, why are we just now in 2022 doing trials?

The mean durations of dyspnea were 2.6 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group and 3.8 (0.4) days in the control group (P = 0.048). Also, persistent cough lasted for 3.1 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group compared to 4.8 (0.4) days in control group (PP = 0.019). The mean durations of hospital stay were 7.1 (0.5) days versus 8.4 (0.6) days in the ivermectin and control groups, respectively (P = 0.016). Also, the frequency of lymphopenia decreased to 14.3% in the ivermectin group and did not change in the control group (P = 0.007).

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Here is an example of how they love to lie about Ivermectin

The primary outcome of hospitalization was met in 14/250 (5.6%) individuals in ivermectin group and 21/251 (8.4%) in placebo group
Conclusion: Ivermectin had no significant effect on preventing hospitalization of patients with COVID-19.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Wait, so 50% MORE people in placebo group were hospitalized, and they conclude Ivermectin has no effect? 50% is not statistically relevant?

Thank you Occams! This is an excellent point!

a reply to: andy06shake

Freedom of choice springs to mind.

What a fascinating concept, precisely why people should be allowed to have the choice of using Ivermectin/Hydroxychloroquine.

Also why they should not be forced to wear masks or take experimental drugs.

I for one can tell you I took the actual horse paste( and I got the monoclonal antibodies immediately- another treatment they have sequestered and its not readily available anymore)... Got rid of the RONA all by myself. Felt bad for a few days and no side effects. My wife also... we got it at the same time and did the same treatment.I actually have my blood tested on a regular basis and no changes. we both came through the illness rather quickly and we don't wear masks and go about our lives pretty much normally. I go to the gym 4-5 times per week and eat healthy. My kids have both had it and they were sick for a day maybe. No treatment or medicine was given. Good luck with the MRNA vaccine that has had NO CLINICAL STUDIES outside of the people selling it. AND they are fighting to keep their results hidden for the next 75 years... tell me why they deserve any delay in the release of information at all? That gives me pause right there. Ivermectin BTW, if you are not listening to the fear porn spoon fed to zombies all day.... HAS HAD BILLIONS OF DOSES WORDLWIDE AND HAS BEEN USED FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS. It was NEVER deemed dangerous until people started using it to combat the virus. BTW #2... BILLIONS of doses freely used by MEXICO, INDIA and many other countries for the last 2 years to specifically combat the coronavirus with excellent results.... also please go to FLCCC protocol. A group of American medical doctors that treat coronavirus and publish the results on their own. The treatment plans are based upon THOUSAND AND THOUSANDS of treated patients and change as they gather more data.... BOOM- just like you are supposed to do... you can argue the " horse paste" is different from the pills. Symantics. Ivermectin, by the pure volume of use, is pretty safe and effective. If you care to look... there is also plenty of data to support this. The CDC is still telling people to wear masks even though that has BEEN DEEMED ineffective in any laboratory test( at least the masks we are all wearing) maybe you should wear a level 3 virus suit with an oxygen tank. NO THANKS. I'll keep on living what life I have left thank you!

a reply to: andy06shake