Ivermectin saves India

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jimy718

Have you any information regarding those who've had a bad reaction to Ivermectin? I would love to read about it.

I have two friends who've taken it, and both like to describe it as a wonder drug of sorts.

All the literature I've read about the drug says it is well tolerated by humans.

Sorry no. I have nothing beyond rather simple internet search. Finding individual 'reports' seems difficult.

Quite a lot of effects, side-effects, toxicity, and such, But, in the end; Ivermectin remains well tolerated by Humans.

I'm not sure I would call it a wonder drug, but it does seem to be a viable alternative to the vaxx, at least over the short term. One of the issues I see is kind of like a problem with the vaxx; no long term use data. there doesn't seem to be any long term use studies on Ivermectin, so taking it as a prophylactic for long periods, may not be so good. For now; "well tolerated" seems way better than "kind of" tolerated.

Since this whole vaccine 'thing' is little more than a "rushed" engineering project, perhaps with Ivermectin we can make it to vaxx/2.0 (you know, the one that will actually be SAFE and effective). Perhaps one that doesn't allow the virus to spread via unconscious vaxxed individuals.

a reply to: dragonridr

Safety of Ivermectin:



Source: www.flccc.net

Before you discredit FLCCC, take a look at the core doctors and researchers who are at FLCCC (not including global partners):



Before you jump the gun and say vaccines are the cause of the drop in cases, deaths, etc. Here's a clear look at when ivermectin was administered and at which point cases and deaths were rapidly dropping:

Slovakia:



Zimbabwe:



India (New Dehli):



India (Uttar Pradesh):



Argentina:



Note: One thing to remember here is that the FLCCC is not funded, so they have no gain to bring light to any of this.

Ah, yes, I fully expected to see some usual suspects show up here trying hard to discredit anything EXCEPT the vaccines via the smoke and mirrors strategy so commonly used by all such agents. I was not disappointed.

Well, thank you all for the suggestions for sources of Ivermectin. I did look up some of them, and it seems that it is available if you try hard enough, but I also got the impression that there are quite a few enterprising entities that are trying to get exorbitant prices for what they consider to be a windfall for them. It ain't cheap any longer from many places, it seems.

I haven't been to my doctor for 2 years now, and he just retired last month. So I have no idea what his replacement may think of such a request for Ivermectin as a precautionary measure to have on hand. Maybe I should ask for some Percocets too so we can compromise on my just getting the Ivermectin.

As for the horse medications in paste form, heck, I dunno. Maybe horses may like the taste, but somehow I am not too sure what my taste buds may think of it. Ivermectin mixed with peanut butter sandwiches?

Honestly, the wife has had me on vitamin supplements and other similar stuff for years now. Basically most everything imaginable to help boost the immune system. I have only been sick with the flu or cold once in as long as I can remember, and that was only because I was out of town and must have picked a virus up in the food at a restaurant. Even then I would have been OK had I not eaten spicy food way too late than was good for me and had a touch of acid reflux late that night that put some of my stomach contents down my windpipe. I actually thought I had contracted pneumonia from the acid reflux, but when I went to the doctor's he confirmed that I had caught the flu. And my wife then contracted that from me and had a pretty rough time of it. I was over it in a week but it took over two weeks for her to recover. I thought we had broken ribs from coughing so much and so forcefully.

But I will keep this in mind about the sources of ivermectin, if needed. If I need to make a choice, I would prefer a medication like Ivermectin that has been in use for 50 years rather than taking an experimental gene therapy that has no long term track record to compare against. Quite honestly, it seems these days that the safest path is the opposite of what the government and the MSM (as well as their internet shadow agents) want you to do.

IMHO.

The vaccines are most definitely NOT showing significant reductions in the China virus

That much is clear

Well done mate, report it & tell it like it is. India should be shouting from the rooftops regarding the way this simple, over-the-counter drug has saved hundreds of thousands of their people. Same thing goes for Hydrochloroquine in other parts of the world, with yet more simple treatments being available ustilising oxydation to kill virus particles in the blood.

Chlorine dioxide is being used in Guayquil, Ecuador by Andreas Kalcker, as a chemical treatment option justified under emergency medical rules (which state that in the absence of any other treatment for a disease, a medical doctor can use any treatment at all which he personally deems will potentially save lives) - this has been done to overcome the fact that practically every family in the city was infected with COVID-19, with high death tolls. And I should know, as my wife is from that city, the bulk of her large family still live there. Andreas Kalcker - chlorine dioxide to kill COVID-19, all variants My brother-in-law is a hospital director, and I've opened communications with him regarding the matter, I will report further when I know more.

a reply to: KEKWchamp

It's not a safety issue for most people it will be perfectly safe taking it if you get covid. The issue is long term use it has never been approved for long-term use. There is a study done with rabbits that indeed showed continual use can cause hepatitis. But no study has been done on humans. Though cases were reported out of Africa Ivermectin
is used for mass treatment against onchocerciasis. However, a case namely 23 cases would probably not have been recognized in an area in Central Africa, where liver function tests are not routinely carried out, especially in the absence of jaundice. Furthermore, in a place where viral hepatitis is common, suspicion of drug-induced hepatitis would be rather low.

Without a study, we have no true numbers for drug-induced hepatitis but we know it occurs with long-term use. It was supposed to be used to kill the parasites then you stop taking it. Using it long-term like they did to stop the spread of mites might have health risks.

But i'd recommend against long-term use since it doesn't appear to be statistically different from people not taking it acquiring the virus. The only benefit in studies is they think it may help reduce the viral load when you are infected with covid on the average recovered 1 to two days quicker. Further studies are still ongoing
clinicaltrials.gov...

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: KEKWchamp

It's not a safety issue for most people it will be perfectly safe taking it if you get covid. The issue is long term use it has never been approved for long-term use. There is a study done with rabbits that indeed showed continual use can cause hepatitis. But no study has been done on humans. Though cases were reported out of Africa Ivermectin
is used for mass treatment against onchocerciasis. However, a case namely 23 cases would probably not have been recognized in an area in Central Africa, where liver function tests are not routinely carried out, especially in the absence of jaundice. Furthermore, in a place where viral hepatitis is common, suspicion of drug-induced hepatitis would be rather low.

Without a study, we have no true numbers for drug-induced hepatitis but we know it occurs with long-term use. It was supposed to be used to kill the parasites then you stop taking it. Using it long-term like they did to stop the spread of mites might have health risks.

But i'd recommend against long-term use since it doesn't appear to be statistically different from people not taking it acquiring the virus. The only benefit in studies is they think it may help reduce the viral load when you are infected with covid on the average recovered 1 to two days quicker. Further studies are still ongoing
clinicaltrials.gov...

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend any medication for long use.

The FLCCC has mentioned it being used as an prophylactic, but mainly for high risk and post-exposure individuals.



I don't take Ivermectin as a prophylactic though. I take mostly everything else mentioned in that image above though. Our maid in the house early this month was positive with COVID-19. Funnily enough, my wife was endorsed by a company that does at-home PCR tests, so we decided to do the whole family and the maid came out positive. She would prepare our meals, clean up the house, etc. We all went into isolation, but none of us got sick (thankfully). When speaking with her after she left for isolation, she said she had flu-like symptoms for 4 days prior, which means she was most likely positive for roughly 6 days.

I'm actually being vaccinated this week with Sinovac (I'm on the search for Sinopharm but it is a little difficult to find where I am). I currently reside in Indonesia where COVID-19 is out of control. So it's good there is a medicine that people can use and trust, with clinical trial data to prove it.

People can get their vaccination in Indonesia relatively easy, HOWEVER, there is a huge issue with people contracting COVID-19 at vaccination sites. You can imagine 200-300 people turning up to a small vaccination site, its absolute chaos. There are safer alternatives to get the vaccine but that is usually for people willing to pay extra, money that the lower class just do not have.

originally posted by: Jimy718

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jimy718

Have you any information regarding those who've had a bad reaction to Ivermectin? I would love to read about it.

I have two friends who've taken it, and both like to describe it as a wonder drug of sorts.

All the literature I've read about the drug says it is well tolerated by humans.

Sorry no. I have nothing beyond rather simple internet search. Finding individual 'reports' seems difficult.

Quite a lot of effects, side-effects, toxicity, and such, But, in the end; Ivermectin remains well tolerated by Humans.

I'm not sure I would call it a wonder drug, but it does seem to be a viable alternative to the vaxx, at least over the short term. One of the issues I see is kind of like a problem with the vaxx; no long term use data. there doesn't seem to be any long term use studies on Ivermectin, so taking it as a prophylactic for long periods, may not be so good. For now; "well tolerated" seems way better than "kind of" tolerated.

Since this whole vaccine 'thing' is little more than a "rushed" engineering project, perhaps with Ivermectin we can make it to vaxx/2.0 (you know, the one that will actually be SAFE and effective). Perhaps one that doesn't allow the virus to spread via unconscious vaxxed individuals.

Finding individual reports regarding bad reactions to Ivermectin might be difficult because there are none?

I've heard several doctors remark that the drug is well tolerated.

A viable alternative to the vaxx? Good nutrition with high Vitamin D levels is a good alternative to the vaxx. It seems anything is a good alternative to injections of dangerous toxins.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies



If this stuff did any good the people who make it would be fighting hand over fist to get it used because of the huge amount of money they would make.

I don't know about that. As far as I know, Ivermectin is out of patent, meaning that anyone can make it. Big Pharma would have to spend millions on research and production, only to have smaller companies produce generic versions of the drug for a much lower price. Also, they would have to pull the enormous amount of Ivermectin from farm and pet supply chains, because those of us who are smart enough would just buy it from them. They would have no control over the market, and thus it's not worth their time or resources. The "vaccine" is completely under their control - the pricing, what's in it, who can produce it, etc. etc.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Imperator2



If you choose to take risks so be it that's your choice I just find it ironic people are willing to take medication not designed to treat covid.

Hi, there are many, many repurposed, out-of-patent drugs being used for several ailments. A remedy does not need to be designed specifically for one particular type of viral infection. I think there are people who would like us to believe this, but it goes against how the body, and nature, works.

I've recently learned about a theory that many, many diseases are caused by the body's reaction to parasitic colonies that have been thriving in our toxic junk food and refined sugar-filled bodies. In particular, viral infections and auto-immune diseases. The latter being caused by the incessant over-work of our immune systems trying to manage these parasite colonies over years and years. Super interesting stuff.

originally posted by: biblioester

originally posted by: AaarghZombies



If this stuff did any good the people who make it would be fighting hand over fist to get it used because of the huge amount of money they would make.

I don't know about that. As far as I know, Ivermectin is out of patent, meaning that anyone can make it. Big Pharma would have to spend millions on research and production, only to have smaller companies produce generic versions of the drug for a much lower price. Also, they would have to pull the enormous amount of Ivermectin from farm and pet supply chains, because those of us who are smart enough would just buy it from them. They would have no control over the market, and thus it's not worth their time or resources. The "vaccine" is completely under their control - the pricing, what's in it, who can produce it, etc. etc.

Not until 2024 they just authorized companies to make it. Most are in shanghai so its being massed produced out of China. What the companies do is sell the process for making the drugs. which that can patent.

www.drugpatentwatch.com...

originally posted by: biblioester

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Imperator2



If you choose to take risks so be it that's your choice I just find it ironic people are willing to take medication not designed to treat covid.

Hi, there are many, many repurposed, out-of-patent drugs being used for several ailments. A remedy does not need to be designed specifically for one particular type of viral infection. I think there are people who would like us to believe this, but it goes against how the body, and nature, works.

I've recently learned about a theory that many, many diseases are caused by the body's reaction to parasitic colonies that have been thriving in our toxic junk food and refined sugar-filled bodies. In particular, viral infections and auto-immune diseases. The latter being caused by the incessant over-work of our immune systems trying to manage these parasite colonies over years and years. Super interesting stuff.

Ivermectin slows the reproduction of the virus and helps stop the inflamation. They have theories on how the mechanism works.

originally posted by: KEKWchamp

Honestly, I wouldn't recommend any medication for long use.

Most medications aren't meant for long-term use. Look at the directions for almost any OTC drug and it'll tell you if you need it for longer than a week, 10 days, 14 days, it varies, to consult your doctor so the underlying cause can be treated.

Prescriptions are the same way. They're often meant as a stopgap measure until the underlying cause can be treated. Yet doctors routinely prescribe them and never treat the underlying cause or send you to a specialist who can. They'll let you keep taking a prescription medication for years that is known to have long-term side effects.

The medical field is a mess these days. Here pop this pill and come back for a higher dose when your body starts to build up a resistance to it.

🔞 Hi) My name is Paula, I'm 24 years old) Beginning sex model) I like to be photographed in the nude) Rate my photos 👉 tiny.one...

originally posted by: myselfaswell
The title doesn't quite say it all, it should read;

Ivermectin saves India; Global Corporate MSM should be criminally prosecuted for their censorship, people need to start going to jail.

Link To Onion Bhajis

India saw a dramatic fall in cases after the ICMR and AIIMS added Ivermectin to their protocols on April 20, 2021. Daily COVID-19 cases, which peaked at 414,188, are now down to 84,332, representing a drop of 80% overall in the country of India.

How much clearer does it have to get FFS you filthy murdering pricks.

What seemed to be an impending humanitarian crisis at the end of April has now been brought under control, not with mass vaccination, but instead with an inexpensive repurposed drug, Ivermectin.

Those Indian states that adopted more aggressive Ivermectin policies saw their cases fall far more than 80%,

Uttar Pradesh - down 98% (37,944 to 596)
Uttarakhand - down 97% (9642 to 287)
Goa - down 90% (4195 to 423).
Delhi - down 99% drop (28,395 to 238) Deaths down by 92%

Tamil Nadu, which publicly banned Ivermectin, saw their cases rise to the highest in India, and they continued setting state records until May 21, 2021, when they peaked at 36,184.

On June 9, Tamil Nadu, with a population less than 4.9% of India's, accounted for almost 20% of all of India's 2,177 June 9 death toll. By contrast, Uttar Pradesh which is on Ivermectin, with 204 million people, three times that of Tamil Nadu, saw a mere 91 deaths, less than 1/4 of Tamil Nadu.

How much more data do you want?

And then throw in the reality that the scary delta cv19 has the lowest mortality of any other variant. And falls in line with just about every other virus of this kind, more contagious less deadly.

And heres one source for that claim too, I could go on .....

This is medically significant data. Do you know whether it has been peer reviewed and published. We all know we have to be careful when interpreting data from a website. It's what we call grey literature.

Ivermectin might indeed work well against Covid infection...but, under our CAPITALIST SYSTEM, we have the watchdog FDA, Food and Drug Administration that is both gatekeeper for the Pharmaceutical Industry and supposed overseer of scientific study and certification of drugs. Trouble is, like when the FDA was AGAINST people obtaining their medications from Canada at HALF or more of US cost, the FDA argued that those drugs might be "UNSAFE for AMERICAN USE"...now, we know thats just capitalist hor# designed to protect Pharma profits...that MAY be what is happening here...and if so, I may owe a huge apology to someone on this board.a reply to: myselfaswell

originally posted by: myselfaswell
The title doesn't quite say it all, it should read;

Ivermectin saves India; Global Corporate MSM should be criminally prosecuted for their censorship, people need to start going to jail.

Link To Onion Bhajis

India saw a dramatic fall in cases after the ICMR and AIIMS added Ivermectin to their protocols on April 20, 2021. Daily COVID-19 cases, which peaked at 414,188, are now down to 84,332, representing a drop of 80% overall in the country of India.

How much clearer does it have to get FFS you filthy murdering pricks.

What's unclear to me is whether ivermectin is given prophylactically, iinstead of vaccination - that is, it's most often used for people who've already contracted the infection.

So, logically, it seems its advertised primary effect wouldn't be in reducing case numbers, (except as a 2nd order effect), but instead improves outcomes (the MOA seems to be to reduce viral replication and inflammation - which would reduce the complications of cases, but again, wouldn't affect actual case counts if not given prophylactically)

So, the idea that it's responsible for a miraculous reduction in case counts seems like it may be a fallacy.

Purely anecdotal, but I have colleagues and friends in India and many of them received vaccinations beginning in late-May as arranged by their US employers. Any reduction in case numbers have to consider vaccinations as a contributing factor.