FDA finally admits Ivermectin works against COVID

I will post two links, the first is the FDA.GOV website and the second is the actual study showing Ivermectin is safe and useful against COVID.

www.fda.gov...

www.sciencedirect.com...

The study shows:

"We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2), with a single addition to Vero-hSLAM cells 2 h post infection with SARS-CoV-2 able to effect ~5000-fold reduction in viral RNA at 48 h."


"As above, a >5000 reduction in viral RNA was observed in both supernatant and cell pellets from samples treated with 5 μM ivermectin at 48 h, equating to a 99.98% reduction in viral RNA in these samples. Again, no toxicity was observed with ivermectin at any of the concentrations tested."


"Taken together these results demonstrate that ivermectin has antiviral action against the SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate in vitro, with a single dose able to control viral replication within 24–48 h in our system"

- - -

So the media is bragging about the FDA approval for the MRNA shot, why not bring this up? And why not allow MDs to prescribe this medication to the public?

a reply to: MPoling

***QUIETLY* admits it works, similar to how the natural antibody immunity is like the giant elephant in the room none of the bureaucrats or talking heads want to admit to

The patent for ivermectin expired in 1996. Pharma companies can't make massive amounts of money if an effective treatment exists in the public domain. Therefore there's no lobbying for it whatsoever, so it gets swept under the rug.

From the FDA link

Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19?

A: No. While there are approved uses for ivermectin in people and animals, it is not approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. You should not take any medicine to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless it has been prescribed to you by your health care provider and acquired from a legitimate source.

A recently released research articleExternal Link Disclaimer described the effect of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2 in a laboratory setting. These types of laboratory studies are commonly used at an early stage of drug development. Additional testing is needed to determine whether ivermectin might be appropriate to prevent or treat coronavirus or COVID-19.

In what universe did the FDA 'admit' to anything in regards to ivermectin?

a reply to: bigsnowman

On that same basis we should all hold off taking the vaccine too! Thanks for clearing that up, phew!

originally posted by: bigsnowman

A: No. While there are approved uses for ivermectin in people and animals, it is not approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19."

In what universe did the FDA 'admit' to anything in regards to ivermectin?

Ivermectin is an anti-viral, so yeah it would be intuitive that it could treat the corona virus.

The beneficial effects of ivermectin for treating covid

It's like the FDA can't even do a google search before defaming anything that isn't a vaccine.

"Taken together these results demonstrate that ivermectin has antiviral action against the SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate in vitro, with a single dose able to control viral replication within 24–48 h in our system"

Kinda sounds like they are admitting it works.

But from what you posted, they just don't want us to use it.
You know, cause it works, and it is cheap.
@bigsnowman

a reply to: MPoling

You forgot the "in animals." Easy to miss, it's only part of the headline. Hack

originally posted by: MPoling
I will post two links, the first is the FDA.GOV website and the second is the actual study showing Ivermectin is safe and useful against COVID.

www.fda.gov...

www.sciencedirect.com...

The study shows:

"We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2), with a single addition to Vero-hSLAM cells 2 h post infection with SARS-CoV-2 able to effect ~5000-fold reduction in viral RNA at 48 h."


"As above, a >5000 reduction in viral RNA was observed in both supernatant and cell pellets from samples treated with 5 μM ivermectin at 48 h, equating to a 99.98% reduction in viral RNA in these samples. Again, no toxicity was observed with ivermectin at any of the concentrations tested."


"Taken together these results demonstrate that ivermectin has antiviral action against the SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate in vitro, with a single dose able to control viral replication within 24–48 h in our system"

- - -

So the media is bragging about the FDA approval for the MRNA shot, why not bring this up? And why not allow MDs to prescribe this medication to the public?

Because it hasn’t been shown to work in vivo. This study found that Ivermectin inhibited the growth of the virus in Vero-hSLAM cells. Those are not human cells; they originally come from an African Green Monkey.

Hydroxychloriquine also has this effect in Vero-hSLAM cells in vitro. That’s why researchers originally suspected that HCL might be effective in humans. But it’s not, because human cells don’t contain the same molecules as Green Monkey cells.

This was shown a year ago by a German team:

“ Chloroquine does not inhibit infection of human lung cells with SARS-CoV-2”


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

a reply to: MPoling

If I remember correctly, for a drug to get emergency approval, there needed to NOT be any treatment available for the sickness the drug was to cure. Now that FDA approval exists, in the past few days, we have Ivermectin and Regeneron miraculously noticed as helping with the symptoms of Covid.

I could be wrong on all that, as I don't really care since illegal sh!t is how things get done in the US these days. But if it's true, it must be a strong coincidence.

originally posted by: Fryguy
a reply to: MPoling

You forgot the "in animals." Easy to miss, it's only part of the headline. Hack

Ummm...Sooooo...humans...aren't animals...lactating mammals even...?

News to me...

Hackatcha...




YouSir

a reply to: Fryguy

No. While there are approved uses for ivermectin in PEOPLE and animals,

Looks like you did a bit of selective editing yourself.

originally posted by: Fryguy
a reply to: MPoling

You forgot the "in animals." Easy to miss, it's only part of the headline. Hack

I had heard that they tested the mRNA vaccines on animals. Is that true?

a reply to: Fryguy

Also be careful trusting the FDA. These are, after all, the guys that get 75% of their funding from the pharma companies they are supposed to be regulating. But I am sure there is no conflict of interest.

the FDA just approved a vaccine that does not vaccine which suspiciously causes a greater than zero percent immediate death, myocarditis and blood clots for general use without a medical history or physical examination of the patient.

and you believe them . . . why?

it is pretty clear that you are on your own and that shamanic ritual and old wives tales are likely to produce better outcomes than FDA recommendations

a reply to: MPoling

Pople shouldczrefullyread the wholee study. Tjjr cells used were bovine
(cow,)

originally posted by: YouSir

Ummm...Sooooo...humans...aren't animals...lactating mammals even...?

News to me...

Hackatcha...

YouSir

Sure, give you dog a big chocoholic bar...

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: MPoling

***QUIETLY* admits it works, similar to how the natural antibody immunity is like the giant elephant in the room none of the bureaucrats or talking heads want to admit to

This chick i work with is currently out of work with blistered throat, etc. Its a weird infection not related to COVID....but she just returned from a trip to NYC. So we were wondering if that might be what it was.

The wierd thing about her is her husband has had COVID. Due to my health issues, she was required to test every other day while he was sick as a condition of coming to work. She never got it then, back in February. Back around CHristmas she travelled to visit family in Oklahoma. Everyone in her family but her and her dad had COVID after that trip.

Im thinking she might have natural immunity to it. It could be possible that I do, due to my ridiculous immune system issues, and don't know. But nonetheless, i suspect that a large portion of the population has a natural/genetic immunity to COVID.

Which is interesting. I know that the "legacy" haplogroups that were in N. America were wiped out by old world disease. So there is obvious precedence for this kind of thing. But a disease that is reputed to be lab grown primarily effecting specific genetic groupings is a conspiracy that would flatten all conspiracies.

a reply to: Fryguy

You are wrong sir. The animals part was the FDA website but it linked to the article about using Ivermectin in humans. Please read the article next time.

a reply to: network dude

Best comment so far and 100% accurate.