New Peer Reviewed Study: Ivermectin Prophylaxis Effective

To date, Ivermectin hasn't killed anyone yet we are not allowed to use it. Numerous studies have shown it to have at least minimal positive impact if not major positive impacts yet is is banned and you can't even mention it without censorship.

I am not saying Ivermectin is a cure or wonder drug for covid but there is absolutely no reason you are not allowed to try it because there is much more evidence that Ivermectin is effective than remdesivir.

Abstract
Background: Ivermectin has demonstrated different mechanisms of action that potentially protect from both coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and COVID-19-related comorbidities. Based on the studies suggesting efficacy in prophylaxis combined with the known safety profile of ivermectin, a citywide prevention program using ivermectin for COVID-19 was implemented in Itajaí, a southern city in Brazil in the state of Santa Catarina. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of regular ivermectin use on subsequent COVID-19 infection and mortality rates.

www.cureus.com... pensity-score-matching

The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality (25 [0.8%] versus 79 [2.6%] among ivermectin non-users; RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.49; p < 0.0001). When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70% (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.46; p < 0.0001). There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate (44 versus 99 hospitalizations among ivermectin users and non-users, respectively; RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31-0.63; p < 0.0001). After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67% (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 023-0.66; p < 0.0001).

Conclusion: In this large PSM study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.

Conclusions
In a citywide ivermectin program with prophylactic, optional ivermectin use for COVID-19, ivermectin was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death rates from COVID-19.

a reply to: infolurker

Results: Of the 223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered for the study, a total of 159,561 subjects were included in the analysis: 113,845 (71.3%) regular ivermectin users and 45,716 (23.3%) non-users. Of these, 4,311 ivermectin users were infected, among which 4,197 were from the city of Itajaí (3.7% infection rate), and 3,034 non-users (from Itajaí) were infected (6.6% infection rate), with a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate

My God, it beats even the artificially inflated mRNA infection prevention numbers...

The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality (25 [0.8%] versus 79 [2.6%] among ivermectin non-users; RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.49; p < 0.0001). When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70% (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.46; p < 0.0001). There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate (44 versus 99 hospitalizations among ivermectin users and non-users

Also hits that "reduces hospitalizations and mortality" ball out of the park.

www.bloomberg.com...

Since the patent held by original manufacturer Merck & Co. expired in 1996

AHA! So unlike the mRNA experimentals, the one box Ivermectin doesn't check is "makes Big Pharma a #load more money while ensuring robust future demand for further patented Big Pharma drugs to treat side effects." Thus, Big Pharma and their vast population of citizen sheep reject the effective, safe, cheap, PROVEN Ivermectin.

originally posted by: Acknt
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Yah, and this was just 0.2 mg per kg two days every 15 days. So 4 days a month they were taking 0.2 mg per kg and weren't even using it as a treatment once sick from what I saw when glancing the study earlier today, just a prophylaxis every 15 days. Wildeh

a reply to: infolurker

Peer reviewed as well? whatever will the bootlickers do with this one?

a reply to: network dude

They will just ignore . In part because they simply do not understand .

I posted this same study last week in another so called Forum and was informed by the Gullibles that it was Fake --- not peer reviewed or randomised double blind etc .
Real low IQs -- Debate Policy . But , shh .

a reply to: Juicer66

I'm shocked they haven't been by as of yet. shocked.

Quite a few studies have been conducted showing the efficacy of Ivermectin as prophylactic, and most show 100% efficacy. It's nice to see a new one.

Personal experience. Came down with the Covid a few weeks ago. Felt disgusting and I just wanted it to stop so I ran down to the local farm store and got the tube of horse paste. Read the box and instructions and metered out a dose for a 250 lb animal. And I felt it start working about 10 minutes after the first dose. About 3 weeks later now and I feel almost normal except for a bit of a cough.

As a Ivermectin user I highly recommend it for Covid infections. And for Fauci, the major pharmaceuticals, and the bootlickers, and anyone else that fought Ivermectin be cursed with the fleas of a 1000 camels. And receive a harsh chastisement on their judgement day. For what they did is tantamount to murder.

Seems some people are saving loved ones despite the hospital directives.

Florida Doctor: Families Sneak Ivermectin to Loved Ones in Hospitals With COVID-19, See Improvement

a reply to: Salander

ZH posted a list of over 1000 studies showing the advantages of early treatment using IVM.
When I went to quote it a few days later it had disappeared .

I wonder who has been squealing and on what grounds ?
ZH usually ignore everybody unless they have rock solid grounds for disagreement .

a reply to: network dude

Go down the list and harass and smear them all?

The usual Dems firebombing everything useful

a reply to: Juicer66

As we saw with the recent release of the emails between Fauci and Collins, they go to great lengths to censor and remove all facts that contradict their Plandemic narrative.