The NIH has a page that lists approved treatments for COVID19 as well as some under investigation. Ivermectin (IVM) is on the list, so a reader sent me the link. NIH is not saying IVM is approved but now that I’ve poked around in their “closet,” the question I have is why?
I know the answer. It’s cheap, safe, and it works. That’s why Hydroxychloroquine got the shaft early on. It negates the need for public health worship and the fascist public health state.
People can treat early and often with what amounts to pocket change, and nobody in government gets filthy rich in the process.
But interfering with the scrabbling for that money and power will almost always result in politicians and policies suppressing the things that get in the way, which is the basis for ‘Public Health’ policy on COVID19 from day one.
The CDC owns the patents for the SARS genome (It bribed the US patent office to get it illegally). It then patented the means to detect it, meaning any test used to identify it, including COVID19.
We know they created COVID19, and it was then released on the world (intentionally or not), and now they are cashing in. Part of that includes controlling treatments to which they also have a property interest without regard to public health.
Remdesivir, which is very expensive, is approved because it’s expensive and, I have heard, connected to people in the CDC and NIH.
Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin are widely available, safe, and very affordable, which is why they have been branded as risky or even dangerous in the US, neither of which is true.
Even the NIH admits Ivermectin is well-traveled, low risk, and effective against viral infections, just not this one. Not yet. Why? Well, the FDA hasn’t approved it for use to treat COVID19.
We need more research.
Really?
A search of the NIH website brings you to the aforementioned page, which includes a link to 79 IVM research studies. Of those 79 planned studies (some are recruiting, in process, or over) – 27 are completed. Of these 27, nine have published results.
The results are promising—nothing bad, everything good. More to add to the news we already know, but that the public health machine and the media are disinclined to share.
But wait, there’s more. If you search the NIH for Ivermectin, you find additional research like this whose conclusion is:
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.
But if you search Ivermectin on the FDA Web site, you get these results.
There’s this nice article about how you should never use Ivermectin to treat COVID19 and nothing in the immediate results to suggest otherwise. Forget any of the research linked above and oh, India and Brazil where thousands (perhaps millions) have been treated with Ivermectin for people and the case and death rates have collapsed.
If used before a patient requires hospitalization, the rate of recovery is outstanding.
It is so damn good that a legal group in India has sued a member of the WHO for mass murder for the lives lost in the province, where she told them not to use Ivermectin.
Perhaps it is time for someone needs to sue somebody at the CDC, NIH, or the FDA?
