COVID OMICRON Thread

[jamil]

The majority of studies get squashed...there is NO money in Ivermectin.

Therapies to Prevent Progression of COVID-19, Including Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, Zinc, and Vitamin D3 With or Without Intravenous Vitamin C: An International, Multicenter, Randomized Trial

BackgroundCOVID-19 is a global pandemic. Treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), zinc, and azithromycin (AZM), also known as the Zelenko protocol, and treatment with intravenous (IV) vitamin C (IVC) have shown encouraging results in a large number ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Not only is there no money in ivermectin, it might possibly reduce the number of shots in arms. So you gotta protect that revenue stream.

 

[jamil]

People here are getting it, so apparently they can. I’m not a doctor, so that would be a better question for Doc to answer. I don’t know how much oversight he has when prescribing things.

Some doctors prescribe it and some pharmacies refuse to fulfill those prescriptions.

 

[jamil]

Speaking of “blind faith” you sure put a lot of trust in studies. They are all bought and paid for by someone. It has frustrated me for years that so many intelligent friends thought a study paid for by big oil, was tainted but a study paid for by the government was virginal and pure. They cannot understand that government had an optimal study outcome too.

I tend not to trust studies sponsored by the US government when the outcome is obviously good for big pharma. In other words when they have a good reason to lie.

 

[jamil]

That sounds suspiciously like ... BINARY THINKING

It’s not that binary thinking always leads towards something to fear. It’s that it’s almost always inaccurate. It’s a perception which leads people towards making decisions in ignorance.

 

[manifest destiny]

There are only a couple of limitations I could see (and this, health law representing physicians and hospitals in all contexts, is what I do). First, if the patient in inpatient in a hospital, the hospital may have internal policies regarding the off-label use of ivermectin in particular or off-label use of drugs in general. The latter would not be a general prohibition because off-label use is pretty common, but there may be levels of approval to get through. Second, a medical group a physician is employed by may have policies, but this is less likely.

For an outpatient, if a doctor wants to prescribe it, chances are he can. The real question is whether he wants to.

Institutional policies aside, isn't it weird that doctors routinely use meds off-label but are prohibited from doing so in this instance? Where/when does the "right to try" legislation enter consideration? Maybe it doesn't because the 'vid isn't technically a terminal diagnosis. Ivermectin has been around for a lifetime. It's used by people the world over. It's safety protocol is far better studied than whatever is in the shot. (note I'm not calling the shot bad, only that it's poorly studied.) I find the stern limitations placed on prescribing physician suspiciously odd in this instance.

 

[Ingomike]

 

[jamil]

There are only a couple of limitations I could see (and this, health law representing physicians and hospitals in all contexts, is what I do). First, if the patient in inpatient in a hospital, the hospital may have internal policies regarding the off-label use of ivermectin in particular or off-label use of drugs in general. The latter would not be a general prohibition because off-label use is pretty common, but there may be levels of approval to get through. Second, a medical group a physician is employed by may have policies, but this is less likely.

For an outpatient, if a doctor wants to prescribe it, chances are he can. The real question is whether he wants to.

Is there any evidence that sanctioning boards are threatening doctors who prescribe it? I’ve seen this reported by groups who would have a bias towards wanting to believe that is true. But is it true, is the question. It seems like if sanctioning bodies were threatening to sanction doctors that would be a big deal, and really provable.

 

[nonobaddog]

This doesn’t sounds good to me.
“These disturbances are shown to have a potentially direct causal link to neurode generative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, increased tumorigenesis, and DNA damage.”

(PDF) Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs

PDF | The mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were brought to market in response to the widely perceived public health crises of Covid-19. The utilization of mRNA... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

This is a very striking paper. Not peer reviewed, not published on a site with high standards, possibly full of hooey and I hope they are coming from a very biased position against mRNA vaccines.

This is what is supposed to happen. The intended action of the mRNA vaccine is to deliver the mRNA to the cytoplasm of cells inducing them to produce fragments of a specific spike protein. This in turn activates the immune system to produce antibodies and T-type lymphocytes which prime the immune system to attack this specific protein which is part of the spikes on early variants of the chinese virus when one gets contaminated.

This paper goes into extensive detail of other, unintended actions of the mRNA vaccines such as disruption and deregulation of normal and desirable physiological processes. If they are even partially right this could lead to a myriad of health issues for the billions of vaccinated people in the world population.

Here is their conclusion...

17. Conclusions
It is imperative that worldwide administration of the mRNA vaccinations be stopped immediately until
further studies are conducted to determine the extent of the potential pathological consequences outlined
in this paper. It is not possible for these vaccinations to be considered part of a public health campaign
without a detailed analysis of the human impact of the potential collateral damage. It is also imperative
that VAERS and other monitoring system be optimized to detect signals related to the health consequences
of mRNA vaccination we have outlined. We believe the upgraded VAERS monitoring system described in
the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. study, but unfortunately not supported by the CDC, would be a
valuable start in this regard [208].
In the end, we are not exaggerating to say that billions of lives are at stake. We call on the public health
institutions to demonstrate, with evidence, why the issues discussed in this paper are not relevant to public
health, or to acknowledge that they are and to act accordingly. Until our public health institutions do
what is right in this regard, we encourage all individuals to make their own health care decisions with this
information as a contributing factor in those decisions.

For those who have been against the mRNA vaccines all along, it might be very tempting and understandable to gloat a little but perhaps an even more appropriate response would be to think Good Lord I hope they are wrong.

 

[Ingomike]

Is there any evidence that sanctioning boards are threatening doctors who prescribe it? I’ve seen this reported by groups who would have a bias towards wanting to believe that is true. But is it true, is the question. It seems like if sanctioning bodies were threatening to sanction doctors that would be a big deal, and really provable.

Doc posted a pic of what I would call a threat if they even disputed the orthodoxy much less prescribed against it…

 

[HoughMade]

Is there any evidence that sanctioning boards are threatening doctors who prescribe it? I’ve seen this reported by groups who would have a bias towards wanting to believe that is true. But is it true, is the question. It seems like if sanctioning bodies were threatening to sanction doctors that would be a big deal, and really provable.

I haven't seen it, but I can only assume that if it's a matter of policy someplace it can be treated as any other violation of policy. In a hospital, the pharmacy computer system will at least alert if it is prescribed outside guidelines and may not allow the prescription to be filled.

 

[firecadet613]

Also, I read the study you posted and thought it was interesting. There wasn’t any mention of ivermectin, but they used HCQ, AZM, zinc, and low doses of vitamin D. The study says every patient in their study had low levels of vitamin D, and how big of a risk that is in hospitalizations. Maybe they should do another study to isolate the effect of just fixing the vitamin D issue.

Dr Zelenko has used HCQ with his protocol, which was used in that study. Ivermectin and/or Quercetin can be subbed for HCQ.

Here is a brief read on how he developed his protocol, there's an in depth interview out there as well.

Dr. Zelenko On COVID And How He Developed His Z-Stack Approach -- "A Gift From God"

Medical hero Dr. Vladimir Zelenko was an early advocate for the use of hydroxychloroquine to fight COVID. For his efforts, he was banned from Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and vilified by the Media. But Dr. Zelenko didn’t stop. He kept working — and found a way to help people. Here is Dr...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[firecadet613]

Some doctors prescribe it and some pharmacies refuse to fulfill those prescriptions.

Correct. As you are well aware, most doctors and pharmacies will refuse to write or fill the script...

 

[KLB]

Fully vax'd language "pivot"

‘27th conspiracy theory that's come true': CDC director says definition of 'fully vaccinated' is being changed

twitchy.com

 

[nonobaddog]

Dr Zelenko has used HCQ with his protocol, which was used in that study. Ivermectin and/or Quercetin can be subbed for HCQ.

HCQ and Quercetin are somewhat analogous since they are both zinc ionophores, however Quercetin is much weaker. HCQ would be better if it were not for politics making it more difficult to get.
Ivermectin is different and is not a substitute for the others.

 

[jamil]

Doc posted a pic of what I would call a threat if they even disputed the orthodoxy much less prescribed against it…

But who specifically is “they”? If it’s just a policy enforced by whatever medical group he’s in. That’s onenthing, but if it’s a state sanctioning body that’s something different.

 

[BugI02]

I would hope people would consider the extent to which existing evidence supports those things though. It seems that people entrenched on either side want to believe it’s 100% yes or 100% no.

I think there is some evidence supporting that at least some voter fraud took place. I think there is some evidence that supports the lab leak theory. I think there is some evidence that ivermectin is more than zero effective. But that doesn’t make me confident that all are 100% true to the extent that many of you think it is either.

I was speaking to the droning assertions that people have seen 'no proof'

I can only assume they believe that election officials in WI or PA will eventually come out and admit that they fabricated votes, as that is likely the only way those folks will ever have what they consider 'proof'

 

[jamil]

I was speaking to the droning assertions that people have seen 'no proof'

I can only assume they believe that election officials in WI or PA will eventually come out and admit that they fabricated votes, as that is likely the only way those folks will ever have what they consider 'proof'

 

[Ingomike]

But who specifically is “they”? If it’s just a policy enforced by whatever medical group he’s in. That’s onenthing, but if it’s a state sanctioning body that’s something different.

Holy moving goal posts, Batman. No one i have seen is saying the state is pushing this, they are saying hospital groups, physician groups, and professional ethics arbiters are pushing this. What I recall I saw threatened ethics actions that could take away the career by a medical organization.

The real ****ing conspiracy is how much has been done, that is clearly of strong interest to the state, by third private parties, to curry favor with the state.

 

[Ingomike]

I was speaking to the droning assertions that people have seen 'no proof'

It is like these people have never heard of evidentiary standards and how to apply them.

 

[ancjr]

The real ****ing conspiracy is how much has been done, that is clearly of strong interest to the state, by third private parties, to curry favor with the state.

I see your general theory here, but I also see it as leading to a chicken/egg debate as to who is paying service to who.