Whoops! How embarrassing! The CDC gave you bad advice. If you want to survive COVID, you should use the drug they said to avoid, and avoid the drug they said to use.
What dosage of Ivermectin should be taken? How often?
Just a thought.... I suspect that the researchers writing this paper may have deliberately written an erroneous abstract to bypass the Pfizer filters so that the ACTUAL data could be published in JAMA. I've noticed a similar trend on YouTube. We're in a war, and we've got to find ways of communicating truth under cover. It reminds me of POW Admiral Jeremiah Denton Jr. using his eyes to blink the word "TORTURE" using Morse Code during his captivity in Vietnam.
Bizarre. Why would a study be honest with data that says IVM works, but then just blatantly lie in the conclusion? Surely the study authors, and JAMA itself, are burning their credibility - and careers - to the ground?
Take that Alex Berenson! Now, be a good little boy, show you can be a big boy, and apologize to Dr. Malone.
Ivermectin works and everyone should have some on hand to immediately start if they think they got one of their planned viruses. My son is exposed to people constantly everyday. In two years, he only had a cold, but a couple of weeks ago he came home with a fever and felt awful. I immediately started him on Ivermectin, doubled his supplements and went home and made him homemade chicken soup (don’t laugh chicken soup is great when your sick!). I got back to his house 3.5 hours later and he was so greatly improved it was simply amazing. The fever was practically gone. We couldn’t believe it! I attribute it to the Ivermectin. By Saturday, he was remarkably better, but I gave him another one to make sure he didn’t relapse. By Sunday, he and I couldn’t believe how much better he was. He was still a little tired, but felt good overall. By Monday, everything was gone! No malaise, nothing! I gave him the Ivermectin one capsule daily for four days since so many people I spoke to had said they had lingering side effects for weeks.
I started getting rundown after he was sick since I had been around him a lot, so I took one Ivermectin and by the next day I felt fine! I also take all the high powered supplements daily that mimic HCQ, Ivermectin, along with C, D3, Zinc, Elderberry and other powerhouse supplements, but Ivermectin is what kicked the virus out! It is criminal what the FDA, CDC, Big Pharma, Bill Gates, Fauci and all the other complicit criminals did to millions of innocent people. It is truly crimes against humanity.
No statistical significance.
Doesn't prove anything.
However, I'd like to see their calculation for "p".
Banning Ivermectin as an effective and safe COVID treatment just for pushing the ineffective and dangerous vaccines, is a crime against humanity and mass murder. I got tested positive, felt a bit sickly the day before and took Ivermectin right then , and I already improved amazingly.
Big money making vaccines for the drug industry are the only reason true information is being suppressed. It has the money to hide the truth. My daugter and I got CV-19 last year and my daugher gave me her HCQ...as I was 87. I was almost totally better the next day; while she did not get well for over two weeks. We both got CV-19 a week after we went marketing and had to wear masks..
In other news, water is wet. You ever take Ivermectin? It makes you feel like Ironman. Meanwhile actual Ironmen take the vaccine and collapse like a sack of potatoes. You'd be stupid to take the latter in lieu of the former. Believe your eyes. But there is no victory here because some small stidy dataset gives 'our side' a 'win'. Have you not seen enough fraud science yet? Even this paper attempted to conclude the exact opposite of what the data said. And why was the data presented so awkwardly. And which definition of 'vaccinated' did they use? Thanks but no thanks. They're going to say what they want said. Their 'science' is going to support the conclusions they want them to support. If you are playing in this arena you have already lost. If you are waiting for their science to prove they were all wrong and killed a bunch of people needlessly, I hope you have a million years. Just break free. Seriously. Believe your own eyes. Vote with your dollars. Don't wait and be jerked around waiting for their science to make it OK for you to think something or believe in your own observations and reasoning. Great story Steve, don't get me wrong. But I am long past the point of indulging the fecal excrement they call science. I just don't care nor will any of their idiotic conclusions change how I will protect my health. They have negative credibility at this point. They did it to themselves. Stop participating in their charade.
I read the journal; they admit the subjects and just monitor them to give the disease greater severity and then within 7 days they administer treatment- often too late by that time. They are also not consistant- using different numbers in tables to identify levels of severity. For example, they claim the level of severity goes up to 9, then they say 5, then they say 4-5; changing of the story is a recurring theme...
You did, of course, send this to Berenson? 🧐
About Daniel's point: The groups are randomized and therefore demographically similar, so I don't agree with him on that one. Also, the size of the 2 groups is almost the same (241 vs. 249), so I disagree there too. About his comment on needing a different study design to determine relative efficacy against death, I agree this study isn't ideal, but I'm thinking we can still draw a valid conclusion. In this study, about 25% of the participants were both vaxxed and IVM'd, , which is the only difference I see between it and Daniel's ideal study (where nobody has both interventions). So, the big question is, how bad is that and what to do about it? If we knew which people had both, we could just throw out their data and recalculate. I don't see the data broken out that way, but can't we just assume that the 25% wouldn't tend to favor either the vaxxed or the IVM'd, therefore Steve's conclusion is still fairly valid although a little less statistically significant? I agree with Daniel that a larger study would have been a lot better.
Want a good laugh? Watch James Corbett's 5th Annual Fake New Awards show here:
The first award goes to Ivermectin disinformation
Why aren't American doctors churning out these studies? It's been two years, and we have to base everything on a study from Malaysia (no offense)?
Francis Collins was a believer in Big Science. Huge, government-controlled/funded centralized operations, and he crowded out everyone else. His ACTIV-6 study is lumbering forward looking at Ivermectin, Fluvoxamine and Fluticasone, but results won't be available until next year.
People are already saying the three days of Ivermectin used in Collins' study aren't enough. So if it comes back negative, they'll have to study it for another two years.
Just for grins you should compare Vitamin D sufficiency to the vax.
An older man I know told me about a doctor local to Brookfield, CT called in a prescription for ivermectin for a patient. 10 minutes later he gets a call back from a governing authority warning him if he does that again his medical license will be pulled! That is how ruthless the medical boards are getting.