04-06-2021, 08:03 PM
(04-06-2021, 07:45 PM)Patrick Wrote:(04-06-2021, 07:41 PM)canada_dry Wrote: I also would prefer to risk getting the virus and use therapeutics like ivermectin (https://covid19criticalcare.com/) than use an experimental gene therapy.
The fact that info about cheap therapeutics like ivermectin are being suppressed is highly suspect.
I do not see it as being suppressed. You can actually follow it all in near real-time.
https://covid-19tracker.milkeninstitute.org/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.100...20-00204-0
https://go.drugbank.com/covid-19
Mainstream media doesn't and hasn't talked about cheap therapeutics, only the technological miracle of vaccines. There is active censorship regarding cheap therapeutics.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...45376.html
"I’ve experienced such censorship firsthand. Early in the pandemic, my research led me to testify in the Senate that corticosteroids were life-saving against COVID-19, when all national and international health care agencies recommended against them. My recommendations were criticized, ignored and resisted such that I felt forced to resign my faculty position. Only later did a large study from Oxford University find they were indeed life-saving. Overnight, they became the standard of care worldwide. More recently, we identified through dozens of trials that the drug ivermectin leads to large reductions in transmission, mortality, and time to clinical recovery. After testifying to this fact in a second Senate appearance — the video of which was removed by YouTube after garnering over 8 million views — I was forced to leave another position.
I was delighted when our paper on ivermectin passed a rigorous peer review and was accepted by Frontiers in Pharmacology. The abstract was viewed over 102,000 times by people hungry for answers. Six weeks later, the journal suddenly rejected the paper, based on an unnamed “external expert” who stated that “our conclusions were unsupported,” contradicting the four senior, expert peer reviewers who had earlier accepted them. I can’t help but interpret this in context as censorship.
The science shows that ivermectin works. Over 40 randomized trials and observational studies from around the world attest to its efficacy against the novel coronavirus. Meta-analyses by four separate research groups, including ours, found an average reduction in mortality of between 68%-75%. And 10 of 13 randomized controlled trials found statistically significant reductions in time to viral clearance, an effect not associated with any other COVID-19 therapeutic. Furthermore, ivermectin has an unparalleled safety record and low cost, which should negate any fears or resistance to immediate adoption.
...My story is not unique. Physicians across the country are fighting a pernicious campaign to denigrate all potential treatments not first championed by the authorities, and others have faced retaliation for speaking up. Sadly, too many of our institutions are using the pandemic as a pretext to centralize control over the practice of medicine, persecuting and canceling doctors who follow their clinical judgment and expertise."