Ivermectin kills tapeworms by paralyzing them. That's been proven over decades. I suspect Covid is going to make a re-appearance and health authorities will no doubt ask us to take a fourth or fifth vaccination. Personally I'm not keen so in the meanwhile work on alternatives. If ivermectin holds up to several years of clinical trials as an antiviral then I might try it as an alternative to vaccination.

'They' demonised it because it wasn't their idea. Yes: they are that childish, petty and domineering. Then there was the huge amount of money to be made from untested vaccines.

But, there is no point in talking about it after the event. Not one of the political and Big Pharma scum will be brought to book; not one of the maniacal chief medical officers; not one of the stormtroopers who assault protesters and shot them with rubber bullets.

And, because the people with the real power - voters - are too stupid to do anything about it, it will all happen again.

What Taswegian says.
Alan B.

WTF?

The latest clinical guidance for CV-19 treatment form the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on 28 March 2023 states specifically (their capitals):

DO NOT USE IN COVID-19 : Ivermectin

India's successes in response to CV-19 are attributed to the public health response not ivermectin.

We know why the restrictions were placed on Ivermectin it was never banned.

Firstly, there were safety fears about the doses being advocated for its use to treat COVID.

Secondly, there was a health risk associated with people taking ivermectin in an attempt to prevent infection rather than getting vaccinated. This was viewed as a risk to the person as well as the wider public.

Thirdly, it was feared an increase in prescriptions would lead to a shortage for those who needed the medicine to treat scabies and parasite infections.

Yes we already knew that it was safe when prescribed properly and in the correct dose.

The problem early on was that in the U.S. in particular there was poisoning from this drug when self-medicated for prevention of CV-19.

One can only guess as to why but I have possible explanation.

In one study reported by The New England Journal of Medicine "most were older than 60 years of age".

Once again there is a probable explanation for this.

WTF?

This author presented us with a recent article where he tried to link the findings of a Swiss study to “sudden death syndrome’.

Murray Hunter 31 July 2023 : "This research may be partly able to shed some light upon the “sudden death syndrome’ of athletes around the world over the past couple of years, and the unusual high rates of excess deaths around the world, over the last 18 months."

According to the Swiss study "Hs-cTnT-elevations were mild and only temporary. No patient had ECG-changes, and none developed major adverse cardiac events within 30 days."

According to the WHO:
"These myocarditis cases typically occurred within a few days after vaccination, are generally mild, respond to conservative treatment, and are less severe with better outcomes than classical myocarditis or COVID-19 related myocarditis."

Just because somebody references a study does not necessarily mean that the study adds weight to their argument. In this case it contradicts the authors viewpoint.

So here we have this lefty twit, WTF preaching from the lefty hymn book again, when we all know he is talking bull.

It is now public information that there was never any suggestion that vaccination had any effect on preventing transmission of covid. Getting the jab was of no use to your fellow man.

We know now it made those vaccinated more liable to infection by later strains.

We know it has killed people with adverse cardiac events, but we still have these clowns trying to tell us this is not so, & still promote these killers.

These people still pushing vaccination are not just wrong, but really evil.

Meanwhile we have Albo wanting to limit free speech with his misinformation legislation, which will be no doubt designed to stop information about cheap medicines being published.

God help us.

Got to hand it to Murray, he’s nothing if not persistent in his championing of Covid dead ends. I remember talking to a friend who works in cancer research. I asked about Ivermectin, given it looked promising in test tube studies. She scoffed “Plenty of things work at high doses in the test tube. The real question is, does it work in patients at a dose that won’t kill them?”

A few (mostly poor quality) studies suggested some benefits, but better double blind studies mostly showed no effect, see here for n example: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483?resultClick=1
Once the fraudulent Elgazzar and Raad studies were excluded the “effects” of Ivermectin on Covid largely disappeared in meta-analysis.

I think an enquiry into Covid would be a reasonable idea. But please, can we consign risible rubbish like this to the bin.

Even if I accept your argument that Ivermectin was ineffective, at least it didn't cause vaccine injury and death, and there is value in a placebo.

Anyway, you'll find that attaching the adjective "high quality" to a study doesn't make it so. The studies that show no effect tend to use too low a dose, or wait until after the person has had COVID for a while. They are designed to fail.

Graham if I were to choose a placebo it wouldn't be Ivermectin. There's plenty of evidence that Ivermectin has side effects, especially when used at high doses without proper medical supervision. These include "severe episodes of confusion, ataxia, seizures, and hypotension", that I think outweigh any placebo effect. https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMc2114907

The notion that Ivermectin works, but hasn't been tested properly, is the kind of idea that Borody et al are spreading. Borody promoted a "triple therapy" of Ivermectin, zinc and Doxycycline, which he'd conveniently patented. Then he could say "oh but you haven't tested it in combination with zinc and Doxycycline".

Where in my comment did I say "high quality"? I said "better double blind studies". I'd appreciate you not misquoting me.

An enquiry into Australia's responses to Covid would be a useful exercise. Border closures, quarantine arrangements, social distancing, masks and vaccine safety and efficacy should all be examined.

Arguing about Ivermectin distracts us from the real issues. Ivermectin hasn't been "demonized", it just doesn't work on Covid. Just let it go.

Well it worked with this little black duck.

52 hours from positive test to all symptoms cleared using my personally imported Indian Viverdo kit based on Ivermectin. Also worked on all 8 infected family & friends I have given them to.

Do tell us Johnj, do you work for one of the big Pharma vaccine profiteers, or the current government?

Well, I'm glad Ziverdo worked for you and yours Hasbeen, even if you couldn't spell it right. Not to mention you're using it off-label as it is recommended to "treat bacterial and parasitic infections".

"Do you work for one of the big Pharma vaccine profiteers, or the current government?" Attacking a person rather than their contentions is not much of an argument.

Why not dish out Ivermectin willy nilly ? It could possibly be an effective prevention of general stupidity ?
I mean with the gene pool as it is now anything is worth testing, it could be put into University water supplies & yuppie coffee shops !
COVID has clearly demonstrated that stupidity is the greatest pandemic facing humans !

Johnj,

You are not wanted here, you know too much on the subject and are making the usual suspects, our loyal band of Trumpsters look rather silly, again! Hassy latched onto ivermectin as soon as the Dangerous Doctor Donald told him it was good sh!t, unfortunately that was before, and not after, the same Dangerous Doctor had a thought bubble, or seen something on the telly that said; "Household diso kills 99% of germs including Covid-19", so fellas reach for the Pine-O-Clean its a God send!"