If we do not approve ivermectin in Australia as a means of treating Covid then there are a lot of people in very high places who will be complicit in the deaths of many of our fellow Australians. This is one more piece of evidence: Ivermectin: Whole of Country Trials in Real Time. This is how the article begins.
The Chicoms have a better understanding of the Wuhan virus than most. Recently they increased the quarantine period for those going into China from 14 days to 21 days. Internal travel in China requires permits now.
How is the rest of the world coping?
The Czechs were having a hard time from the virus, with deaths averaging 180 per day and overcrowded intensive care units for months on end. That is until 8th March, when ivermectin was approved for use in the country. Two months later deaths are down 93%.
Now read the rest of the article where there are additional case studies. Meanwhile, what is keeping us from approving ivermectin right now as a treatment for Covid?
This is an article you should read if you want to get past the wall of silence: The Drug that Cracked COVID. Dated May 1, 2021. Here is some but read the rest if you are interested in understanding the nature of the world in which you live. But be warned, it’s a long article.
An earlier Australian study, reported in the journal Antiviral Research, showed that Ivermectin, which blocked other RNA viruses like Dengue virus, yellow fever virus, Zika virus, West Nile virus, influenza, the Avian flu, and HIV1/AIDS in vitro, decimated the coronavirus in vitro, wiping out “essentially all viral material by 48 hours.” But more research was needed in human beings.
But by October Marik’s concerns were answered. The studies were well-designed university trials that showed amazing anti-COVID-19 activity at the normal doses used to treat parasites. Though small and endlessly diverse by large, Western big pharma “one-size-fits all” random control trials, the Ivermectin studies were a mosaic of hundreds of scientists and many thousands of patients in trials all over the world, all showing the same remarkable efficacy against all phases of COVID-19 no matter what dose or age or severity of the patient. “Penicillin never was randomized,” Marik says. “It just obviously worked. Ivermectin obviously works.”…
The scientific evidence was overwhelming, he said. The data from twenty-seven studies, sixteen of them randomized controlled trials, demonstrated, with highly statistically significant, overwhelmingly positive, consistent, and reproducible rates, that people who got sick with COVID-19 were far more likely to quickly get better at home when they took Ivermectin. They didn’t go to the hospital. Housemates of people with COVID-19 who took Ivermectin didn’t get infected. People who got moderately ill in hospitals didn’t go to the ICU; they got better quicker and went home faster. Hospitals didn’t get overrun. The drug even saved elderly, critically ill COVID-19 patients from dying compared to those routinely dying elsewhere. Six prevention studies showed Ivermectin reduced the risk of getting COVID-19 by 92.5 percent, superior to many vaccines. Dr. Hector Carvallo, a professor of medicine at the University of Buenos Aires, gave 788 doctors and other health care workers in three medical centers weekly Ivermectin prophylaxis, with a control group of 407 doctors and others who didn’t get the drug. In the control group 236 people, or 58 percent, “had become ill with COVID.” Among the 788 who got Ivermectin, “no infections were recorded.”
The medical establishment that has stood in the way of wide distribution of Ivermectin are no better than mass murderers.
Chadstone Shopping Centre has been added to the expanding exposure site list!
You might as well complete the set and include Flinders Street Station. In fact, that is just where this woman was arrested yesterday in an anti-lockdown protest.
I tweeted about ivermectin in April 2020 and again in August 2020. It's hard not to think that objective appraisal of ivermectin has been delayed by both TDS and NIH (in both senses of acronym). pic.twitter.com/B8AdYGCheK
The public health danger posed by potentially pandemic-causing viruses escaping from laboratories has become the subject of considerable discussion, spurred by “gain of function” experiments. The ostensible goal of these experiments—in which researchers manipulate already-dangerous pathogens to create or increase communicability among humans—is to develop tools to monitor the natural emergence of pandemic strains. Opponents, however, warn in a variety of recentresearchpapersthat the risk of laboratory escape of these high-consequence pathogens far outweighs any potential advance.
The virtual certainty is, however, that there are more we don’t know about. And the only reason this one has become notorious is because it could be used as a vehicle to steal the election in 2020.
Let me note that it takes a year or so for price increases to catch fire since consumer demand stays mostly the same while investment, and massive increases in public spending in general, are diverted into useless unproductive channels. Eventually, however, the flow of money expenditure begins to grow more rapidly than the flow of actual goods and services to buy.
BOMBSHELL! Dr Fauci in 2012 wrote that “gain of function” research to juice up bat viruses was worth risking a pandemic: “the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature” @SharriMarkson scoop https://t.co/S7ILuzgnNwpic.twitter.com/iwyPCPctId
America’s top medical adviser for the coronavirus, Anthony Fauci, argued that the benefits of experimenting on contagious viruses – manipulating and heightening their infectious potency – was worth the risk of a laboratory accident sparking a pandemic.
In previously unreported remarks, Dr Fauci supported the contentious gain-of-function experiments that some now fear might have led to an escape from a Wuhan laboratory causing the Covid-19 pandemic, calling them “important work”.
An investigation by The Weekend Australian has also confirmed Dr Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, did not alert senior White House officials before lifting the ban on gain-of-function research in 2017.
Writing in the American Society for Microbiology in October 2012, Dr Fauci acknowledged the controversial scientific research could spark a pandemic.
“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” he wrote. “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?
“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.”
C.S. Lewis’s Screwtape Letters quoted by Steve Hayward as amongst his Relevant Classics. This is Lewis on how to ruin education. For 1962, this is incredibly prescient.
The basic principle of the new education is to be that dunces and idlers must not be made to feel inferior to intelligent and industrious pupils. That would be “undemocratic.” These differences between pupils – for they are obviously and nakedly individual differences – must be disguised. This can be done at various levels. At universities, examinations must be framed so that nearly all the students get good marks. Entrance examinations must be framed so that all, or nearly all, citizens can go to universities, whether they have any power (or wish) to profit by higher education or not. At schools, the children who are too stupid or lazy to learn languages and mathematics and elementary science can be set to doing things that children used to do in their spare time. Let, them, for example, make mud pies and call it modelling. But all the time there must be no faintest hint that they are inferior to the children who are at work. Whatever nonsense they are engaged in must have – I believe the English already use the phrase – “parity of esteem.” An even more drastic scheme is not possible. Children who are fit to proceed to a higher class may be artificially kept back, because the others would get a trauma — Beelzebub, what a useful word! – by being left behind. The bright pupil thus remains democratically fettered to his own age group throughout his school career, and a boy who would be capable of tackling Aeschylus or Dante sits listening to his coeval’s attempts to spell out A CAT SAT ON A MAT.
So far as cats sitting on mats is concerned, even Dr Seuss has been banned so what is really left? He even included the fear of “trauma” he was so ahead of his time!
“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015….
“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
So what. It’s been an obvious scam from the start so why should anyone change their minds just because they are provided with some obvious facts about the cynicism and lies of the left?
Law of Markets 