July 24 is World Ivermectin Day. There is more than this at the link but this really is the core of it.

More recently, research has identified Ivermectin’s impressive anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties. This is important, because a serious case of COVID-19 has at least two phases: viral and inflammatory.

But research papers are only a tool. Although they help us identify useful medical treatments, that isn’t sufficient. A few years ago I wrote a report arguing that roughly half of published scientific research is probably wrong. The core idea behind the ‘reproducibility crisis’ is that results that look good on paper don’t necessarily pan out. The findings of nine out of 10 landmark cancer research papers couldn’t be reproduced when a second group of scientists attempted to do so. Of 53 research papers, only 6 passed this test (11%).

Treatments must not only appear promising on paper, they need to work when administered to real patients in the real world. Doctors from around the world report that Ivermectin works against COVID-19. They know it has the power to bring some seriously ill patients back from the brink, after all else has failed.

Many physicians now believe our overall COVID response has focused on the wrong thing. When Ivermectin is prescribed immediately after a test comes back positive, they say, almost no one requires hospitalization. When it’s given to family members of infected people, additional illness is prevented. But rather than treating people early so they never become seriously ill, our focus has been on managing hospital resources such as ICU beds and ventilators.

There are no end of persons in positions of political authority who have seen Covid as a means to a very shady end. And it’s more than  just the billions that are being made by pharmaceutical conglomerates, although there is that too. Donald Trump threatened to upend their power, and there are no stops these people were unwilling to pull to get him out, even if it has crashed our economies and terrified half the population.

Found at Reiner Fuellmich Explains The Class Action Law Suit Filed On June 21st 2021. Published July 1, 2021.

It may be long but it is the best analysis so far available and is interesting all the way through.

Further details on the class action available here: Dr Reiner Fuellmich begins Legal Litigation on the Covid-19 Fraud – The Greatest Crime Against Humanity.

According to American-German lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, all cases of fraud in German companies are meagre in comparison to the level and depth of damage that has been caused and continues to be caused to humanity by the Covid-19 regulations and this orchestrated crisis. A German Corona Investigative Committee has been working tirelessly since July 10, 2020 to answer some important questions, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists’ and experts’ testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking.

Go to the link, which is a very long article, and read it all. Terrifying from end to end. But this might be the most incredible bit. But first this:

What is a COVID-19 PCR test?

A PCR test for COVID-19 is a test used to diagnosis people who are currently infected with SARS-CoV-2, which is the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. The PCR test is the “gold standard” test for diagnosing COVID-19 because it’s the most accurate and reliable test.

Then read this from the above linked article.

And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections. In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, who died in 2019, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they’re simply incapable of diagnosing any disease.’

”That is: contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR-test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does NOT mean that they’re infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus. Even the United States CDC, even this institution agrees with this, and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests, dated July 13, 2020.

You will have to click on the link above to see the vid. From Ex-Pfizer VP Yeadon Warns: Children 50 Times More Likely to Die From Vaccine Than Virus. 

Which provides this outline at the Youtube link:

Highlighting the principle of using a prophylactic vaccine in the midst of a pandemic. Likely to create more more viral variants in the process.

Timecodes:

0:00 – Intro

7:36 – Lockdowns

8:51 – Gaining immunity from exposure & immunological escape

11:17 – COVID vaccine 18:30 – COVID antibodies

19:55 – NK Cells

25:00 – Antigen-specific antibodies outcompete natural antibodies

28:51 – Highly-infectious strain

31:01 – Vaccine resistance in COVID pandemic

31:51 – More on immunological escape

32:59 – Geert Vanden Bossche’s thoughts on COVID vaccination

Geert Vanden Bossche PhD, is an internationally recognised vaccine developer having worked as the head of the Vaccine Development Office at the German Centre for Infection Research. Coordinated Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation’s Ebola Vaccine Program and contributed to the implementation of an integrated vaccine work plan in collaboration with Global Health Partners (WHO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CDC, UNICEF), regulators (FDA) and vaccine manufacturers to enable timely deployment or stockpiling of Ebola vaccine candidates. Sharing his perspective on mass vaccination in COVID-19.

My thanks to Gold v Fiat for sending this along.

These are comments on a discussion of a new “vaccine” created to deal with Covid found at Instapundit. Lots of money to be made by some of the most unscrupulous people ever landed upon the body politic.

For a virus for which has a “survivability rate” well in excess of 99%, and for younger and healthier persons, approaching 100%, the calculations need to be on relative risk reduction. That means for me, nearly 70, the RRR is well less than 1%. For example, if my infection fatality risk is 1% and the effectiveness of reducing my infection fatality risk is 67% (estimate for J&J by Lancet) then my relative risk reduction is 0.66. Why would I want to assume the risk of an unproven and, based on news reports, potentially risky vaccine (not a vaccine but that’s for another discussion) and take on a risk of adverse affects up to and including death, for a miniscule – and possibly non-existant – benefit? It’s not about medicine. We’re now in the sociological control realm.

Although the mRNA technique is still relatively novel, the vax problems with clotting and heart damage, etc, don’t seem to mRNA related as much as spike protein related (knock on wood), as Astra Seneca and J&J have had similar problems. So before rushing to Novovax, does it target the spike protein by introducing it too. I still say w Pfizer and Moderna, apart from younger people and COVID survivors just not getting vaccinated, dropping the 2nd dose would sidestep most of the horrible reactions, usually triggered by the provocation of the 2nd dose. But none of the goddam “authorities” are even acknowledging that. Rather a few more people die here or there than risk their presumed aura of technocratic infallibility. F*ck ’em all.

NovaVax is “more traditional” only in that it doesn’t cause your own cells to produce the spike protein, which all three existing vaccines do (including the JNJ vaccine). The NovaVax vaccine itself causes the immune system to respond. The NovaVax COVID vaccine is a two-injection (21 days apart) vaccine. OK, so what’s in the NovaVax vaccine? The NovaVax NVX-CoV2373 vaccine is made up of protein sub-units from the SARS-CoV-2 virus already attached to a carrier. The proteins were developed using NovaVax’s recombinant nanoparticle technology. Or, if you’d like more specific information: “We have developed a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine constructed from the full–length, wild-type SARS–CoV-2 spike glycoprotein (GenBank gene sequence MN908947, nucleotides 21563–25384) optimized for the baculovirus-Spodoptera frugiperda (Sf9) insect cell expression system.” The NovaVax “Matrix-M” nanoparticle adjuvant technology is a significant part of how this vaccine achieves its efficacy. The Matrix-M technology will be seen in several other vaccine offerings that NovaVax is bringing to market: A “traditional” vaccine, it is not.

It is different in how it causes the immune system to react. But Dr. Malone was quite indistinct in his description of what he meant by “traditional.” It isn’t a killed/modified/live virus vaccine, which is the vaccine technology that so many people here at IP define as the only technology that can be called “vaccine.”

I’d just like the option NOT TO TAKE A VACCINE FOR A COMMON COLD. Is that really too much to ask?

If you don’t like the mRNA tech, NovaVax looks about the same and is just a protein plus adjuvant (immune boost), similar tech but different adjuvant to the Prevnar pneumonia vaccine.