| Courtesy of The Walking Unvaxed: |
[NationalFile] [John O’Looney, a British funeral director] says that he repeatedly saw people labeled as COVID deaths, even if they died of natural causes, of terminal cancer, or being hit by a car. All COVID deaths.He says it is his belief that thousands of elderly people in the U.K. were euthanized with the sedative Midazolam and then labeled as coronavirus deaths. But he also says that overall in 2020, the death rate compared to past years was about the same, or even down.
He did see a huge explosion in deaths, but it wasn’t in 2020. It was in early 2021, and it happened almost the moment mass vaccination began. Then, from April through the summer, he says it was one of the quietest periods he’d ever seen. There weren’t enough deaths to keep the lights on.
Now, he says the death rate is rising again. And the people coming in, he says, are from all age ranges. They aren’t just old people. The causes of death, he says, are heart attacks, blood clots, strokes, and multiple organ failure. Almost all these people, he says, are vaccinated. He saw a man, a barber, who died at age 23 just after getting the second shot.
Blockbuster: NIH Study Concludes Ivermectin Works!
[MAGA Institute] Because we’ve come to expect nothing but cover-ups and anti-science diktats from NIH and its subdivisions, NIH has published on its website and article in the July-August issue of the American Journal of Therapeutics that concluded that "large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin."The study authors continued, "Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally."
| Overexcited headline. The actual journal article can be found here. Here are key bits from the abstract of this review of previous published research: |
We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES:
Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average risk ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.73; n = 2438; I2 = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence). This result was confirmed in a trial sequential analysis using the same DerSimonian–Laird method that underpinned the unadjusted analysis. This was also robust against a trial sequential analysis using the Biggerstaff–Tweedie method. Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86% (95% confidence interval 79%–91%). Secondary outcomes provided less certain evidence. Low-certainty evidence suggested that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for “need for mechanical ventilation,” whereas effect estimates for “improvement” and “deterioration” clearly favored ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare among treatment trials and evidence of no difference was assessed as low certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.
CONCLUSIONS:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
Courtesy of Bobby:
Dr. Fauci's NIH approved hydroxychloroquine 15 years ago to cure coronaviruses[Tech Startups] SARS-CoV-2 is one of the seven coronaviruses identified by CDC. The sixth and the seventh of the coronaviruses are: SARS-CoV (the beta coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS) and SARS-CoV-2 (the novel coronavirus that causes coronavirus disease 2019, or COVID-19) respectively.
Why all of a sudden hydroxychloroquine is considered an unsafe drug? After all, hydroxychloroquine is still being used to treat lupus patients. To answer this question, we have to back to the month of March 2020. It all started back after President Trump threw his support for the drug and opened the floodgates of criticisms after he touted the drug as a potential game-changer. Many in the mainstream media accusing him of promoting an unsafe drug. When asked about President Trump's tweet, Dr. Anthony Fauci said: "the anecdotal reports … may be true," and that the President's message of "hope for people" with #coronavirus is "not unreasonable" & "not incompatible" with total confirmation."So after a cautious - scientific, even - initial response to Trump's statement, Fauci subsequently went all in with the anti-Trumpers and the media.
According to NIH own study conducted in 2005 titled, "Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread," chloroquine, a sister drug to hydroxychloroquine, was found to be "effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture."
From the NIH study -
Results
We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.
Seems like some researchers might've built on the 2005 work. If they could get funding.
Related: The 2005 NIH Study.
Norway Opts Out of the Pandemic Club
[Epoch Times] Norway will end all COVID-19-related restrictions starting Saturday, Sept. 25, the government announced, joining a growing list of countries and states that have removed pandemic curbs."It is 561 days since we introduced the toughest measures in Norway in peacetime ... Now the time has come to return to a normal daily life," Prime Minister Erna Solberg told a news conference on Friday.
The virus can now be considered as one of several respiratory illnesses with seasonal variation, said Geir Bukholm, the assistant director for the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, according to local media. In Norway, COVID-19 has been classified as a generally dangerous disease, but the official classification could change soon, he said.
"This is because the vast majority of those at risk are protected," Bukholm said, referring to the country’s vaccination campaign. According to the Norwegian Institute for Public Health, about 67 percent of the population is fully vaccinated.
However, there are some travel restriction.
Nearby Sweden earlier this month announced it will remove most of its COVID-19 restrictions.
An announcement from the Swedish government on Sept. 7 said that restrictions on public venues such as restaurants, theaters, and stadiums will be removed on Sept. 29.
Courtesy of Vespasian Ebboting9735:
Congressman ‐ Hospitals are covering up Vaccine Injury reports to VAERS…[CitizenFreePress] Congressman Dr. Paul Gosar (AZ) has sent a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] demanding a "full review of all HHS health care systems nationally to ensure full compliance with vaccine injury reporting laws including reporting all adverse events occurring after the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine."
| Finally, one from India: |
[OneIndia] The National Task Force on Covid 19 has dropped Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine from revised "clinical guidance for management of adult COVID-19 patients".
The studies showed no clarity with relation to mortality benefit, no effect on length of stay, clinical recovery in case of Ivermectin medicine.
Meanwhile, the WHO panel also recommends against the use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19 regardless of disease severity.
The latest guidance adds to previous recommendations for the use of interleukin-6 receptor blockers and systemic corticosteroids for patients with severe or critical COVID-19.
The WHO Guideline Development Group (GDG) panel recommends treatment combining casirivimab and imdevimab for two specific groups of patients with COVID-19.
The first recommendation is based on new evidence from three trials that have not yet been peer reviewed.
The trial show that casirivimab and imdevimab may reduce the risk of hospitalisation and duration of symptoms in those at highest risk of severe disease, such as unvaccinated, older, or immunosuppressed patients.
The second recommendation is based on data from another trial which shows that the two antibodies probably reduce deaths and the need for mechanical ventilation in seronegative patients.
This study showed that treatment with Casirivimab and imdevimab led 49 fewer deaths per 1,000 in the severely ill and 87 fewer deaths in the critically ill patients.
For all other COVID-19 patients, any benefits of this antibody treatment are unlikely to be meaningful, the panel noted.
Casirivimab and imdevimab are monoclonal antibodies that when used together bind to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, neutralising the virus's ability to infect cells.