Oh Jed you really do just love the Pharma lies don't you. Nothing could be further from the truth.
First off there have been no deaths ever from overdosing with it, a woman who took x100 times the recommended dosage was fine after 4 days in hospital. The negative effects from it are rare, mild and mostly related either to insane dosing (which is a result of it not being prescribed by doctors) and it killing parasites that release toxins. But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive but to do it justice I'll do that in another post, but the fact remains if there is no harm (except to parasites and apparently Cancer) then why oppose people trying it? Why are they making up lies about it flooding emergency rooms when the hospital has never treated anyone for it ever? Why are they making up fake studies that don't exist? Why are they pushing an experimental that contains the harmful spike protein that has little beneficial effect and obvious harm? Why are trying to make it harder to enter accounts of Vaccine harm in the VARS database? They have been caught making it intentionally hard with slow loading and timeouts in the Canadian system. All for a Virus that finally it has been admitted Faucci lied about, & was involved with making, the evidence for it being gain of function research. On Fri, 10 Sept 2021 at 09:14, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jürg Wyttenbach <ju...@datamart.ch> wrote: > >> We no longer need any Ivermectin studies as we have real data from >> 1'000'000'000 people that now no longer worry CoV-19. >> > Leading Indian epidemiologists say there is no evidence that ivermectin > had an effect in India. They were interviewed in the New York Times and > elsewhere. Epidemiologists are better at judging these things than doctors > in the field. Doctors have often been mistaken about the efficacy of a > drug. The epidemiologists say the curves of the recent outbreaks indicate > the epidemic abated because of natural herd immunity in the hard hit > districts. The doctors took antibody tests from a sample of the population. > They found that the infection rate was far higher than official statistics > showed. It was high enough to achieve local herd immunity. Local herd > immunity is why there are multiple waves of an epidemic in different cities > over time. > > Double-blind tests of ivermectin show either a very small effect, or none > at all, so it is not possible it has had a giant effect on the Indian > population. The doctors in the field are not more skilled in > administering the drug than the doctors doing the double-blind tests. The > doctors in the field have described their methods, dosage and so on. > Clinical double-blind tests did not replicate their claims. When a drug has > a small effect at best, the way ivermectin does, the only way to confirm > that effect is with a double blind test. > >
