A June (2021) article by Steve Kirsch at OneDayMD.com (who’s that?) is critical of NIH and WHO COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Steve argues, and I must say fairly persuasively, that early treatment should include ivermectin and fluvoxamine. Parts of the world don’t have time to wait for results of large randomized double-blind controlled trials of these drugs. RTWT and decide for yourself if Steve’s right. Warning: It’s a long article but worth it if you’re a healthcare professional.
Who is Steve Kirsch? In his article, Steve mentions that he’s an MIT-trained engineer. From OneDayMD.com:
She’s at little risk of serious illness if she’s generally healthy, so why take the risk of experimental vaccination?
From KTLA Channel 5:
Booster shots will likely be necessary as antibodies from both COVID-19 vaccines and infections wane at the same rate, according to a new UCLA study published Wednesday.
The study published in ACS Nano looked at the two-dose Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, finding that after the second jab, antibody levels decreased an average of 90% within 85 days. That’s the same relatively rapid antibody loss that comes after a natural infection, according to the study.
Senior author of the study, Dr. Otto Yang, said that while more research is needed on the response of the immune system’s long-lasting “memory” T cells to the vaccines, the sharp drop in antibodies suggests that booster vaccinations will likely be needed to maintain protection against the potentially deadly virus.
There has been evidence that immunity from the mRNA vaccines doesn’t just depend on antibodies that dwindle over time, with some experts saying booster shots may only be needed every few years, the Associated Press reported.
“Why can’t we discuss all the options? Why can’t I get ivermection or hydroxychloroquine if my doctor prescribes it? Why are politicians so intimately involved with this disease?”
The social media monopolists (e.g., Twitter, YouTube, Facebook) and mainstream media are censoring news about the coronavirus pandemic that doesn’t fit the approved narrative. Why are they so afraid of open discussion and freedom of speech? You’d almost think they’re trying to hide something. For your consideration, an article excerpt from American Greatness:
In an extraordinary interview last week, Dr. Peter McCullough, an American professor of Medicine and Vice Chief of Internal Medicine at Baylor University, declared that the world has been subjected to a form of bioterrorism, and that the suppression of early treatments for COVID-19—such as hydroxychloroquine—“was tightly linked to the development of a vaccine.”
Dr. McCullough made the explosive comments during a webinar on June 11, with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, a German trial lawyer, who believes the pandemic was planned, and is “a crime against humanity.”
McCullough said he believes the bioterrorism has come in two stages—the first wave being the rollout of the coronavirus, and the second, the rollout of the dangerous vaccines, which he said may already be responsible for the deaths of up to 50,000 Americans.
Dr. McCullough practices internal medicine and cardiology, is the editor of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, senior editor of the American Journal of Cardiology, editor of the textbook Cardiorenal Medicine, and president of the Cardiorenal Society.
I watched the video in the link above, and Dr McCullough seems like an honest, compassionate, ernest fellow. It doesn’t bother me that he’s a cardiologist. I’m sure his IQ’s higher than mine. Is he right? I don’t know.
Anonymous “PhD researchers and scientists” have attempted to collate all the available studies of various proposed early treatments and preventatives for COVID-19 at c19early.com. Why anonymous? From the website’s FAQs: “We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor. You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. For examples of why we can’t be more specific search for “raoult death threats” or “simone gold fired”. We have little interest in adding to our publication lists, being in the news, or being on TV (we have done all of these things before but feel there are more important things in life now).”
The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC Alliance) published their own home-based treatment and prevention protocols. FLCCC is composed of various medical school professors and other physicians, the most famous of whom is probably Dr. Paul E. Marik, Professor of Medicine and Chief of the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at the Eastern Virginia Medical School in Norfolk, Virginia. FLCCC also produced a hospital treatment protocol called MATH+. MATH is methylprednisolone (a corticosteroid), ascorbic acid (vitamin C), thiamine, and heparin, + others (ivermectin was the last major addition). The MATH major components are all “off patent” and relatively cheap. What motivates the FLCCC docs? I don’t see any money in it. A quest for fame? I tend to think they’re trying to do what’s best for the patients who have an illness we didn’t know much about. Dr Gorski would probably call them grifters.
I considered the evidence in favor of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the early months of the pandemic, and was not favorably impressed. Now, after 18 months, do we have good clinical studies that have considered it for prevention or early treatment? I don’t know since I haven’t looked lately. Both HCG and ivermectin are “off patent” so the research won’t be paid for by a pharmaceutical company; it would have to be funded by an un-corrupt government that cares about its citizens.
Compared to HCQ, I’m more favorably predisposed toward ivermectin.
Most community-based non-research physicians working full-time in the trenches, like me, don’t have the time or resources (or intelligence and skepticism?) to figure out the best way to prevent and treat COVID-19. We tend to depend on authoritative sources to teach us. The authorities have disappointed us too many times with this illness, whether through ignorance, corruption, or ineptitude. There have been too many suspicious occurrences. For instance:
If the vaccines are so effective, why do the vaccinated still need to wear a mask?
Why did some politicians, bureaucrats, and pharmacies proscribe the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, even early-on before we had much data?
Why do social media monopolists and the mainstream media censor and de-platform voices who question the official narrative?
If this disease was so deadly, why did contact-tracing fall by the wayside so soon?
Why did NY governor Cuomo send sick patients back to nursing homes, infecting the high-risk population there?
Why didn’t the CDC understand the adverse effects of the lockdowns, which ended up not saving lives?
Why are health authorities recommending the experimental coronavirus vaccines for healthy people aged 12 to 55 when we know the risks of the virus are low for that population?
By what authority did federal and state governments violate civil rights and shut down and destroy thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of small businesses?
Why did the general public allow themselves to be fear-stricken by the mainstream media?
How does the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) have authority to set a moratorium on evictions, rent payments, and mortgage payments?
The degree of censorship and de-platforming we’ve seen with this illness are unprecedented, adding fuel to the fire of conspiracy theorists.
With luck, we’re in the last days of the pandemic now. The virus may well become endemic at low or seasonally high levels, like the flu and head colds. There will undoubtedly be other pandemics in the future. Let’s learn as much as we can from this one to mitigate the effects of the next.
…at least in terms of deaths, according to researchers at the University of Southern California and the RAND Corporation. Lockdowns are also referred to as shelter-in-place orders, which were implemented with the mistaken idea they would reduce deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic. Note that viruses can kill, but so can lockdowns via social isolation, loss of jobs/income, delayed or no treatment for non-virus illness, etc. The study at hand looked data generated by 43 countries and all U.S. states.
Are you tired of this pic yet?
“…the implementation of shelter-in-place policies [SIP] does not appear to have met the aim of reducing excess mortality [deaths]. There are several potential explanations for this finding. First, it is possible that SIP policies do not slow COVID-19 transmission. As discussed earlier, prior studies find only a modest effect of SIP policies on mobility. A potential reason for the modest impact on mobility may be that individuals change behavior to avoid COVID-19 risk even in the absence of SIP policies. It is also unclear whether modest reductions in mobility could slow the spread of an airborne pathogen. Second, it is possible that SIP policies increased deaths of despair due to economic and social isolation effects of SIP policies. Recent estimates in the U.S between March and August 2020 show that drug overdoses, homicides, and unintentional injuries increased in 2020, while suicides declined. Third, existing studies suggest that SIP policies led to a reduction in non-COVID-19 health care, which might have contributed to an increase in non-COVID-19 deaths. For example, one study in the United Kingdom predicts that there will be approximately an additional 3,000 deaths within five years due to a delay in diagnostics because of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
The Last American Vagabond posted an interview with what appears to be a well-qualified Canadian pathologist who is very wary of the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19. Essentially he says that we don’t know if they’re adequately safe, especially for women of child-bearing age, pregnant women, and young folks. Dr Hodkinson reminds us that the survival rate for COVID-19 is generally very high, so why take chances with a vaccine of dubious safety.
Look, I don’t know for sure whether hydroxychloroquine is effective for prevention, early treatment, or late treatment of COVID-19. If you’re interested in the clinical studies regarding this issue, here’s a list of pertinent articles. I have no idea if the articles are comprehensive or cherry-picked. The authors of the list wish to remain anonymous, citing concern about death threats and loss of jobs.
I considered the few clinical studies available in Spring 2020 and was not impressed with the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. The hospital where I work may not let me prescribe hydroxychloroquine even if I wanted to. I recently admitted a patient who needed the drug for a non-COVID diagnosis and the ordering software would not cooperate, which is very unusual. I had to go through the hospital pharmacist; the patient got the drug.
I do think it’s highly suspicious for politicians and others to second-guess and supersede the judgment of physicians. This, plus censorship and deplatforming by social media companies of folks who don’t toe the line of the authorities, adds fuel to the fire of conspiracy theorists. In my decades of medical pracitce, I’ve never seen anything like it.
We’ve seen enough government screw-ups and lies recently and over the years that you should always question the official narrative.
From the same authors of the first list, here’s their list of ivermectin articles. The also consider zinc, vitamin C, remdesivir, and several other therapies for COVID-19.
Here’s an assignment for an energetic investigative journalist. Find out who’s making money, and how much, on the development and distribution of the coronavirus vaccines.
Posted onMay 11, 2021|Comments Off on Lack of Related Coronavirus Antibodies Linked to Severe Illness from COVID-19
Antibodies against human coronavirus OC43 help suppress COVID-19
My colleagues and I often wonder why we see otherwise healthy 35- to 50-year-olds come into the hospital pretty sick with COVID-19. After all, isn’t it the 65 and older crowd with multiple chronic illnesses the ones that develop critical COVID-19? A recent study provides at least a partial explanation why some folks get much sicker than others.
First off, note that 30-40% of head colds are caused by coronaviruses. Most of us get one or two colds a year. SARS-CoV-2 is the particular coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Another human coronavirus, called OC43, commonly causes infection, which leads to antibody production. It turns out that these antibodies help protect us from severe disease caused by the COVID-19 coronavirus. Some of these otherwise healthy but now critically ill middle-aged COVID-19 patients just don’t have antibodies to OC 43. So SARS-CoV-2 spreads through them more virulently.
After COVID-19 emerged on U.S shores, providers began reviewing the emerging basic science, translational, and clinical data to identify potentially effective treatment options. In addition, a multitude of both novel and repurposed therapeutic agents were used empirically and studied within clinical trials.
Areas of Uncertainty:
The majority of trialed agents have failed to provide reproducible, definitive proof of efficacy in reducing the mortality of COVID-19 with the exception of corticosteroids in moderate to severe disease. Recently, evidence has emerged that the oral antiparasitic agent ivermectin exhibits numerous antiviral and anti-inflammatory mechanisms with trial results reporting significant outcome benefits. Given some have not passed peer review, several expert groups including Unitaid/World Health Organization have undertaken a systematic global effort to contact all active trial investigators to rapidly gather the data needed to grade and perform meta-analyses.
Data Sources:
Data were sourced from published peer-reviewed studies, manuscripts posted to preprint servers, expert meta-analyses, and numerous epidemiological analyses of regions with ivermectin distribution campaigns.
Therapeutic Advances:
A large majority of randomized and observational controlled trials of ivermectin are reporting repeated, large magnitude improvements in clinical outcomes. Numerous prophylaxis trials demonstrate that regular ivermectin use leads to large reductions in transmission. Multiple, large “natural experiments” occurred in regions that initiated “ivermectin distribution” campaigns followed by tight, reproducible, temporally associated decreases in case counts and case fatality rates compared with nearby regions without such campaigns.
Conclusions:
Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.
Parker here again. My understanding of Emergency Use Authorization, which applies to all COVID vaccines used in the U.S. today, is that they are authorized only if there are no other proven effective treatments available. In which case, the Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers may want to suppress the study at hand.
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: There is no consensus on the dose of ivermectin for the patients I see, i.e, those sick enough to be in the hospital. Single dose of 0.4 to 0.15 mg/kg? Subsequent dose seven days later “if needed”? I see multiple different dosing regimens in the article.
She’s at little risk of serious illness if she’s generally healthy
The problem is that the virus mutates over time, perhaps to the point that the vaccinated immune system doesn’t recognize the new mutant. Learn the word endemic; you’ll be hearing it more often.
From The Guardian in March, 2021:
The planet could have a year or less before first-generation Covid-19 vaccines are ineffective and modified formulations are needed, according to a survey of epidemiologists, virologists and infectious disease specialists.
* * *
The grim forecast of a year or less comes from two-thirds of respondents, according to the People’s Vaccine Alliance, a coalition of organisations including Amnesty International, Oxfam, and UNAIDS, who carried out the survey of 77 scientists from 28 countries. Nearly one-third of the respondents indicated that the time-frame was likely nine months or less.
Another issue is that we don’t know how long the vaccine’s effectiveness lasts. Pfizer’s CEO recently suggested a booster by be needed as soon as six months after the last shot.
When the opportunity to expand the government’s control in the name of Public Health or Safety or Your Continued Well-being or Not Overwhelming the Healthcare System or whatever comes along next, suddenly your having fun is not nearly as important as obeying the commands of the petty little fucks that enjoy telling other people what to do. Fun is “non-essential,” you see. Your obedience isessential. And that is why your globogym is now closed.
Depending on where you live and how much cash the corporation has on hand, it may be closed for a long time, or it might be closed permanently. Because it is viewed as Recreation, and is therefore “non-essential,” the petty fucks in charge feel no responsibility to ensure your fun – as if the kind of innocent fun a person has is their decision to make.
And the government has already described their ideas about exercise. I wrote an article about this several years ago that shows you how completely divorced from our particular reality these fools are. It could be argued that their version of exercise is so utterly wasteful of time that you would in fact be better off locked in your house. And that is what they intend to do.
So it’s time for a paradigm shift. Training – the process we employ to intentionally increase our strength and our health over time – is fundamentally different than stopping by the club on the way home, catching a pump, catching a sweat, catching a shower, and finishing the trip having had fun. Training may actually be no fun at all. The results of training are enjoyable, but the process is hard, and it requires commitment, patience, and eventually the courage to do things you’re not sure you can do. It is an educational process, of teaching both your body and mind to be stronger.
Advanced Mediterranean Diet 