Jewish-American warns: Vaccines are the new gas chambers and 150 million Americans are walking right in, spurred by media-hyped Covid-19 fear.
Now The Issue Is All Those Vaccinated Are Highly Contagious To Anyone Near Them. The UK People Burned Thousands of Head of Cattle in the 90’s in the UK Why? Because Of High Transmissabilty Of The Wasting Disease.
FDA admits covid injections from Pfizer, Moderna cause heart inflammation, but this is just the Tip of the Iceberg.
Solution At Bottom Of Post!
The Spike Protein that the Vaccinated are Shedding are Prions. (Mad Cow Disease for the Laymen)
Prion diseases or transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) are a family of rare progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect both humans and animals. They are distinguished by long incubation periods, characteristic spongiform changes associated with neuronal loss, and a failure to induce inflammatory response.
The causative agents of TSEs are believed to be prions. The term “prions” refers to abnormal, pathogenic agents that are transmissible and are able to induce abnormal folding of specific normal cellular proteins called prion proteins that are found most abundantly in the brain. The functions of these normal prion proteins are still not completely understood. The abnormal folding of the prion proteins leads to brain damage and the characteristic signs and symptoms of the disease. Prion diseases are usually rapidly progressive and always fatal.
If you think these Psychopaths stop here your sadly mistaken as they also did this: Coronavirus vaccines contain aborted human fetal tissue – right on the label
The Deadly Aspect Of The COVID Vaccine And How It Kills.
Dr. Lee Merritt and Mike Adams ask: Are covid spike proteins being RELEASED onto cities?
Dr. Lee Merritt joins the Health Ranger to discuss vaccine MIND CONTROL and medical MADNESS
HIGHLIGHTS – Dr. Carrie Madej on the covid vaccine deception
Dr. Carrie Madej tells the Health Ranger that covid vaccines use exotic nanotech for tracking and bio-control
Dr. Christiane Northrup gives new details on covid vaccine shedding / transmission, especially among women
Dr. Judy Mikovits warns spike protein “vaccine” injections may kill 50 million Americans
Identified Prion Diseases from the CDC. Click the Link at the Bottom to view on the CDC wesite.
Listed below are the prion diseases identified to date. CDC does not currently offer information on every prion disease listed below.
- Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD)
- Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD)
- Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker Syndrome
- Fatal Familial Insomnia
- Kuru
- Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)
- Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)
- Scrapie
- Transmissible mink encephalopathy
- Feline spongiform encephalopathy
- Ungulate spongiform encephalopathy
CDC Source: https://www.cdc.gov/prions/index.html
CJD (Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, Classic)
Classic CJD is a human prion disease. It is a neurodegenerative disorder with characteristic clinical and diagnostic features.
vCJD (Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease)
vCJD has a different clinical and pathologic characteristics from classic CJD. Each disease also has a particular genetic profile of the prion protein gene.
BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy)
BSE also known as Mad Cow Disease is a progressive neurological disorder of cattle that results from infection by an unusual transmissible agent called a prion.
CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease)
CWD is a prion disease that affects deer, elk and moose in some areas of North America, South Korea and Norway. In North America, it has been found in both free-ranging and captive deer populations.
- The Public Health Impact of Prion Diseases [PDF – 191KB]
Belay E., Schonberger L. Annu. Rev. Public Health2005;26:191-212 - Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies in Humans [PDF – 183KB]
Belay E. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1999;53:283-314 - WHO infection control guidelines for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Report of a WHO consultation, Geneva, Switzerland, 23-26 March 1999
For Questions or Comments on Prions Email CDC-INFO
BSE/TSE Action Plan of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has four major components:
- Surveillance for human disease is primarily the responsibility of CDC.
- Protection is primarily the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
- Research is primarily the responsibility of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
- Oversight is primarily the responsibility of the Office of the Secretary of DHHS.
Vaccine Hesitancy by County Link – Those Who Will Survive!
Jun 04, 2021 – Jun 10, 2021
This map highlights areas of the US that would benefit most from increased vaccination acceptance. This view shows, by county, the % of survey respondents who answered “Yes, probably,” “No, probably not,” or “No, definitely not” when asked “If a vaccine to prevent COVID-19 were offered to you today, would you choose to get vaccinated?”
Data source: US COVID-19 Symptom Survey (this research is based on survey results from Carnegie Mellon University’s Delphi Research Group with Facebook’s support)
Either their data shifts on the hour or they decicded it was better to tell the population it isn’t that bad and so go get your vaccine because your neghbors are doing it. The Image below was captured an hour after the first one. Less Red on the newest one.
United Kingdom BSE outbreak
|
A plaque memorializing those who died of vCJD.
|
|
| Location | United Kingdom |
|---|---|
| Type | Disease outbreak |
| Deaths | 177 |
| Inquiries | The BSE Inquiry |
The United Kingdom was afflicted with an outbreak of Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, also known as “mad cow disease”), and its human equivalent variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD), in the 1980s and 1990s. Over four million head of cattle were slaughtered in an effort to contain the outbreak, and 177 people died after contracting vCJD through eating infected beef. A political and public health crisis resulted, and British beef was banned from export to numerous countries around the world, with some bans remaining in place until as late as 2019.[1]
The outbreak is believed to have originated in the practice of supplementing protein in cattle feed by meat-and-bone meal (MBM), which used the remains of other animals. BSE is a disease involving infectious misfolded proteins known as prions in the nervous system; the remains of an infected animal could spread the disease to animals fed on such a diet.
Background[edit]
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) is a neurodegenerative disease of cattle caused by misfolded proteins known as prions. Symptoms include abnormal behaviour, trouble walking, weight loss, and eventual paralysis.[2] Prion diseases such as BSE are universally fatal; the time between infection and onset of symptoms is generally four to five years and time from onset of symptoms to death is typically weeks to months.[3]
At the time of the outbreak, cattle farming was the largest sector of British agriculture, comprising up to 38 per cent of the United Kingdom’s entire agricultural product, and was capable of providing the vast majority of domestic demand for beef and dairy.[4] This was due to policies enacted after World War II to reduce reliance on food imports and sustain rural areas, and strengthened after the United Kingdom’s 1973 entrance to the European Economic Area provided the Common Agricultural Policy and a larger export market for farmers.[5] The cattle industry had produced a breed of dairy cattle that had high milk yields when fed a high-protein diet.[6] Feeds derived from animal sources, such as meat-and-bone meal (MBM), had been used since the early 20th century and were found to increase milk yields more than those derived from non-animal sources such as soybeans.[7] That dairy herds were fed such feeds more than beef herds ultimately proved immaterial since most British beef came from cattle in dairy herds.[8]
British cattle are believed to have become infected in large numbers in the 1980s through the use of MBM, which contained the remains of other animals.[9] This included the remains of cattle which had spontaneously developed the disease as well as sheep infected with scrapie, a similar disease in sheep, while the inclusion of brain and spinal cord tissue in MBM increased the likelihood of infection.[10]
Timeline of outbreak[edit]
1980s: First cases of BSE in cattle[edit]
The earliest suspicions of BSE were on a farm in Sussex in December 1984,[11] and the earliest confirmed case was by a post-mortem examination of a cow from the same farm in September 1985, although it was not confirmed as such until June 1987.[12]
By November 1987, the British Ministry of Agriculture accepted it had a new disease on its hands.[13][14] In 1989, high-risk foodstuffs like offal were banned for human consumption and widespread fear about beef led many British consumers to stop purchasing it.[15]
1990–1994: Spread to other animals[edit]
A crucial basis for the government’s assurances that British beef was safe was the belief that BSE-infected meat products would not be able to infect other animals. This was founded on their experience with scrapie-infected sheep, which had proven unable to cause any illness in humans.[16][17]
However, scientists studying BSE were already questioning this assumption and, on 10 May 1990, it was widely reported that a Siamese cat named Max had become infected with BSE, providing the first confirmation outside the laboratory that BSE could in fact be transmitted between species through eating infected meat.[18] Despite this, the government maintained that British beef was safe and, later that month, the then-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, John Gummer, appeared on TV encouraging his daughter to eat a beef burger, and declared British beef to be ‘completely safe’.[19] Many more cats would go on to develop the disease, as would numerous other animals including at least one tiger in a UK zoo.[20]
Cases of the disease in cattle continued to rise despite bans on feeding offal to cows, and peaked with 100,000 confirmed cases in 1992-1993. In an attempt to stop the spread of the disease, a total of 4.4 million cattle were slaughtered during the outbreak.[15]
1994–1996: Spread to humans[edit]
In late 1994, a number of people began to show symptoms of a neurological disease similar to CJD, a fatal disorder that occurs naturally in a small percentage of people, though usually only later in life. This new form of the disease would go on to be identified as variant CJD (vCJD), occurring primarily in younger people and caused through eating BSE-infected meat.[21] The first known death from vCJD occurred on 21 May 1995, when the 19-year old Stephen Churchill died[21] although the UK government continued to emphasise the safety of British beef and, in September 1995, concluded that there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to link BSE and vCJD.[22] It was not until 20 March 1996 that Stephen Dorrell, the Secretary of State for Health announced that vCJD was caused by eating BSE-infected meat.[23]
177 people (as of June 2014) would go on to contract and die of the disease.[24][25]
Regulations and bans of British beef[edit]
When BSE was identified, the United States banned the importation of British cattle in 1989, and 499 cows who had been recently imported from the United Kingdom were destroyed. The United States slaughtered an additional 116 British cows in 1996.[26]
Between December 1997 and November 1999, the British government banned the sale of beef on the bone.[27]
A week after Dorrell’s announcement, on 27 March 1996, the European Union (EU) imposed a worldwide ban on exports of British beef.[27] The ban would go on to last for 10 years before it was finally lifted on 1 May 2006, although restrictions remained on British beef containing vertebral material and beef sold on the bone.[28] The ban, which led to much controversy in Parliament and to the incineration of over one million cattle from at least March 1996, resulted in trade controversies between the UK and other EU states, dubbed a “beef war” by media.[29] France continued to impose a ban on British beef illegally long after the European Court of Justice had ordered it to lift its blockade, although it has never paid any fine for doing so.[30]
The BSE inquiry[edit]
During the height of the crisis, as well as after cases began to decline, the UK government came under criticism for its response, and in particular for how slow it was to acknowledge the problem, to inform the public, and to take steps to deal with the outbreak.[31]
On 22 December 1997, an inquiry was announced in parliament to investigate the history of the outbreak and the actions taken in response. The inquiry was conducted by a committee consisting of Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, June Bridgeman, and Malcolm Ferguson-Smith. It provided its report in October 2000, and the report was published in full by Nick Brown, the secretary for agriculture at the time.[31]The inquiry report was critical of the government, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and Sir Donald Acheson the chief medical officer.[32]
Future risk[edit]
The original outbreak of vCJD only affected individuals with a particular genetic makeup; those who only make an M form of a particular protein. Studies of similar diseases in other parts of the world have shown that individuals with the M form tend to become ill quickly in a first wave, while individuals with the other, V form can be infected but asymptomatic for years or even decades.[33] This has led some researchers including Graham Jackson of the University College London to warn that there could be a second wave of vCJD infections years later.[33][34]
In late 2014, the first case was reported in an individual with the V form of the protein.[33]
Solution that Works for the Spike Protein. Nothing we know works to reverse DNA damage from the Vaccine.
COVID, Ivermectin and the Crime of the Century
Story at-a-glance
- Click Here To Be Taken To The Source Article: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/06/16/ivermectin-for-covid-19-infection.aspx
- Data clearly show ivermectin can prevent COVID-19 and when used early can keep patients from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease. It can even help critically ill patients recover
- Ivermectin has a long history of use as an antiparasitic, but its antiviral properties have been under investigation since 2012
- Studies have shown ivermectin inhibits replication of SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal influenza viruses, inhibits inflammation through several pathways, lowers viral load, protects against organ damage, prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure, speeds recovery and lowers risk of hospitalization and death in COVID-19 patients
- Doctors have been told not to use ivermectin as large controlled trials are still lacking. However, once you can see from clinical evidence that something is working, then conducting controlled trials becomes unethical, as you know you’re condemning the control group to poor outcomes or death. In fact, this is the exact argument vaccine makers now use to justify the elimination of control groups and giving everyone the vaccine
- The Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance recommends widespread use of ivermectin for all stages of COVID-19, including prevention
In the video above, DarkHorse podcast host Bret Weinstein Ph.D., interviews Dr. Pierre Kory about the importance of early treatment of COVID-19 and the shameful censoring of information about ivermectin, which has been shown to be very useful against this infection.
It’s no small irony then that YouTube deleted this interview, which is why I embedded a Bitchute version. How this interview could possibly be labeled as misinformation is a mystery, considering all they do is discuss published research. Not to mention, they’re both credentialed medical science experts.
Kory, a lung and ICU specialist and former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is the president and chief medical officer1 of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Another founding member of FLCCC is Dr. Paul Marik2 who, as noted by Kory, is the most-published intensive care specialist who is still practicing medicine and seeing patients.
Marik, known for having created an effective sepsis treatment protocol, was asked by a group of peers early on in the pandemic to help create a treatment protocol for COVID-19. The resulting collaboration led to the creation of the FLCCC. Each of the five founding members has treated critical illnesses for decades and, as Weinstein says, they are “unimpeachable. You couldn’t ask for better credentials. You couldn’t ask for a better publication record.”
Yet, despite stellar credentials and being on the frontlines treating hundreds of COVID-19 patients, they have been dismissed as “kooks on the fringe, making wild-eyed claims,” Weinstein says. How can that be? Initially, the FLCCC insisted, based on the evidence, that COVID-19 was a corticosteroid-dependent disease and that corticosteroids were a crucial part of effective treatment.
“I was actually invited to give Senate testimony back in May [2020] where I testified that it was critical to use corticosteroids; that lives are being lost [because we weren’t using it],” Kory says.
“As you might know, I got killed for that. We got killed for that. We were totally criticized for not having an evidence-base. [Yet] our reading of the evidence was that you had to use it. So that basically that’s how we came together, and that was the first components of our protocol.”
Ivermectin Suitable for All Treatment Stages
The FLCCC’s COVID-19 protocol was initially dubbed MATH+ (an acronym based on the key components of the treatment), but after several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+3 while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+,4 due to the addition of ivermectin.
The two protocols — I-MASK+5 and I-MATH+6 — are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages. The clinical and scientific rationale for the I-MATH+ hospital protocol has also been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine7 in mid-December 2020.
Since those early days, the FLCCC has been vindicated and corticosteroids, as well as blood thinners, are now part of the standard of care for COVID-19 in many places. The same cannot be said for the remainder of the protocols, however, including the use of ivermectin, which continues to be suppressed, despite robust clinical evidence supporting its use in all phases of COVID-19.8,9 As noted by the FLCCC:10
“The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.
… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.”
Kory has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 202011 and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel in January 2021.12
A Disease of Phases
As noted by Kory, they rather quickly realized that COVID-19 was a disease with very specific phases, and that successful treatment depended on the phase the patient was currently in. It starts out as a general viral syndrome, much like a cold or flu. Most patients recover without incidence. However, in a subset of patients, things take a turn for the worse after Day 5. Their oxygen level starts dropping and lung inflammation sets in.
“We now know that it’s a cell called a macrophage that gets activated and attacks the lungs,” Kory explains. “So, you have this sort of immune response that is attacking the lungs and the lungs start to fail … So, it’s predominantly a severe lung disease …
We knew relatively early on that by the time they get to the ICU … there’s not a lot of viral replication on going on. In fact, you can’t culture a virus after about Day 7 or 8. So, it’s actually a disease of inflammation, not viral invasion …
So, you didn’t have to go after the virus at that point, you had to actually check the inflammation … What we think triggers [the] inflammation is actually the viral debris. It’s the RNA that triggers this massive response. It’s not the virus. It’s actually the debris of the dead virus that does it.”
Kory notes that after having treated the first handful of patients, he realized that anticoagulants, blood thinners, were needed, as there was abnormal blood clotting going on in all of them. Yet for some reason the medical community was, again, told not to do it because there were no clinical trials supporting the use of anticoagulants for a viral illness.
“It was bizarre,” Kory says. “They were like, you can’t observe, you can’t make clinical reasoning, you can’t deduce, you need a trial before you do [anything] … Everyone talks about evidence-based. I’m like, what about experience-based medicine? I’ve been doing this for 30 years. Why can’t I do what my experience tells me to do? …
You couldn’t actually doctor. I felt like I was being handcuffed. I I’ve never seen that in my life before … I have the sense that doctors have been forcibly demoted from the position of scientific clinician to technician …
I’ve never been asked before to get advice from … desk jockeys. I mean, they’re not on the front lines … I’ve never been asked to do that before. I’ve always been asked to use the best extent of my experience and judgment and insight to best help the patient. That’s the oath I took …
Instead we’re in this situation where if we open our mouth and say the wrong word, suddenly there are warnings appended to what we’ve said. It’s insane. It’s limiting discussion, limiting choices, limiting approaches.”
Overwhelming Evidence for Ivermectin
Kory spends a significant portion of the 2 1/2-hour interview reviewing the evidence for using ivermectin. This drug has a long history of use as an antiparasitic. It’s been credited with virtually eradicating onchocerciasis (river blindness), a condition caused by a parasitic worm. The drug was originally made from a soil organism found in Japan. However, as early as 2012, researchers started looking at ivermectin’s antiviral properties.
In April 2020, an Australian group showed ivermectin eradicated all viruses studied in as little as 48 hours, at least in the petri dish. Due to the state of emergency the world was in, some countries, including Peru, decided to recommend ivermectin to their population. It was well-known that the medication was safe, so the risk of doing so was very low.
As was the trend, Peruvian officials were roundly criticized for using an “unproven” remedy, and shortly thereafter, they removed it from the national guidelines. Some states continued to give it out, however, and according to Kory, each ivermectin campaign resulted in a precipitous decline in cases and deaths.
Marik was the first in the group to really take notice of the remarkable consistency in the studies using ivermectin. Kory dove into the research right behind him, and came to the conclusion that there indeed was something special about this drug. The population-based evidence was also very strong.
With regard to calls for randomized controlled trials, Kory points out that once you can see from clinical evidence that something really is working, then conducting controlled trials becomes more or less unethical, as you know you’re condemning the control group to poor outcomes or death. In fact, this is the exact same argument vaccine makers now use to justify the elimination of control groups by giving everyone the vaccine.
“When I posted our preprint November 13 [2020], I literally thought the pandemic was over,” Kory says. “We showed the basic science level. We showed multiple clinical trials. We showed the epidemiologic effects.
Everything was there to show that this is an intervention on the par of vaccines that could literally extinguish the pandemic, and quickly. I thought at the beginning that it was as simple as putting the evidence out there … and what happened? Crickets! Nothing happened …
I cannot believe that this is occurring. Literally, people are dying because they don’t know about this medicine. Providers are being told not to use the medicine … And I’ve never studied a medicine which has more evidence than this …
You have dozens of randomized controlled trials conducted by interested and committed clinicians from oftentimes low and middle income countries around the world. And there’s no conflicts of interest. None of them is going to make a million dollars by finding out that ivermectin works in COVID. None of them have a conflict of interest.”
For example, studies have shown ivermectin:13
• Inhibits replication of many viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal influenza viruses — In “COVID-19: Antiparasitic Offers Treatment Hope,” I review data showing a single dose of ivermectin killed 99.8% of SARS-CoV-2 in 48 hours.
An observational study14 from Bangladesh, which looked at ivermectin as a pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 among health care workers, found only four of the 58 volunteers who took 12 mg of ivermectin once per month for four months developed mild COVID-19 symptoms between May and August 2020, compared to 44 of the 60 health care workers who had declined the medication
• Inhibits inflammation through several pathways
• Lowers viral load
• Protects against organ damage
• Prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure; speeds recovery and lowers risk of hospitalization and death in COVID-19 patients — The average reduction in mortality, based on 18 trials, is 75%.15 A WHO-sponsored review16 suggests ivermectin can reduce COVID-19 mortality by as much as 83%
Ivermectin Has Been Intentionally Suppressed
As noted by Weinstein, ivermectin appears to be intentionally suppressed. It’s simply not allowed to be a go-to remedy. The obvious question is why? Don’t they want to save lives? Isn’t that why we shut down the world?
“I would have these data arguments,” Kory says. “But it’s not about the data. There’s something else. There’s [something] out there that is just squashing, distorting, suppressing the efficacy of ivermectin, and its egregious.”
Indeed, as noted by Weinstein, it’s not even difficult to prove that ivermectin is being suppressed and censored. Censorship of certain COVID-related information, such as ivermectin, is written into the community guidelines. You’re not allowed to talk about it. If you do, your post will be censored, shadow-banned or taken down. If you persist, your entire account will be taken down.
Mexico’s Experience With Ivermectin
Another population-based experiment that demonstrates ivermectin’s real-world usefulness occurred in Mexico. Kory explains:
“Mexico did something which I think is the model for the world. I think, on a public health level, it’s what every country in the world should adopt, at a minimum. They [had a] clinicians committee.
They actually got expert clinicians [and] they gave them a seat at the table at the public health level. It’s called IMSS, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. That’s the agency which controls a good portion of their healthcare infrastructure, mostly outpatient, I think …
In December, hospitals were filling. It was a crisis almost like in India. They decided to deploy ivermectin using a test and treat strategy. Basically, anyone who appeared at the testing booths, if you tested positive, you were given ivermectin at a reasonably low dose … 12 milligrams … and only two days’ worth. They got four pills [at 3 mg each].
And when they did that, you saw across Mexico this precipitous decline in deaths and hospitalizations. And, if you look a few months later, right now — and this is publicly available data — look at the occupancy of beds in hospitals in Mexico, throughout the entire country, we’re talking about 25% to 30% occupancy.
There’s nobody in the hospitals in Mexico. They’ve basically decimated COVID in that country by using a test and treat strategy … Those were real public health leaders. They made a risk-benefit decision. They used their clinical judgment and expertise to have the right people at the table.”
As noted by Kory, the IMSS was attacked by the federal health minister, but they fought back, and laid out the evidence supporting their decision. This included studies showing a 50% to 75% reduction in hospitalizations using just that four-pill regimen.
As for the FLCCC, they recommend dosages between 0.2 mg and 0.4 mg per kilogram when taken at first signs of mild symptoms. For mild disease, they recommend continuing the drug for five days. For moderate disease, of if you start taking it late, they recommend continuing until you’re recovered.
The in-hospital protocol involves higher doses. Keep in mind, however, that the FLCCC protocols include several other remedies, not just ivermectin, so be sure to review the latest guidance.17,18
Some regions in India have also used ivermectin. Kory believes the minister of Goa made some of the boldest moves in the world with regard to ivermectin, recommending all adults over the age of 18 to take ivermectin for five days, as a preventive. Uttar Pradesh also gave it out, while other states, such as Tamil Nadu, outlawed it. Here too, population-based data suggest ivermectin is tightly correlated with a decline in hospitalizations and deaths.
Where You Can Learn More
While ivermectin certainly appears to be a useful strategy, which is why I am covering it, it is not among my primary recommendations. In terms of prevention, I believe your best bet is to optimize your vitamin D level, as your body needs vitamin D for a wide variety of functions, including a healthy immune response.
What’s more, although ivermectin is a relatively safe drug, it can still have side effects. Vitamin D, on the other hand, is something your body absolutely requires for optimal health, which is why I would encourage you to focus on vitamin D first.
As for early treatment, I recommend nebulized hydrogen peroxide treatment,19,20 which is inexpensive, highly effective and completely harmless when you’re using the low (0.04% to 0.1%) peroxide concentration recommended.
All of that said, ivermectin and several other remedies certainly have a place, and it’s good to know they exist and work well. On the whole, there’s really no reason to remain panicked about COVID-19. If you want to learn more about ivermectin, there are several places where you can do that, including the following:
• April 24 through 25, 2021, Dr. Tess Lawrie, director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd.,21 hosted the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference online.22
Twelve medical experts23 from around the world — including Kory — shared their knowledge, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data. All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org24
• An easy-to-read and print one-page summary of the clinical trial evidence for ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website25
• A more comprehensive, 31-page review of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology26
• The FLCCC website also has a helpful FAQ section where Kory and Marik answer common questions about the drug and its recommended use27
• A listing of all ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com28
As noted by Lawrie during her closing address at the 2021 International Ivermectin for COVID Conference:29
“The story of Ivermectin has highlighted that we are at a remarkable juncture in medical history. The tools that we use to heal and our connection with our patients are being systematically undermined by relentless disinformation stemming from corporate greed.
The story of Ivermectin shows that we as a public have misplaced our trust in the authorities and have underestimated the extent to which money and power corrupts.
Had Ivermectin being employed in 2020 when medical colleagues around the world first alerted the authorities to its efficacy, millions of lives could have been saved, and the pandemic with all its associated suffering and loss brought to a rapid and timely end …
With politicians and other nonmedical individuals dictating to us what we are allowed to prescribe to the ill, we as doctors, have been put in a position such that our ability to uphold the Hippocratic oath is under attack.
At this fateful juncture, we must therefore choose, will we continue to be held ransom by corrupt organizations, health authorities, Big Pharma, and billionaire sociopaths, or will we do our moral and professional duty to do no harm and always do the best for those in our care?
The latter includes urgently reaching out to colleagues around the world to discuss which of our tried and tested safe older medicines can be used against COVID.”
Source: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/06/16/ivermectin-for-covid-19-infection.aspx
Breakthrough: Ivermectin inhibits the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein from binding to ACE2 receptors in human tissue
(Natural News) Ivermectin, a common anti-parasite drug, has shown great efficacy in the fight against covid-19. For the first time, medical researchers have documented how ivermectin docks to the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain that is attached to the ACE2 receptor. In this way, ivermectin effectively inhibits viral attachment and replication, assisting a precise antiviral response that can target the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at its most advantageous cleavage site. The researchers showed how ivermectin interferes with the attachment of the spike protein to the human cell membrane.
Ivermectin is a simple medicine derived from the bacterium Streptomyces avermitilis. It weakens and kills parasites by interfering with their nervous system and muscle function. Ivermectin targets the glutamate-gated chloride channels in the parasite’s nerve and muscle cells, bolstering inhibitory effects in the parasite’s own neurotransmission. As the chloride ions permeate, the parasite’s cells are hyper-polarized and then paralyzed, resulting in their demise.
In this study, ivermectin docked in region of leucine 91 of the spike protein and at the histidine 378 of the ACE2 receptor. The binding energy and constancy of ivermectin was also measured and found to be sufficient at the ACE2 receptor, proving the anti-parasitic molecule a powerful force for blocking viral attachment of SARS-CoV-2.
Ivermectin blocks SARS CoV-2 at the ACE2 receptor in humans
The 17 randomized controlled trials that use ivermectin for early treatment and prophylaxis report positive effects, with an estimated improvement of 73 percent and 83 percent, respectively. Out of 37 early treatment and prophylaxis studies for ivermectin, 97 percent report positive effects. One of the studies documents how ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and displays broad-spectrum anti-viral activity against the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2). This study showed a 5,000-fold reduction in viral RNA after just 48 hours.
The study also proves that effective treatments and prophylactics can mitigate the replication and spread of a virus thousands of times faster than the paranoid, isolationist approach of social distancing and lockdowns. If antivirals were encouraged early and often, then the spread of actual infectious virus would have been mitigated at rates thousands of times faster than the insane method of treating everyone as if they are infectious. By treating actual infections where symptoms are present, the spread is reduced at magnitudes thousands of times greater, while conveying immunity instead of terror.
The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is designed to attach to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in humans. To see whether ivermectin could dock at this receptor site and block viral attachment, the researchers used a program called AutoDock Vina Extended. This docking study showed the crystal structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain. The researchers looked specifically at the human ACE2 receptor and calculated the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) of its atomic positions. A lower RMSD value indicates a more accurate docking capacity. When the RMSD value is three or greater, no docking has occurred at the receptor site. Ivermectin did not dock at nine of the locations; however, it did dock at the leucine 91 region of the spike and histidine 378 at the intersection of proteins between SARS CoV-2 and the ACE2 receptor complex.
Previous studies proved ivermectin’s efficacy, but had to use high concentrations of the drug because the study relied on African green monkey kidney epithelial cells, which do not express the human ACE2 receptor. SARS-CoV-2 is specifically equipped to infect human ACE2 receptors, so this study could prove ivermectin to be effective in much smaller dosages. Clinical trials are now underway to determine if ivermectin is an effective treatment for covid-19.
The global conspiracy to suppress effective anti-viral medicines
The World Health Organization, the FDA, and the NIH have repeatedly suggested that no antiviral treatments exist for covid-19, even though multiple antiviral herbs and drugs have been studied during previous SARS and MERS epidemics and found to be effective. This time around, many of these antivirals were used with great effectiveness by doctors who were willing to go out on a limb and save lives.
Chinese hospitals used various antiviral herbs to treat covid-19 patients. These hospitals studied the effects of the herbs for impeding virus-cell receptor binding, for stimulation of the host’s immunity, for blocking virus entry into host cells through action on the host’s enzymes, and for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 RNA synthesis and replication. The research found numerous phytochemicals to be effective, including: quercetin, ursolic acid, kaempferol, isorhamnetin, luteolin, glycerrhizin, and apigenin. The top three most effective plants for treating covid-19 included licorice root, (Glycyrrhiza glabra) chicory root, (Cichorium intybus) and hibiscus flowers (Hibiscus sabdariffa). A number of antiviral plants contain compounds that target all three antiviral targets, including olive leaf (Olea europaea), white horehound (Marrubium vulgare), black cumin seed (Nigella sativa), garden cress (Lepidium sativum), Judean wormwood (Artemisia Judaica), guava (Psidium guajava), chrysanthemum (Glebionis coronaria), and Maryam’s flower (Anastatica).
Medical systems around the world are not properly equipped to strengthen the human immune response or understand what individuals need to overcome an infection. When it comes to fighting infections, the US FDA and European drug regulators parrot the same narrative of ignorance and apathy, withholding viable antivirals from the public. By the way, this is the only legal way to bring experimental vaccines to the global marketplace, by proving that no effective treatments exist. This suppression of science on antiviral treatments has paved the way for emergency use authorization of experimental vaccines and forced countless patients to suffer (and die) on ventilators, without treatment.
Learn more about this new ivermectin study:
Sources include:
0 Comments