UNCOVERDC
The FDA is allegedly working with the USPS to hold packages containing Ivermectin at JFK, a port of entry for the drug from foreign sources. Aaron Siri posted a Nov. 10 letter using FDA Personal Importation policy to refuse delivery of the drug to a customer whose name is redacted on the letter. According to […]
“criticisms of Rogan were condescending and below the need to make the point he chose. It speaks very poorly of him. He disagreed with Rogan using his platform to distribute his experience and offered his opinion on the treatment that Rogan received. He had no need to try to belittle Rogan and this alone belies an active advocacy that should not be held by any medical professional. His comments were completed with the reference to the cow medicine.”
Mike Hansen is a practising doctor. He has dealt with thousands of cases of COVID-19. Rogan is backed by the filthy rich Spotify. There you have it Peloni and out editor Ted. A working man against that tech filth. And see who line up with against the working man. Kinda explains this whole crisis in this blog.
Hansen has spent 20 minutes clinically dissecting the treatment that Joe Rogan is advocating to his millions of listeners. One or two may, he says, do some good. But overall it is misinformation. And you Peloni are defending this Rogan/Spotify charlatan. Shame on you Peloni and shame on this branch of Zionism for backing charlatinism. I can tell you all the implications for Zionism are profound.
@Felix
Dr. Hansen’s criticisms of Rogan were condescending and below the need to make the point he chose. It speaks very poorly of him. He disagreed with Rogan using his platform to distribute his experience and offered his opinion on the treatment that Rogan received. He had no need to try to belittle Rogan and this alone belies an active advocacy that should not be held by any medical professional. His comments were completed with the reference to the cow medicine. Doctors should be advocates for their patients choices, not for a biological product.
The crux of a the failure of the Covid Crisis is due to the reality that the ill are not being treated. Vaccinate the masses and cull the weak when they become ill. It is a disgraceful standard.
His comments on the Monoclonal Antibodies being used for only mild disease is ridiculous. Anyone still in the first week of the disease will benefit from the virus being removed from their system. It reduces the viral load and has been demonstrated in FL to have had an enormous effect by being used by anyone, not just mild disease.
His statement that Azithromycin should not be given because it is an antibiotic is also ridiculous. Viral infections are always associated with potential secondary bacterial infections from bacteria present on and in the body. This drug is commonly used in viral infections of the respiratory tract and has been seen to have immunomodulary effects(helps the immune system work better). This drug is a mainstay treatment as described by McCulluogh in the only two treatment protocols in scientific literature from 2020. Given Hansen’s credentials, he has to be aware of these very basic facts.
Dr. McCullough has stated clearly that the treatment that Rogan received is the perfect treatment for someone who contracts the disease, especially someone of Rogan’s build and history.
To better understand these things people should watch Hansen’s condescending criticism and compare it to the informative explanation that McCullough offers. The distinction is one between an advocate with a pre-determined order for the patient and an advisor providing information so that the patient can make an informed choice about their health, their care and the risks they choose to accept as part of an experimental drug trial.
Charges of crimes against humanity must be brought against the W DC “White Coats” for deliberately blocking the judicial use of life saving medications such as HCQ and Ivermectin in combinations.
This doctor Mike Hansen actually works on the front line
https://youtu.be/RGvlPeo5bNU
@brent rubin
This site will document all the studies for IVM, all of them:
https://ivmmeta.com/
This page hosts all the info you can hope to find on the use and research of IVM in use with Covid.
The Blue Highlighted area contains info on controlled trials related to IVM and Covid.
The first chart at the top of the Blue Highligted area is an Odds Ratio chart which compares the strength of association between IVM use and Covd based on results of different categories of trials – ie All Studies, Peer-Reviewed, Randomize Trial, etc – or end point comparision – ie death, ventilation, viral clearance, etc – or point of treatment use – Prophylaxis, Early or Late. In the Odds Ratio chart, the findings are demonstrated as beneficial(green) or detrimental(red) and the further to the left, the greater the observed benefit, and the further to the right the greater the perceived detriment. All comparisons on this Odds Ratio chart are green.
The second chart lists all the Controlled Trials by their separate categories – All Studies, Peer-Reviewed, Randomize Trial, etc – against the time interval in which IVM was applied – Prophylaxis, Early or Late. The number in the box represents a weighted average of the performance of IVM with the 95% confidence interval in parentheses.
Below this, you will find a listing of the various meta-data analyses done on IVM use with Covid, again all green, ie beneficial.
At the bottom of the Blue Highlighted area, there is a comparison between a few treatment options with their reported outcomes as compared to IVM.
Below the Blue Highlighted area, you will find the various breakdowns on the individual controlled trials where you can access each trial.
Not too far below the Blue Highlighted are you will find the comparison between the various controlled studies where the beneficial studies(green) and detrimental studies(red) are compared in a bar graph. The higher(for green) or the lower(for red) the bar, indicates a more greater result, respectively.
Just above the Blue Highlighted area, if you click on the Studies button, you will find all the reports on IVM as it has been compared to use with Covid in non-controlled, observational or other format studies.
Hope this helps, the site is a very powerful record of what is known of IVM’s use with Covid.
Are there any sites that document all the positive studies of Ivermectin treatment. Not antidotal evidence.
I understand. You said both sides must be aired but both sides not on this site. How about just going for the truth of it here regardless and let the readers make up their own minds.
As an example when I write on say the issue of Israel and Hamas or the Palestinians I set out to explain all the facts.
It was the same method used by Jared Israel. He supported the left narrative at first. Then on investigation found it didn’t hold up because the facts spoke differently.
And so on.
We have to approach these issues all of them as does a scientist. That’s the only way to convince a new person coming to politics, or anybody.
I pay no attention at all to anybody else. I am all the time weighing up everybody and in the end only I decide. Must be the way in general.
I promised her no such thing. In the case of the pandemic I believe thaqt both sides should be presented.
The public is bombarded daily with pro establishment stuff. so there is no need to repeat their message. I make no apologies.
Ted editor you promised your daughter no less in print that both sides must be broadcast. I just roughly counted it as 11 to 0 today the eleven are the Alex Jones type of stuff