subject:"Re\: \[Vo\]\:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma"

Robin, were you trying to imply they wouldn't allow for there to be an easy
cheap cure, or were you arguing that maybe it was meant to be easily
defeated?
I think it is possible they wanted it easily defeated because even those
who want to kill want to save themselves and others they need.

On Sat, 11 Sept 2021 at 14:26, Robin 
wrote:

> In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 11 Sep 2021 01:17:18 +0200:
> Hi Jürg,
> [snip]
> >On 11.09.2021 01:02, Robin wrote:
> >
> >> Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a
> cheap and commonly available "off switch" such as
> >> Ivermectin??
> >
> >
> >
> >You mix up virus and in cell replication. Ivermectin basically stops in
> >cell replication of CoV-19 and of a dozen of other virus too (what also
> >helps to cure cancer or against flu..).
>
> I meant might be designed to "switch-off" when Ivermectin is administered,
> even more so than would otherwise be the
> case.
>
> >
> >On top of this Ivermectin is one of the best antibodies for CoV-19.
> >Other good antibodies are Heparin, Doxycycline, Hesperidin (in orange
> >juice).
> >
> >This can be a problem if you have a high virus load. That case you waste
> >Ivermectin as antibody and do not gain a replications stop. That's why
> >we add Doxycycline!
>
> Who is "we"?
>
> >
> >
> >J.W.
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Well think about it, they are going to be exposed to it too.
They need an effective cheap safe antidote.

There are a LOT of suppressed cures for Cancer, including guess what,
Ivermectin!

I have long studied repressed Cancer cures but never knew of Ivermectin.

My point is is one of the biggest most feared killers has many many cures
and treatments more effective than Chemo, radiation and surgery but most
don't know about them because "they" control the official narrative and
only a small percentage of people aren't' too trusting and brainwashed...

Then why should they fear that it will become overwhelmingly popular with
COVID?

Though they are scared that it will be realized, look at how many have
fallen for this stupid experimental gene therapy mascerading as a Vaccine?

On Sat, 11 Sept 2021 at 11:02, Robin 
wrote:

> In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 10 Sep 2021 23:21:19 +0200:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>
> Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a
> cheap and commonly available "off switch" such as
> Ivermectin??
>
>
> >On 10.09.2021 22:09, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> >>
> >> As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear
> >> from the double-blind clinical testing.
> >
> >
> >If Jed would once read a paper and not just spread, what his FM buddies
> >forward him, then he could see that it works!
> >
> >I sent the link some mails ago.
> >
> >
> >https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 OF course
> >big pharma never references it
> >
> >Virus gone after two,days. PCR confirmed. Not so in placebo arm...
> >
> >J.W.
> >
> >PS: Only blind mice eat poison...
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Robin

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 11 Sep 2021 01:17:18 +0200:
Hi Jürg,
[snip]
>On 11.09.2021 01:02, Robin wrote:
>
>> Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a cheap 
>> and commonly available "off switch" such as
>> Ivermectin??
>
>
>
>You mix up virus and in cell replication. Ivermectin basically stops in 
>cell replication of CoV-19 and of a dozen of other virus too (what also 
>helps to cure cancer or against flu..).

I meant might be designed to "switch-off" when Ivermectin is administered, even 
more so than would otherwise be the
case.

>
>On top of this Ivermectin is one of the best antibodies for CoV-19. 
>Other good antibodies are Heparin, Doxycycline, Hesperidin (in orange 
>juice).
>
>This can be a problem if you have a high virus load. That case you waste 
>Ivermectin as antibody and do not gain a replications stop. That's why 
>we add Doxycycline!

Who is "we"?

>
>
>J.W.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma


On 11.09.2021 01:02, Robin wrote:


Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a cheap and commonly 
available "off switch" such as
Ivermectin??




You mix up virus and in cell replication. Ivermectin basically stops in 
cell replication of CoV-19 and of a dozen of other virus too (what also 
helps to cure cancer or against flu..).


On top of this Ivermectin is one of the best antibodies for CoV-19. 
Other good antibodies are Heparin, Doxycycline, Hesperidin (in orange 
juice).


This can be a problem if you have a high virus load. That case you waste 
Ivermectin as antibody and do not gain a replications stop. That's why 
we add Doxycycline!



J.W.

--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Robin

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 10 Sep 2021 23:21:19 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]

Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a cheap 
and commonly available "off switch" such as
Ivermectin??


>On 10.09.2021 22:09, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>> As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear 
>> from the double-blind clinical testing.
>
>
>If Jed would once read a paper and not just spread, what his FM buddies 
>forward him, then he could see that it works!
>
>I sent the link some mails ago.
>
>
>https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 OF course 
>big pharma never references it
>
>Virus gone after two,days. PCR confirmed. Not so in placebo arm...
>
>J.W.
>
>PS: Only blind mice eat poison...
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma


On 10.09.2021 22:09, Jed Rothwell wrote:


As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear 
from the double-blind clinical testing.



If Jed would once read a paper and not just spread, what his FM buddies 
forward him, then he could see that it works!


I sent the link some mails ago.


https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 OF course 
big pharma never references it


Virus gone after two,days. PCR confirmed. Not so in placebo arm...

J.W.

PS: Only blind mice eat poison...


--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Jonathan Berry  wrote:

It is not marginal, look at Africa, the places where they give Ivermectin
> routinely has basically no Covid death spikes, the places where they don't
> have the familiar looking waves.
>

These effects are more easily explained by demographics (many young people)
and by very poor data collection. They are not caused by the use of
ivermectin.

As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear from
the double-blind clinical testing. As noted above, many tests have been
done, and 70 in total will be done. That is more than enough to reveal an
effect. Furthermore, even if we assume that the most positive tests so far
are correct, the effect they show is so small it cannot begin to explain
the result in Africa or India.

Beware of wishful thinking and people who do not understand epidemiology
and statistics. The epidemiologists in India are right; the ivermectin
advocates are wrong. I am not aware of any epidemiological look at the
situation in Africa, but the population profiles and the poor quality of
health care and public health statistics are similar. You cannot draw
conclusions from the public health data. For example, in Uttar Pradesh
recent statistics indicate that no one has died from anything. Deaths are
zero in all categories. That can't be right. See:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.04.21261604v1.full

QUOTE:

"For Uttar Pradesh, the raw mortality data obtained from a
Right-to-Information request contained anomalies, such as multiple
districts with zero deaths for numerous months."

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

It is not marginal, look at Africa, the places where they give Ivermectin
routinely has basically no Covid death spikes, the places where they don't
have the familiar looking waves.

If it is taken preventatively and in enough dosage it is basically perfect,
almost no one dies and COVID rapidly disappears, ok, there seems to be a
few people who need more than just that according to FLCCC but it is rare.

Add in enough other things and honestly I have zero concern about COVID,
Melatonin and BHT are things I have suitable stocks of that have shown
promise.

And the full protocol with Ivermectin includes for best results an
antibiotic (little known fun fact, they also kill viruses!) and Zinc, but
the IMASK protocol is recommended.

The Vaccine is harmful and has only a very short period of masking the
vaccinated's infected status so they spread it more but are not harmed as
much by the virus, past that period they are more vulnerable than others.

Also it is clear that COVID isn't terribly deadly anymore, after the very
earliest cases (which had a high rate of fatality up to 100% of presenting
cases from some countries) it has mutated to a less deadly variety that
kills very very few even without competent treatment.

Let it run through the population and not that many will die especially
those who are younger and in good health.

However the Vaccine has the certainty of injuring to some degree everyone
it is given to and the potential to kill everyone who gets it
through multiple different pathways.

Literally if everyone took it could wipe humanity out entirely.

One way this could happen is antibody dependent enhancement, which so far
corona virus vaccines tested on animals for classic SARS has demonstrated.
When presented by the virus after some time the response to the virus (or a
new strain of it) is deadly.

Other ways it could result in death have also been explored and even some
ex Pfizer employees are warning against just that.

The fact that a Vaccine that is insufficiently tested, that is made by
companies linked ultimately to the lab that made the virus in the first
place...   Makes me think anyone taking it is taking an incredible risk and
for next to nothing because it's short period of mild effectiveness (can
still catch and spread COVID even during it's period of limited efficacy,
have same levels of transmissible virus particles as unvaccinated as the
Vaccine doesn't stop replication in the nasal tract, it works deeper in the
body) is quickly over.

On Sat, 11 Sept 2021 at 06:35, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jonathan Berry  wrote:
>
> Jed, You point me to a study where it was tested this way suitably, I
>> suspect it will have been highly flawed if that was the result.
>>
>
> I suspect you will say that any result you disagree with is flawed by
> definition.
>
> But you are missing my point. Even if we assume the most positive studies
> are correct, the effect is still marginal. It cannot explain the events in
> India. The drug cannot be used instead of vaccines. If you are vaccinated,
> there is no need to use ivermectin or anything else, including drugs that
> we know actually work, such as remdesivir. We don't need these things any
> more than we need iron lungs and the various therapies for dealing with
> polio symptoms. The vaccine all-but ensures you will not get a serious
> case. A third booster reduces the likelihood of infection by 95%. The
> problem is fixed. The pandemic can easily be eradicated, and driven into
> extinction in the human species. Vaccines are far cheaper than any other
> drug. Even if ivermectin works, you have to take it for days, and you are
> sick while you do that, which costs you a lot in lost productivity. Whereas
> two doses of vaccine cost practically nothing.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

The largest study of Ivermectin prophylaxes has been made in Argentina:
http://pharmabaires.com/1739-resultados-positivos-del-%20protocolo-iver-car-en-la-profilaxis-de-los-agentes-de-salud.html

I usually take high dose V-D3 and zinc as a preparation. this is the
best and most simple proven prophylaxis. Some add Quercetin since early 2020

PLEASE stop such FUD:: You said:: The best I've seen on this are
people that do that, get infected, wind up hospitalized and/or dead.

Yes we exactly know why the pseudo vaccines stop to work after some time.

In case of Pfizer & Moderna & Astra "vaccine" we talk of an
*experimental gen therapy*! A gen therapy that for 30% works in cancer
therapy...

The Pfizer gen therapy according sound research does not imply a useful
immune memory = has no vaccine like action. (that produces a broad
immune memory pattern)

The gen therapy just forces, mostly endothelian cells, to intake &
replicate the spike protein, what in follow up presentation reaction
stimulates the production of spike antibodies only.

This " pseudo vaccine" never helps to stimulate/produce new antibodies
after an infection with CoV-19. Only the surviving - but waning - anti
bodies help to fight an illness.

In UK & Israel the efficiency of the gen therapy already reached "0"
level for some age groups and important to know. Boosters will make
things worse. According the UK Covid report number 22 double vaccinated
have a higher viral load than single vaccinated This is a clear sign
of ADE = antibody dependent enhancement due to a miss fit between gen
therapy induce monoclonal antibodies and the new, no longer matching
Delta spike.

Only scared to death or "mad" people kill them selves with an
experimental gen therapy.

The pseudo vaccines already did produce some 100'000 crippled people.
The gen therapy has > 1000x more adverse reactions (see VERS) than the
worst flu vaccine.

See also https://www.adrreports.eu/de/disclaimer.html go to letter "C"
there you find all > 1 mio adverse reactions in the EU.

J.W.

On 10.09.2021 16:28, CB Sites wrote:

Jürg Wyttenbach says;

"Ivermectin gives a 100% protection from a COV-19 infection. Start
dose is 2 days normal dose then weekly once for 100% protection for
90% protetion every 2 weeks."

And you know this to be true? So are you following your own treatment
plan? The best I've seen on this are people that do that, get
infected, wind up hospitalized and/or dead. At least you won't have
lice when you die. It seems ironic that you would be willing to
trust one pharmaceutical (ivermectin) and not another (the vax, the
jab aka; Phiser, Moderna, J vaccines) that have been studied inside
and are well published and documented. We know exactly how and why
the vax works against covid. Yet someone with a home remedy that is
used to treat lice infections, thinks there is a better solution even
though there is no known science that would show how it protects
against covid or any other virus for that matter. Ivermectin is just
one more of the big lies like Hydroxychloroquine or even injections of
'sodium hypochlorite'. Remember that crazy one that the
science community had to be put down as fast as possible before people
killed themselves?

I really wish you would take your propaganda and keep it to yourself
and get your vax instead of wasting everyone time. There are better
subjects like Cold Fusion for us to sort out.

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 6:34 AM Jürg Wyttenbach > wrote:

You cannot teach Jed

As member of the FM the ruling USA sect he has to spread, what his
buddies tell him else he will get problems.

Others would say it more rigorously. In case of the Mizuno LENR
protocol he intentionally did spread wrong details. So he is a
professional cheater.

We know this because in the mean time the Mizuno patent is
available that refutes all rubbish Jed did claim.

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6017-mizuno-replication-and-materials-only/?pageNo=1

Regarding Ivermectin:: Doing an RCT study for a deadly illness is
a sign of mental illness. But exactly this is what Jed references.
RCT studies for CoV-19 can only be done among very mild cases that
are completely irrelevant for the medical outcome of the pandemic.
Nevertheless. All these studies show what I said 2 mails earlier.
If you take Ivermectin then after 2 days CoV-19 is gone.

The best such study comes from Israel and does a full PCR control
on each day!

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1
OF
course big pharma never references it

J.W.

On 10.09.2021 03:11, Jonathan Berry wrote:

Oh Jed you really do just love the Pharma

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Jonathan Berry  wrote:

Jed, You point me to a study where it was tested this way suitably, I
> suspect it will have been highly flawed if that was the result.
>

I suspect you will say that any result you disagree with is flawed by
definition.

But you are missing my point. Even if we assume the most positive studies
are correct, the effect is still marginal. It cannot explain the events in
India. The drug cannot be used instead of vaccines. If you are vaccinated,
there is no need to use ivermectin or anything else, including drugs that
we know actually work, such as remdesivir. We don't need these things any
more than we need iron lungs and the various therapies for dealing with
polio symptoms. The vaccine all-but ensures you will not get a serious
case. A third booster reduces the likelihood of infection by 95%. The
problem is fixed. The pandemic can easily be eradicated, and driven into
extinction in the human species. Vaccines are far cheaper than any other
drug. Even if ivermectin works, you have to take it for days, and you are
sick while you do that, which costs you a lot in lost productivity. Whereas
two doses of vaccine cost practically nothing.

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Jed, You point me to a study where it was tested this way suitably, I
suspect it will have been highly flawed if that was the result.

I will make a post about Ivermectin a bit later.

On Fri, 10 Sept 2021 at 14:04, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jonathan Berry  wrote:
>
>
>> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>>
>
> No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests. Many of
> them have been done by proponents. None have shown more than a marginal
> effect, and they were probably mistakes.
>
> This is science. You have to use objective, scientific experiments.
> Double-blind tests are the only way to be sure a drug is actually working.
> The experiments show that ivermectin does not work. There is nothing more
> to be said. There are no other standards of truth.
>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Terry Blanton  wrote:

If you are truly interested, there are currently 76 clinical studies either
> on-going or completed for the efficacy of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2.
>

76 is a lot of studies! I think we can be confident that if it has any
efficacy, that will be determined. A reliable, quantitative measure of
efficacy will emerge.

Some critics say that too much effort is being put into testing ivermectin.
Other, more promising drugs are not being tested because so many clinical
studies are being made of ivermectin.

Some supporters of ivermectin say the medical establishment has not
approved any pre-existing drug. It is dragging its feet. That is not the
case. Several drugs have been approved, such as remdesivir:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20479976

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

Terry Blanton  wrote:

> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>>>
>>
>> No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests.
>>
>
> Many things work in vitro but not in the body, e.g.:
>

That's true too. It is important. But I was talking about a clinical
double-blind test with human patients. You give ivermectin to some of them,
and a placebo to others. You don't know who is getting what. If ivermectin
is effective, the ones who got it recover sooner, or their symptoms are
markedly less severe. Several double-blind tests have been done. They have
either shown no effect, or a very small effect. In no case has the effect
been large enough to cause what is reported from India. So, I conclude that
the Indian epidemiologists are right, and the field doctors are engaged in
wishful thinking, or they are ascribing good results to the drug which are
actually caused by the natural course of the epidemic. That may sound
unlikely, but there are many examples of that in the history of medicine.

If a drug works, that has to show up when you do enough double-blind
tests, with enough people. One test might fail because the doctors doing it
give the wrong dose, or they give it during the wrong phase of the disease,
or for some other reason. However, there have been multiple tests of
ivermectin. As far as I know, the doctors in the field in India have
reported their doses, methods, and so on, and the doctors doing clinical
trials know what procedures supposedly work. But they are not working.

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Terry Blanton

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:49 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 10:04 PM Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Berry  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>>>
>>
>> No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests.
>>
>
> Many things work in vitro but not in the body, e.g.:
>
>
> https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30464-8/fulltext
>
>

If you are truly interested, there are currently 76 clinical studies either
on-going or completed for the efficacy of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2.  You
can read about or even volunteer to participate if you qualify:

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=COVID-19=ivermectin=Search

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Terry Blanton

On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 10:04 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jonathan Berry  wrote:
>
>
>> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>>
>
> No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests.
>

Many things work in vitro but not in the body, e.g.:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30464-8/fulltext

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Terry Blanton

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:29 AM CB Sites  wrote:

>
>   Ivermectin is just one more of the big lies like Hydroxychloroquine or
> even injections of 'sodium hypochlorite'.  Remember that crazy one that
> the science community had to be put down as fast as possible before people
> killed themselves?
>

Personally, I liked the idea of endoscopically illuminating the abdomen
with UV-C to kill the virus directly.

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread CB Sites

Jürg Wyttenbach says;

"Ivermectin gives a 100% protection from a COV-19 infection. Start dose is
2 days normal dose then weekly once for 100% protection for 90% protetion
every 2 weeks."

And you know this to be true?  So are you following your own treatment
plan?   The best I've seen on this are people that do that, get infected,
wind up hospitalized and/or dead.  At least you won't have lice when you
die.   It seems ironic that you would be willing to trust one
pharmaceutical (ivermectin) and not another (the vax, the jab aka; Phiser,
Moderna, J vaccines) that have been studied inside and are well published
and documented.  We know exactly how and why the vax works against covid.
Yet someone with a home remedy that is used to treat lice infections,
thinks there is a better solution even though there is no known science
that would show how it protects against covid or any other virus for that
matter.   Ivermectin is just one more of the big lies like
Hydroxychloroquine or even injections of 'sodium hypochlorite'.  Remember
that crazy one that the science community had to be put down as fast as
possible before people killed themselves?

I really wish you would take your propaganda and keep it to yourself and
get your vax instead of wasting everyone time.There are better subjects
like Cold Fusion for us to sort out.


On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 6:34 AM Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> You cannot teach Jed
>
>
> As member of the FM the ruling USA sect he has to spread, what his buddies
> tell him else he will get problems.
>
> Others would say it more rigorously. In case of the Mizuno LENR protocol
> he intentionally did spread wrong details. So he is a professional cheater.
>
> We know this because in the mean time the Mizuno patent is available that
> refutes all rubbish Jed did claim.
>
>
> https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6017-mizuno-replication-and-materials-only/?pageNo=1
>
>
> Regarding Ivermectin:: Doing an RCT study for a deadly illness is a sign
> of mental illness. But exactly this is what Jed references. RCT studies for
> CoV-19 can only be done among very mild cases that are completely
> irrelevant for the medical outcome of the pandemic. Nevertheless. All these
> studies show what I said 2 mails earlier. If you take Ivermectin then after
> 2 days CoV-19 is gone.
>
> The best such study comes from Israel and does a full PCR control on each
> day!
>
> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1  OF course
> big pharma never references it
>
> J.W.
>
>
> On 10.09.2021 03:11, Jonathan Berry wrote:
>
> 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  wrote:
>
>> Jürg Wyttenbach  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

Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma