The Story Of Ivermectin

Trial Site News reports regularly on the use of ivermectin around the world. I created a cache of articles and videos here: ⁣https://usa.life/ivermectinforcovid . Also check FLCCC: ⁣https://covid19criticalcare.com/ Good health to all and thanks for this documentary!

When a drug company wants a drug they have invented to go through the necessary clinical studies, they provide funding for these studies as part of their researh expenses.
Academic research physicians who are selected to participate in such a study can derive some of their salary from this funding, but the bulk of the funds are chaneled through their affiliated medical school to pay the clinical research staff (nurses, technicians, secretaries) and laboratory expenses of the study. These investigators will have their names on any publications that result from the research they have supervised.
There is nothing untoward here; it is common practice.
The ethical problem arises, however, when an advisory panel takes them as members. They should have refused membership on this panel and in fact should not have been accepted once their financial disclosure information was submitted. Stupidity on the part of NIH, I'm afraid.

⁣Nice summary, with one correction:
The NIH panel has no say so about what treatment US physicians can use. They make recommendations, but their opinions are not binding or meant to be law, as they say on their website. ⁣The NIH panels simply attempt to summarize the hard evidence for how to best to treat a given disease.

Unfortunately, many hospital committiees and administrators mistakely think that CDC and NIH guideline are hard an fast rules and discourage staff from thinking independently. It is also unfortunate that when new evidence comes iin it can take months to get the NIH advisory revised.

For Covid-19 in April 2020 there was essentially no firmly established evidence, so the committee could only produce a useless document.

As time went along, however, they were criminally negligent in ignoring the mounting body of evidence that vitamiin D nutrition was the major determinent of disease severity: Those with good vitamin D nutrition were 10-fold less likely to have severe disease. They should have shouted this from the rooftops. Instead: crickets. Everyone should be taking at least 2000 IU daily of vitamin D3, and those with obesity or skin pigment about twice that amount.

The NIH was again negligent when they ignored the information about ivermectin that was beganing to accumulate. It should have been incorporated in their August revision, but it took until well after the December Congressional hearing before they were willing to remove their advice AGAINST using it.

They (and Dr. Fauci) seem to have forgoten the primary ethic of evidence-based medicine. Physicians must use the best evidence at hand in treating an illness. The fact that the available evidence is not perfect does NOT mean a treatment should be avoided, especially when the treatment is extremely safe and inexpensive.

The institutional malfeasance has continued or worsened with the WHO alteriing the conclusions of the meta-analysis carried out by Dr. Hill's crack team that was funded by a branch of the WHO. Instead of stating that the evidence for ivermectin is overwhelmingly positive, they forced the analyzing team to agree to a document that questions its efficacy. Criminal negligency, IMHO.

I would be interested in an addtion to the video summarizing the latest cases & IFR in Uttrar Pradesh, the situation has changed as of April 10th, 2021, maby infection rates are high, but mortality rates are low.

Given the fraud of remdesivir and the untold deaths perpetrated by Fauci, the NIH, and the media, imagine how much greater the deception, deceit, and treachery of the so-called "vaccines." "Government is not the solution to the problem; government IS the problem."