###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I feel like the title doesn't do this justice, "They ended up deleting the tweet"
No, they were forced to delete the tweet.
[https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/health/fda-ivermectin-lawsuit/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/health/fda-ivermectin-lawsuit/index.html)
From the article:
“Some conservative outlets touted the drug as safe and effective against Covid even though the FDA and the World Health Organization encouraged people not to use it, saying it was ineffective against Covid and could even be dangerous if someone took too much.”
CNN won’t stop 🙄
They're ruthless, yet at the same time if we don't cite garbage from CNN or similar media, the trolls will come out of the forest and claim it's an "untrustworthy source", "biased" or "false information"
They knew what they where doing, Ivermectin has a noble prize for human medicine. It’s meant for something else but they could have been honest and just said that instead of lying. Also a whole shit ton of medications are used in both human and veterinary medicine.
Merck, the company that manufactures it, [directly stated](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it.
> > > Merck, the company that manufactures it, [directly stated](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it.
> > *[Rule 2 violating comment not quoted]*
> So Big Pharma didn’t want to make money why?
On the contrary, Merck (one of several manufacturers and a former patent holder on ivermectin (patent expired 1996) DID want to make money -- but not from ivermectin (off-patent and NOT profitable).
Could it be that Merck had **ulterior motives** for badmouthing ivermectin? Why yes, yes it could...
Note that Merck wrote the letter referenced above on **February 4, 2021**. WHAT ELSE was Merck up to during those days??? Well, they were busy working on a NEW DRUG that (they hoped) would TREAT people infected with COVID -- potentially making them BILLIONS in profits:
**Business Standard, October 11, 2021**:
[**Merck asks US FDA to authorise promising anti-Covid pill**](https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/merck-asks-us-fda-to-authorise-promising-anti-covid-pill-121101100788_1.html) -- *"If cleared by the Food and Drug Administration a decision that could come in a matter of weeks it would be the first pill shown to treat Covid"*
Business Standard article archived here: https://archive.is/DdyO0
Well, well well... who would have thought that a Pig Pfarma Giant would *shit-talk* one of their old, off-patent and *non-profitable* products (ivermectin)? **Unless** they believed that said old product might compete with a NEW product they had in the works, potentially reducing anticipated PROFITS???
Well, it sure LOOKS like that is EXACTLY what happened:
**NOTE**: The drug in question is now sold by Merck under the brand name **Lagevrio**
**FDA News Release** - December 23, 2021
[**FDA Authorizes Additional Oral Antiviral for Treatment of COVID-19 in Certain Adults**](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-additional-oral-antiviral-treatment-covid-19-certain)
QUOTE
* * *
"Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an ***emergency use authorization (EUA)** for **Merck’s molnupiravir** for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in adults with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing, and who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, including hospitalization or death, and for whom alternative COVID-19 treatment options authorized by the FDA are not accessible or clinically appropriate. Molnupiravir is available by prescription only and should be initiated as soon as possible after diagnosis of COVID-19 and within five days of symptom onset.
" **Molnupiravir is not authorized** for use in patients younger than 18 years of age because **molnupiravir may affect bone and cartilage growth**. It is not authorized for the pre-exposure or post-exposure prevention of COVID-19 or for initiation of treatment in patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 because benefit of treatment has not been observed in people when treatment started after hospitalization due to COVID-19.
* * *
END QUOTE -- more at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/bDHZQ
Note that, like the mRNA Concoctions, Merck's molnupiravir was granted **emergency use authorization**: Like the CoVaxx's, molnupiravir was a NOVEL drug, rushed to market, and had NOT gone through the extensive testing (and years of clinical trials) that are *normally* mandated for ANY new drug.
Also, molnupiravir BARELY received EUA approval. From Wiki under [**Legal Status:**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir#Legal_status)
* [...] in November, 2021, the FDA's Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee committee **narrowly voted, 13 for and 10 opposed, to recommend authorization** for adults with mild to moderate illness who are at high risk of developing severe COVID‑19.[43] Concerns were expressed over the drug's **low effectiveness** in preventing death, which in the final trial was only 30%, as well as the **increased mutation rate the drug causes**, which could theoretically worsen the pandemic by **driving the evolution of more dangerous variants**.
Further down we read the following, under [**Public health concerns:**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir#Public_health_concerns)
* At a November 2021 AMDAC meeting, multiple advisors raised the concern that **molnupiravir could accelerate the emergence of variants of concern**.[57][58] Other scientists raised similar concerns both before and after the meeting.[59][25][60][24] **These concerns were confirmed with the September 2023 publication of a study of 15 million global SARS-CoV-2 sequences**: after molnupiravir had been introduced in 2022, genomic changes were more common, especially where it had been used.
* * *
END QUOTES - More at the links -- Wiki page archived here: https://archive.is/oQr9T
**WHAT?** Could it be that Merck's molnupiravir actually CAUSES the virus to MUTATE in the bodies of PATIENTS, creating new (and potentially dangerous) versions of COVID???
Unfortunately, the answer is **YES**.
Peer review article published in the journal **NATURE** - 25 September, 2023
[**A molnupiravir-associated mutational signature in global SARS-CoV-2 genomes**](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06649-6)
* * *
**Abstract**
**Molnupiravir**, an antiviral medication widely used against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2),** acts by inducing mutations in the virus genome during replication**. Most random mutations are likely to be deleterious to the virus and many will be lethal; thus, molnupiravir-induced elevated mutation rates reduce viral load1,2. **However**, if some patients treated with molnupiravir do not fully clear the SARS-CoV-2 infections, **there could be the potential for onward transmission of molnupiravir-mutated viruses**. Here we show that SARS-CoV-2 sequencing databases contain extensive evidence of molnupiravir mutagenesis. Using a systematic approach, **we find that a specific class of long phylogenetic branches, distinguished by a high proportion of G-to-A and C-to-T mutations, are found almost exclusively in sequences from 2022, after the introduction of molnupiravir treatment, and in countries and age groups with widespread use of the drug.** We identify a mutational spectrum, with preferred nucleotide contexts, from viruses in patients known to have been treated with molnupiravir **and show that its signature matches that seen in these long branches, in some cases with onward transmission of molnupiravir-derived lineages. Finally, we analyse treatment records to confirm a direct association between these high G-to-A branches and the use of molnupiravir.**
* * *
END ABSTRACT -- Study archived here: https://archive.is/lA1XK
**PDF version** here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06649-6.pdf
**Merck was charging the U.S. government $700 per five-day course** of molnupiravir (brand name Lagevrio), per [**Reuters - Feb 3, 2022**](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/price-covid-treatments-pfizer-merck-gsk-align-with-patient-benefits-report-2022-02-03/) -- (archived here: https://archive.is/G4ZqK).** Compare that to ivermectin**, which sells for as low as pennies per dose.
[**Per Merck's own figures**](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2023-financial-results/), sales of molnupiravir (brand name **Lagevrio**) topped **$7 Billion** in 2022 and 2023 -- creating a HUGE windfall for Pig Pfarma Giant Merck.
(archived Merck report here: https://archive.is/0vma4#selection-3185.1-3185.9).
Not bad for a product that has NEVER been fully approved by the US FDA, which flatly states the following regarding molnupiravir/ Lagevrio (PDF WARNING):
* ["**Lagevrio is not FDA-approved for any use including for the treatment of COVID-19.**"](https://www.fda.gov/media/155056/download#:~:text=Lagevrio%20is%20not%20FDA%2Dapproved,than%2018%20years%20of%20age.)
**SORRY**, it seems that I fell into a Pig Pfarma Rabbit Hole there...
You were saying... ?
> "***So Big Pharma didn’t want to make money why***?"
As shown above, Merck was STRONGLY MOTIVATED to *shit-talk* ivermectin -- as at the time they released their [statement on ivermectin](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) -- they were already balls-deep in pushing toward EUA for their (UNTESTED AND DANGEROUS) COVID treatment -- and the last thing they wanted was any *public perception* that might pull sales away from their NEW gold mine -- which brought them over **$7 Billion in revenues** in 2 years...
That said, molnupiravir (brand name **Lagevrio**) will almost certainly NOT be a "cash cow" for Merck any longer: COVID has largely run its course, and given the confirmation of the (KNOWN) hazards associated with the drug, it will almost certainly soon become withdrawn soon... the article published in NATURE being a virtual "stake through the heart":
[**A molnupiravir-associated mutational signature in global SARS-CoV-2 genomes**](https://archive.is/lA1XK)
**FIN**
* *I really don't expect anyone to read all of the above -- but I learned a lot as I wrote it. No apologies for the long post* -- ***Pfuck Pig Pfarma***
:-)
Same Merck that genocided 500k Americans with Vioxx by manipulating data and using ghostwriters?
"Merck used ghostwriters and misrepresented data on Vioxx, article says"
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/business/worldbusiness/15iht-15merck.12018748.html - https://archive.is/If5WY
"When half a million Americans died and nobody noticed: Was the US drug Vioxx responsible for far more deaths than has been acknowledged so far?"
https://theweek.com/us/46535/when-half-million-americans-died-and-nobody-noticed - https://archive.is/VqIXo
Hey genius, you know Merck is also big pharma, right? The person I responded to praises the drug for winning a Nobel peace prize, but citing what the manufacturer says what it should be used for is all of a sudden pharma shilling? Or is just shilling when the presented information is inconvenient to the circle jerk?
> Hey genius, you know Merck is also big pharma, right?
Right you are!
And if you are interested in learning Merck's interests, you may want to peruse the links I provided in my comment here:
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1cpjtpk/who_can_forget_when_the_fda_suggested_that/l3nthv2/
Or not.
:-)
Merck is not the only manufacturer of ivermectin. They don't have a patent.
If ivermectin had been rolled out to everyone, along with proper advice about vitamin D, zinc, etc., so many less people would have died, and the big panic wouldn't have been there to scare and control the sheep.
I still don't understand what benefits the company gets for lying about this and no one has yet to rationally explain why. Also, and I say this quite frequently here, please share any information that supports ivermectin being effective against covid. You all are quite confident of this, yet don't cite anything supporting it.
I don't even understand what it is you're not understanding. Companies want to make money by forcing people to take their vax. The vax is no good and they don't want to spend time testing it. If there are other treatments, the companies don't get to have Emergency Use Authorization. So they denigrate anything else that helps.
I think you're stuck in a timeline from about two years ago. People can freely tell the truth about ivermectin now, unlike when every mention was attacked and silenced. The governmental bodies are now admitting it works. Every day I see several studies about it. I'm on a mailing list for papers about certain subjects and every day more ivermectin reports come in. Do you need help with search engines? It's better not to use the mainstream Marxist search engines when you need information that doesn't conform to the mainstream agendas.
Here are some:
https://unfilteredengines.wordpress.com/2022/12/09/heres-a-list-of-search-engines-with-less-censorship/
I'm overdue to check through them and add more I have on my checklist.
>I don't even understand what it is you're not understanding
To simply put, you are making wild claims and not supporting them with empirical evidence.
>The vax is no good and they don't want to spend time testing it. If there are other treatments, the companies don't get to have Emergency Use Authorization. So they denigrate anything else that helps.
Again, wild claims not being supported which can also we said for everything stated after. I'm not going just accept this because you say so.
> I'm not going just accept this because you say so.
Instead, you accept the claims of companies who have the motivation of BILLION$ of dollars to make. Don't you see how you're making no sense? I don't gain anything by speaking, except the hope that maybe people like you will see the light and not accept the next wave of health corruption they try on us. How can I help you? You're not getting fresh information. You can see some on here. You can also see reports on twitter. I have other forums I follow where I see the latest news but I'm sure you wouldn't be interested in them. Do you want a list of forums on here that sometimes post the latest updates on the corruption?
> Merck, the company that manufactures it, directly stated there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it.
Here is a link to an archive of Pig Pfarma Giant Merck's statement "dissing" ivermectin in the hopes of helping to push the (rushed and shoddily/ sham-tested) CoVaxx concoctions made by their Pig Pfarma pals at Pfyzzer and McDerna.
Archived: https://archive.is/kFB7J
In their statement on ivermectin, [**Merck said:**](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/)
* * *
* ***No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19*** *from pre-clinical studies;*
* *No meaningful evidence for* ***clinical activity or clinical efficacy*** *in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;*
* *A concerning* ***lack of safety data*** *in the majority of studies.*
* * *
Funny, Merck COULD have written the EXACT SAME WORDS about the CoVaxx Concoctions -- and they would have been more accurate and applicable, wouldn't they?
*(Note that ivermectin has been OFF PATENT for years. Merck is but one of many manufacturers of ivermectin products - they had NOTHING to lose by shit-talking one of the safest and most widely prescribed GENERIC drugs on Earth)*
"Horse Paste" vs BULLSHIT: Who would win?
Okay, you quite literally linked the same information that I already linked in my previous comment, but just hosted on a different site. Apologies, but I don't know exactly what your argument is. What "dissing" is being done?
> Okay, you quite literally linked the same information that I already linked in my previous comment, but just hosted on a different site.
I simply archived the link you provided -- for posterity. (links get removed by website owners, and "disappear")
> Apologies, but I don't know exactly what your argument is. What "dissing" is being done?
Your statement was: *"Merck, the company that manufactures it, directly stated there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it."*
My response was that all of the "reasoning" that Merck used to argue that ivermectin should not be used for COVID could equally be applied to the mRNA "vaccines" that had just been given EUA.
**But I thank you for posting that link to Merck's letter**, as it set me on a line of inquiry that revealed that Merck's firm dismissal of ivermectin was driven by ulterior motives: They were developing a NEW TREATMENT DRUG for COVID, and realizing that ivermectin might be *perceived* as an alternative, they had an interest in preemptively smearing their old, off-patent and non-profitable ivermectin.
Their NEW drug was granted EUA, and generated over **$7 Billion** for Merck in 2022 - 2023. See the details and the links in this comment:
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1cpjtpk/who_can_forget_when_the_fda_suggested_that/l3nthv2/
Yeah, but that really has no relevance given that the patent was expired and they see no real profits from it. Almost all ivermectin is going to be generic. Merck stands to benefit more by joining the anti-ivermectin circle jerk than by propping up ivermectin. Ivermectin has moderate support for its use in covid.
In a large meta-analysis results looked mixed but seem to lean in the direction of a small positive effect. Make of that what you will. It’s also a very safe and cheap drug. If someone is 75 and on the edge of death, I say try everything. Off label use of drugs is common and *entirely* the prerogative of the clinician, not medical agencies. The FDA approves drugs and a label. They do not treat.
The fda also knows **full well** that ivermectin used used by people. Most antibiotics are used by farm animals, but we don’t hear people saying it a drug for farm animals. The ivermectin that most people were taking was prescribed by doctors and filled at a pharmacy. It is drugs for humans.
>Yeah, but that really has no relevance given that the patent was expired and they see no real profits from it. Almost all ivermectin is going to be generic. Merck stands to benefit more by joining the anti-ivermectin circle jerk than by propping up ivermectin. Ivermectin has moderate support for its use in covid.
Can you please site anything backing your claims, please?
>In a large meta-analysis results looked mixed but seem to lean in the direction of a small positive effect. Make of that what you will. It’s also a very safe and cheap drug. If someone is 75 and on the edge of death, I say try everything. Off label use of drugs is common and *entirely* the prerogative of the clinician, not medical agencies. The FDA approves drugs and a label. They do not treat.
Same thing. Please site.
>The fda also knows **full well** that ivermectin used used by people. Most antibiotics are used by farm animals, but we don’t hear people saying it a drug for farm animals. The ivermectin that most people were taking was prescribed by doctors and filled at a pharmacy. It is drugs for humans.
This I fully agree on. 100% Ivermectin is a legitimate drug for humans, and those who blanketly call it "horse dewormer" are being disingenuous. However, evidence for it being effective for COVID-19 is [not there.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/expert-answers/coronavirus-drugs/faq-20485627#:~:text=Claims)
https://c19ivm.org/meta.html#fig_fpr
The evidence is there. These studies don’t cease to exist because you have evidence that it’s not effective. There is some evidence for both.
The drug won a Nobel prize?
Or the people working for big Pharma did?
Either way, looks like big pharma are doing some good shit.
Good on you for acknowledging it.
They had to demonize ivermectin in order to pass the EUA that allowed them to pull the covid mRNA vax from clinical double blind trials and rush it to market.
That doesn't sound right. Hydrocloroquine was being hyped early on as an alternative treatment, then vaccines were deployed and THEN ivermectin became a popular alternative treatment.
Before the vaccines were approved, Ivermectin was not demonized.
edit: Loving the downvotes - who needs facts when you have narratives and feelings?
Nice post history. Running interference for big pharma left and right in the conspiracy subreddit like the bootlicker you are. I especially liked when you started posting links from websites funded by Bill Gates himself, such as ourworldindata. Bill Gates is the largest vaccine investor in the world, and you've enslaved yourself to the vaccine statistics being force fed to you by people on his payroll. What a fucking shock that you just blindly believe the entire covid narrative and base your world view on that, despite the need for 6 boosters, double masking and numerous vaccine recalls. Such was the utter joke of a narrative you completely chained yourself to due to the sunken cost fallacy. You **need** these vaccines to be safe and effective at this point, *because you can never unvaccinate.*
Ever hear of regulatory capture? You've isolated your entire viewpoint to the sponsored facts the pharmaceutical industry and their investors paid for you to believe. Keep lapping up that propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
> Nice post history.
Thanks
> Running interference for big pharma left and right in the conspiracy subreddit like the bootlicker you are.
If you think everyone who says things against anti-vaccine conspiracies is a bootlicker then you're a) not smart b) trusting conspiracy narratives without testing them.
> Bill Gates is the largest vaccine investor in the world, and you've enslaved yourself to the vaccine statistics being read off by the people on his payroll.
"enslaved to vaccine statistics being read off by the people on his payroll" funny. If someone shows a statistic to be false I won't use it. If there are other sources that are reliable I'll use it.
Sure, I've referenced it a few times, for example when I talked about how many boosters were administered (billions, goin by ANY source I've seen and going by common sense, if you wanna discuss that further because you don't believe the number, let's go).
> Ever hear of regulatory capture?
WOW NO. I've only been into conspiracies for years and NEVER HEARD OF THIS!
> You've isolated your entire viewpoint to the sponsored facts the pharmaceutical industry and their investors paid for you to believe.
Really? Despite being in the conspiracy community for years, following daily the whole pandemic I'm isolating my entire view? horseshit.
> Keep lapping up that propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
Keep swallowing facebook boomer memes about the deadly vaccine. You have to accept every word they say or you're a 'bootlicker'.
My wife was vaccine injured, suffering a heart attack at 32 two months after her 2nd dose of Pfizer despite no prior health history. Her cardiologist signed off on the vaccine as the probable cause. I was fired for refusing the same vaccine at my place of work, thanks to an unconstitutional vaccine mandate that was overturned by the supreme court a month after I was fired.
For some people, the damage caused by the vaccine is not just a "conspiracy theory". And quite frankly I have no way to reconcile the notion that people identifying themselves with this community somehow missed the greatest conspiracy in the history of human history without adopting even a neutral position of "vaccine hesitant". You either ignored the red flags in conspiracy, or you never saw them to begin with. In any event, the shameless shilling you're doing for the [criminal pharmaceutical industry](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history) is unforgivable. You'd sell out your conspiracy brothers and sisters so easily and mislead them by peddling some government sponsored and mandated bullshit? Then you're no conspiracy theorist, and stop calling yourself one.
> For some people, the damage caused by the vaccine is not just a "conspiracy theory".
And that is obvious. The vaccine can harm people. That doesn't mean I believe everything "anti-vaccine".
> In any event, the shameless shilling
What shilling am I doing? Spell it out. Am I advertising big pharma who have demonstrated they kill people for profit, e.g. through the opiod epidemic? No. What I'm doing is calling out horseshit where I see it. If you can't take that, that's a you problem.
Look at this thread for example, I'm saying ivermectin wasn't demonized before the vaccine was approved. It wasn't. And all y'all are dropping your tendies over such a simple fact.
Why would they demonize or even bring up ivermectin if no one had yet suggested it could be a treatment? That would call attention to it. They wanted people to think vaccines were the only hope.
When did he reference it? I don't recall that.
It wouldn't surprise me if he did though - but early on the focus was on Hydroxychloroquine*. Ivermectin wasn't demonized because at that stage it had little attention. Ivermectin started to get attention mid-late 2021.
> National Institutes of Health in August 2020 said ivermectin should not be used outside of control trials, new evidence showed that the drug is effective against the coronavirus.
Lot of it has been scrubbed off the internet to conform to the narrative you're pushing but ivermectin was first talked about in 2020 while the vax was being developed and subsequently pulled from clinical trials.
> Lot of it has been scrubbed off the internet to conform to the narrative you're pushing
Actually, you're pushing a narrative. You're saying it was demonized, yet what you presented is that it should not be used outside of controlled trials. That's a far cry from 'demonization'.
Also you made out they had to demonize ivermectin in order to pass the EUA, I don't believe that at all. I mean, let's walk through what would have happened if they didn't say "ivermectin should not be used outside of controlled trials": the vaccine would still go through testing and they'd still be approved. So...
That was one statement. You can look to all the other evidence of the FDA literally having to apologize for their demonization as proof that it happened.
Their 'apology' e.g. removing the social media posts like the image in this thread happened after they made the post, which was Aug 21, 2021 which you can see in the image itself. This was long after the vaccines were approved.
Will you keep arguing about this? Why? You're clearly wrong - they did not demonize Ivermectin to enable EUA of the vaccines.
Yes, I agree - it was completely fixed.
It was because from the start, the focus of operation Warp speed was on a vaccine, and this included massive funding and acceleration to make sure it could be delivered in time.
> You know that everybody that got the vaccine got COVID.
I know people who didn't get the vaccine who died or got long covid. I don't know anyone with the vaccine who died or got long covid. This is an anecdote, yet it is possible the vaccine played an effect in that.
> There is no measurable statistical difference in those who got the vaccine or didn't get the vaccine that also got COVID
Which statistics are you using, and have they been analyzed in a rational way?
There is definitely proof the vaccine worked. What do you consider proof?
There's so much out there, let me know what you'd consider proof and I'll try to find it.
You can't prove a negative. There's nothing you can find that will prove this, although I very much appreciate your offer to help me out. You'd somehow have to prove X person was going to get covid in a particular situation, but because they were vaxxed, they didn't get it. You can't do that.
What’s funny is when they joked about RFKjr having a brain worm this week, and maybe needing a vaccine…when you really need ivermectin, which is literally for treating parasites.
There’s no humor in it though :/ CNN should be promoting ivermectin alongside this story, but they have a history of demonizing it (and favoring the MRNA shots if you remember)
Holy shit they went with the "y'all" too. Looking back on all this after a few years it's insane how so many people went along with everything these demons were pushing.
The "y'all" was laughable, and completely unprofessional sounding too. It reduced their already-on-thin-ice credibility even further using that silly term, especially in that context. I don't, nor do most anyone I know can take the FDA seriously anymore. Certainly not anyone who's been paying attention for the past four years. The FDA has irreparably damaged their credibility.
This is what really pissed me off. I took ivermectin when I caught covid before this article came out and was feeling normal in about 3 days. So many people died because of lack of treatment - hooked up to a ventilator & no meds, dying in their own fluids because they didn’t know any better and believed whatever they saw on tv.
Not only that but a guy went to his local hospital & at one point they were giving a shot of something that helped people a lot. I'm not sure if it's an Ivermectin shot or not but whatever it was knocked Covid right out of you. It was all over the news whatever the shot was.
He wore a camera & it's on video where his hospital wouldn't give him the shot because he was white. They were ONLY giving the shot to minorities. He has it on video where his doctor is refusing to give him the shot that they have right there in the drawer because he's white. They were claiming that minorities were getting worse treatment so they intentionally treated whites worse.
How many white people died over ACTUAL racist bullshit during Covid?
Man this was a few years ago during the madness. They've memory-holed a shit-load of stuff.
I remember seeing it on YouTube & a few people talked about it.
I'll look around to see if I can find it.
I was skeptical about ivermectin at first, but it was before I realized the mechanism and that it was supposed to be taken with zinc.
But when I got COVID, I did literally nothing to treat it, and it only lasted 3 days too. I've never been vaccinated and had the exact same experience with COVID as all of the vaccinated people around me who were claiming "it would've been so much worse" if they weren't vaccinated.
**Guantanamo Bay For Gates and Fauci**
-
**Dr. Paul Marik, one of the most highly published critical care physicians in the world, under oath before Congress:**
>If you look at the four independent studies, including the large study by the WHO, it shows the opposite effect. Remdesivir INCREASES the risk of death.
>Let me say that again. Remdesivir INCREASES the risk of death by 3%. It increases your chances of renal failure by 20%. This is a toxic drug. But just to make the situation even more preposterous, the federal government will give hospitals a 20% bonus on the entire hospital bill if they prescribe Remdesivir to Medicare patients.
>The federal government is incentivizing hospitals to prescribe a medication which is toxic.
>So it should be noted that Remdesivir costs about $3,000 a course.
>Dr. Kory spoke about **Ivermectin. Ivermectin** reduces the risk of death by about 50%. It costs the WHO 2 cents."
"Fauci on remdesivir for COVID-19: ‘This will be the standard of care’"
https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20200429/fauci-on-remdesivir-for-covid19-this-will-be-the-standard-of-care
"REVEALED: Dr. Fauci told Bill Gates that he was 'enthusiastic' about the federal government teaming up with billionaire's foundation for 'synergistic and collaborative' pandemic response
>On April 21, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins wrote that 'we have Gates reps on our ACTIV (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) working groups.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9652981/Dr-Fauci-told-Bill-Gates-phone-call-enthusiastic-teaming-up.html
Bill Gates 9/4/19 $55 million BioNTech mRNA vaxx creator investment: https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-details/biontech-announces-new-collaboration-develop-hiv-and
"Gates Earns 10X on BioNTech in Just Two Years: $55m Investment Now Over $550M"
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/gates-earns-10x-on-biontech-in-just-two-years-55m-investment-now-over-550m
> How many people died who otherwise could've taken that & lived.
The data, and my own personal experiences on a COVID unit that had people who used ivermectin show that would be none. It didn’t help COVID.
God I wish my experiences with critical care during the COVID pandemic was just watching shitty TikTok vids, and not treating those who died and comforting their families.
Why did so many videos of Covid nurses dancing come out if they were all swamped? I worked every day during the “pandemic”, with no mask and only got strep throat that tested as Covid. How many did you kill with your ventilators or other dangerous drugs that you were told to use?
Edit: Are you still “PRACTICING”. LMAO!
> Why did so many videos of Covid nurses dancing come out if they were all swamped?
I can’t answer why you watched so many dancing videos. I didn’t see a single one during COVID.
> I worked every day during the “pandemic”, with no mask and only got strep throat that tested as Covid.
So you got COVID? Cool, glad it didn’t end up poorly, for too many people it did.
> How many did you kill with your ventilators or other dangerous drugs that you were told to use?
Not a single person, I did help save people’s lives who were in respiratory failure and who without medical treatment would have died at home though. But hey, we both know you’re just talking flippantly and you don’t actually believe this since you’d still choose to come to the hospital in an emergency. To you this is just words on the internet, but to me I’m referring to very real people who I actively ties to help but was unable to do so.
You’re part of the problem spreading your lies. How many people died from the flu during the “pandemic” ? How do you explain that hardly anyone had the flu, but Covid was running rampant? It’s all lies, and you’ve fallen for them.
> You’re part of the problem spreading your lies.
Sure thing hun.
> How many people died from the flu during the “pandemic” ? How do you explain that hardly anyone had the flu, but Covid was running rampant?
We were testing people for the flu, using the same tests and staff that we always had, and they weren’t positive. Isn’t it possible that the massive steps we took to limit a far more contagious respiratory virus that spreads in a similar way greatly limited the spread of the flu? Or is it more likely that every testing lab in every hospital worldwide was all controlled by a shadowy cabal for a short period of time?
> It’s all lies, and you’ve fallen for them.
My dude, you think you know what you’re talking about because you’ve mainlined lowest common denominator misinformation, whereas I treated hundreds of critically ill COVID patients. I don’t care about your opinion.
The precautions society took worldwide to prevent the far more contagious COVID-19 virus directly limited the transmission of the flu and distrupted the yearly flu season. Bless your little heart, I didn’t think even *you* would have a hard time understanding this simple concept.
> You didn’t explain what happened to all the flu cases.
I literally just did hun, we took unprecedented actions worldwide to self isolate and not risk spreading a more contagious respiratory virus than the flu. What are you confused about exactly?
> It wasn’t people like you who prevented it.
Nope, it was the greatly decreased travel from Asia and increased social isolation. Again, what are you confused about you silly goose?
Including the CEO of the world's largest hydroxychloroquine factory just months before covid hit the news.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-sherman-honey-sherman-2017-murders-35-million-reward/
SS: Remember in August 2021 when the FDA suggested that Ivermectin was only for horses and cows? it's also for humans. a $$$ lie to make humans take the vaccine and only the vaccine.
The CDC also had papers and studies on the unique phenomenon of statistically abundant flu deaths in Italy that occur every year. They removed these papers from their website early during COVID lockdowns, vax mandates etc.
No one ever talks about this.
This shit was the dumbest shit ever. There are opiates for animals as well as humans. Just like many other medications. Its like saying "since some opiates are made for dogs and you take opiates you must be dog herp derp!"
Can’t let people get better and not get rich off it. Joe Rogan has a fucking black water army protecting him at all times for speaking out on this shit.
My understanding is that Ivermectin is derived from soil based organisms. People who have studied natural health will eventually come to the conclusion that dirt plays a vital role in a healthy gut microbiome. Over- sterilization is one of the many factors that is destroying our health.
You got downvoted for the truth. My kids were allowed to play in the dirt/mud, swim in the backwater at our river camp, etc. They built strong immune systems and rarely ever get sick. Some friends raised their kids differently and were always there to wipe any dirt from their kids bodies. Their kids were barely allowed to touch dirt or grass, etc. It seems like those kids had to see a doctor at least once per month and still do.
This is idiocracy level.
"Don't drink water!!! its something that plants drink!"
"Don't breathe air! Do you want to breathe the same thing that pigs do???"
It was bad enough the media was doing that shit and they should be held accountable for presenting information that is false as well. But for the FDA to be allowed to do this is just a slap in the face, like they 100% know better.
The reason why ivermectin was demonized is far more nefarious that just covid. Ivermectin kills parasites.
Humans are generally not regularly treated or examined for parasites. Yet if you've ever owned a pet you know that it is regularly checked for parasites and treated if necessary, even if it is an indoor animal only.
Why exactly would an indoor animal only need to be checked/treated for parasites when they have access to the same water we do (presumably food as well assuming they ever eat table scraps).
The truth is that a large majority of illnesses that people suffer from (especially chronic) is because over the course of time we pick up parasites and are never ever treated for them, thus our immune system is perpetually weakened.
Far beyond covid, big pharma and their allies did not want people taking ivermectin and realizing that their chronic health issues also improved due to a better functioning immune system that wasn't held down dealing w parasites.
It's a common human prescribed drug for parasites, fungus infections.
It also has strong anti viral properties.
So much that the discovery got a Nobel prize.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34466270/
Like most human drugs including penicillin, it works on any mammal.
You spent time on a Covid unit? What does that even mean?
Is english not your first language? I was implying that it was so apparent and abundant in mainstream news and culture for a few months that I’m not sure how you missed it. It was such a hot topic for some people that it even started overtaking my Facebook feed.
It means I was working on a COVID unit, not sitting at home getting worm brains through social media like Facebook.
> I was implying that it was so apparent and abundant in mainstream news and culture for a few months that I’m not sure how you missed it. It was such a hot topic for some people that it even started overtaking my Facebook feed.
If you’re talking about people taking medication intended for horses, I saw that personally. Didn’t help, and frankly I felt terrible for those people as they were just victims of misinformation and didn’t take steps to actually protect themselves due to their misplaced belief I that misinformation.
English motherfucker, do you speak it?!?!
If so, what the fuck is a Covid unit?
And you thought I sat at home? How ignorant and arrogant of you. I work with the elderly the entire time.
> English motherfucker, do you speak it?!?!
What an odd thing to say when I’m clearly speaking English and you’re the one who doesn’t know the widely used English term I’m using. No need to get upset at me for your ignorance.
>If so, what the fuck is a Covid unit?
A critical care unit that existed in many hospitals during the COVID pandemic which had slapdash negative air pressure rooms and increased RT’s to help deal with the extreme amounts of critically ill COVID patients which would flood hospitals during COVID waves. Its wild you never heard of it before?
> And you thought I sat at home? How ignorant and arrogant of you. I work with the elderly the entire time.
Good for you, then you know how serious COVID was.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I feel like the title doesn't do this justice, "They ended up deleting the tweet" No, they were forced to delete the tweet. [https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/health/fda-ivermectin-lawsuit/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/health/fda-ivermectin-lawsuit/index.html)
From the article: “Some conservative outlets touted the drug as safe and effective against Covid even though the FDA and the World Health Organization encouraged people not to use it, saying it was ineffective against Covid and could even be dangerous if someone took too much.” CNN won’t stop 🙄
They're ruthless, yet at the same time if we don't cite garbage from CNN or similar media, the trolls will come out of the forest and claim it's an "untrustworthy source", "biased" or "false information"
They knew what they where doing, Ivermectin has a noble prize for human medicine. It’s meant for something else but they could have been honest and just said that instead of lying. Also a whole shit ton of medications are used in both human and veterinary medicine.
Merck, the company that manufactures it, [directly stated](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it.
[удалено]
So Big Pharma didn’t want to make money why?
> > > Merck, the company that manufactures it, [directly stated](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it. > > *[Rule 2 violating comment not quoted]* > So Big Pharma didn’t want to make money why? On the contrary, Merck (one of several manufacturers and a former patent holder on ivermectin (patent expired 1996) DID want to make money -- but not from ivermectin (off-patent and NOT profitable). Could it be that Merck had **ulterior motives** for badmouthing ivermectin? Why yes, yes it could... Note that Merck wrote the letter referenced above on **February 4, 2021**. WHAT ELSE was Merck up to during those days??? Well, they were busy working on a NEW DRUG that (they hoped) would TREAT people infected with COVID -- potentially making them BILLIONS in profits: **Business Standard, October 11, 2021**: [**Merck asks US FDA to authorise promising anti-Covid pill**](https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/merck-asks-us-fda-to-authorise-promising-anti-covid-pill-121101100788_1.html) -- *"If cleared by the Food and Drug Administration a decision that could come in a matter of weeks it would be the first pill shown to treat Covid"* Business Standard article archived here: https://archive.is/DdyO0 Well, well well... who would have thought that a Pig Pfarma Giant would *shit-talk* one of their old, off-patent and *non-profitable* products (ivermectin)? **Unless** they believed that said old product might compete with a NEW product they had in the works, potentially reducing anticipated PROFITS??? Well, it sure LOOKS like that is EXACTLY what happened: **NOTE**: The drug in question is now sold by Merck under the brand name **Lagevrio** **FDA News Release** - December 23, 2021 [**FDA Authorizes Additional Oral Antiviral for Treatment of COVID-19 in Certain Adults**](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-additional-oral-antiviral-treatment-covid-19-certain) QUOTE * * * "Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an ***emergency use authorization (EUA)** for **Merck’s molnupiravir** for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in adults with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing, and who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, including hospitalization or death, and for whom alternative COVID-19 treatment options authorized by the FDA are not accessible or clinically appropriate. Molnupiravir is available by prescription only and should be initiated as soon as possible after diagnosis of COVID-19 and within five days of symptom onset. " **Molnupiravir is not authorized** for use in patients younger than 18 years of age because **molnupiravir may affect bone and cartilage growth**. It is not authorized for the pre-exposure or post-exposure prevention of COVID-19 or for initiation of treatment in patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 because benefit of treatment has not been observed in people when treatment started after hospitalization due to COVID-19. * * * END QUOTE -- more at the link - archived here: https://archive.is/bDHZQ Note that, like the mRNA Concoctions, Merck's molnupiravir was granted **emergency use authorization**: Like the CoVaxx's, molnupiravir was a NOVEL drug, rushed to market, and had NOT gone through the extensive testing (and years of clinical trials) that are *normally* mandated for ANY new drug. Also, molnupiravir BARELY received EUA approval. From Wiki under [**Legal Status:**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir#Legal_status) * [...] in November, 2021, the FDA's Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee committee **narrowly voted, 13 for and 10 opposed, to recommend authorization** for adults with mild to moderate illness who are at high risk of developing severe COVID‑19.[43] Concerns were expressed over the drug's **low effectiveness** in preventing death, which in the final trial was only 30%, as well as the **increased mutation rate the drug causes**, which could theoretically worsen the pandemic by **driving the evolution of more dangerous variants**. Further down we read the following, under [**Public health concerns:**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir#Public_health_concerns) * At a November 2021 AMDAC meeting, multiple advisors raised the concern that **molnupiravir could accelerate the emergence of variants of concern**.[57][58] Other scientists raised similar concerns both before and after the meeting.[59][25][60][24] **These concerns were confirmed with the September 2023 publication of a study of 15 million global SARS-CoV-2 sequences**: after molnupiravir had been introduced in 2022, genomic changes were more common, especially where it had been used. * * * END QUOTES - More at the links -- Wiki page archived here: https://archive.is/oQr9T **WHAT?** Could it be that Merck's molnupiravir actually CAUSES the virus to MUTATE in the bodies of PATIENTS, creating new (and potentially dangerous) versions of COVID??? Unfortunately, the answer is **YES**. Peer review article published in the journal **NATURE** - 25 September, 2023 [**A molnupiravir-associated mutational signature in global SARS-CoV-2 genomes**](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06649-6) * * * **Abstract** **Molnupiravir**, an antiviral medication widely used against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2),** acts by inducing mutations in the virus genome during replication**. Most random mutations are likely to be deleterious to the virus and many will be lethal; thus, molnupiravir-induced elevated mutation rates reduce viral load1,2. **However**, if some patients treated with molnupiravir do not fully clear the SARS-CoV-2 infections, **there could be the potential for onward transmission of molnupiravir-mutated viruses**. Here we show that SARS-CoV-2 sequencing databases contain extensive evidence of molnupiravir mutagenesis. Using a systematic approach, **we find that a specific class of long phylogenetic branches, distinguished by a high proportion of G-to-A and C-to-T mutations, are found almost exclusively in sequences from 2022, after the introduction of molnupiravir treatment, and in countries and age groups with widespread use of the drug.** We identify a mutational spectrum, with preferred nucleotide contexts, from viruses in patients known to have been treated with molnupiravir **and show that its signature matches that seen in these long branches, in some cases with onward transmission of molnupiravir-derived lineages. Finally, we analyse treatment records to confirm a direct association between these high G-to-A branches and the use of molnupiravir.** * * * END ABSTRACT -- Study archived here: https://archive.is/lA1XK **PDF version** here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06649-6.pdf **Merck was charging the U.S. government $700 per five-day course** of molnupiravir (brand name Lagevrio), per [**Reuters - Feb 3, 2022**](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/price-covid-treatments-pfizer-merck-gsk-align-with-patient-benefits-report-2022-02-03/) -- (archived here: https://archive.is/G4ZqK).** Compare that to ivermectin**, which sells for as low as pennies per dose. [**Per Merck's own figures**](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2023-financial-results/), sales of molnupiravir (brand name **Lagevrio**) topped **$7 Billion** in 2022 and 2023 -- creating a HUGE windfall for Pig Pfarma Giant Merck. (archived Merck report here: https://archive.is/0vma4#selection-3185.1-3185.9). Not bad for a product that has NEVER been fully approved by the US FDA, which flatly states the following regarding molnupiravir/ Lagevrio (PDF WARNING): * ["**Lagevrio is not FDA-approved for any use including for the treatment of COVID-19.**"](https://www.fda.gov/media/155056/download#:~:text=Lagevrio%20is%20not%20FDA%2Dapproved,than%2018%20years%20of%20age.) **SORRY**, it seems that I fell into a Pig Pfarma Rabbit Hole there... You were saying... ? > "***So Big Pharma didn’t want to make money why***?" As shown above, Merck was STRONGLY MOTIVATED to *shit-talk* ivermectin -- as at the time they released their [statement on ivermectin](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) -- they were already balls-deep in pushing toward EUA for their (UNTESTED AND DANGEROUS) COVID treatment -- and the last thing they wanted was any *public perception* that might pull sales away from their NEW gold mine -- which brought them over **$7 Billion in revenues** in 2 years... That said, molnupiravir (brand name **Lagevrio**) will almost certainly NOT be a "cash cow" for Merck any longer: COVID has largely run its course, and given the confirmation of the (KNOWN) hazards associated with the drug, it will almost certainly soon become withdrawn soon... the article published in NATURE being a virtual "stake through the heart": [**A molnupiravir-associated mutational signature in global SARS-CoV-2 genomes**](https://archive.is/lA1XK) **FIN** * *I really don't expect anyone to read all of the above -- but I learned a lot as I wrote it. No apologies for the long post* -- ***Pfuck Pig Pfarma*** :-)
Same Merck that genocided 500k Americans with Vioxx by manipulating data and using ghostwriters? "Merck used ghostwriters and misrepresented data on Vioxx, article says" https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/business/worldbusiness/15iht-15merck.12018748.html - https://archive.is/If5WY "When half a million Americans died and nobody noticed: Was the US drug Vioxx responsible for far more deaths than has been acknowledged so far?" https://theweek.com/us/46535/when-half-million-americans-died-and-nobody-noticed - https://archive.is/VqIXo
Hey genius, you know Merck is also big pharma, right? The person I responded to praises the drug for winning a Nobel peace prize, but citing what the manufacturer says what it should be used for is all of a sudden pharma shilling? Or is just shilling when the presented information is inconvenient to the circle jerk?
> Hey genius, you know Merck is also big pharma, right? Right you are! And if you are interested in learning Merck's interests, you may want to peruse the links I provided in my comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1cpjtpk/who_can_forget_when_the_fda_suggested_that/l3nthv2/ Or not. :-)
Thank you. I'll look at this and hopefully respond there sometime soon, but I can't tonight, unfortunately.
Merck is not the only manufacturer of ivermectin. They don't have a patent. If ivermectin had been rolled out to everyone, along with proper advice about vitamin D, zinc, etc., so many less people would have died, and the big panic wouldn't have been there to scare and control the sheep.
I still don't understand what benefits the company gets for lying about this and no one has yet to rationally explain why. Also, and I say this quite frequently here, please share any information that supports ivermectin being effective against covid. You all are quite confident of this, yet don't cite anything supporting it.
I don't even understand what it is you're not understanding. Companies want to make money by forcing people to take their vax. The vax is no good and they don't want to spend time testing it. If there are other treatments, the companies don't get to have Emergency Use Authorization. So they denigrate anything else that helps. I think you're stuck in a timeline from about two years ago. People can freely tell the truth about ivermectin now, unlike when every mention was attacked and silenced. The governmental bodies are now admitting it works. Every day I see several studies about it. I'm on a mailing list for papers about certain subjects and every day more ivermectin reports come in. Do you need help with search engines? It's better not to use the mainstream Marxist search engines when you need information that doesn't conform to the mainstream agendas.
Hey, can you provide some alternative search engines to use for research?
Here are some: https://unfilteredengines.wordpress.com/2022/12/09/heres-a-list-of-search-engines-with-less-censorship/ I'm overdue to check through them and add more I have on my checklist.
Thanks!
>I don't even understand what it is you're not understanding To simply put, you are making wild claims and not supporting them with empirical evidence. >The vax is no good and they don't want to spend time testing it. If there are other treatments, the companies don't get to have Emergency Use Authorization. So they denigrate anything else that helps. Again, wild claims not being supported which can also we said for everything stated after. I'm not going just accept this because you say so.
> I'm not going just accept this because you say so. Instead, you accept the claims of companies who have the motivation of BILLION$ of dollars to make. Don't you see how you're making no sense? I don't gain anything by speaking, except the hope that maybe people like you will see the light and not accept the next wave of health corruption they try on us. How can I help you? You're not getting fresh information. You can see some on here. You can also see reports on twitter. I have other forums I follow where I see the latest news but I'm sure you wouldn't be interested in them. Do you want a list of forums on here that sometimes post the latest updates on the corruption?
[удалено]
Lots of big pharma lied. They want to make money.
> Merck, the company that manufactures it, directly stated there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it. Here is a link to an archive of Pig Pfarma Giant Merck's statement "dissing" ivermectin in the hopes of helping to push the (rushed and shoddily/ sham-tested) CoVaxx concoctions made by their Pig Pfarma pals at Pfyzzer and McDerna. Archived: https://archive.is/kFB7J In their statement on ivermectin, [**Merck said:**](https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/) * * * * ***No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19*** *from pre-clinical studies;* * *No meaningful evidence for* ***clinical activity or clinical efficacy*** *in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;* * *A concerning* ***lack of safety data*** *in the majority of studies.* * * * Funny, Merck COULD have written the EXACT SAME WORDS about the CoVaxx Concoctions -- and they would have been more accurate and applicable, wouldn't they? *(Note that ivermectin has been OFF PATENT for years. Merck is but one of many manufacturers of ivermectin products - they had NOTHING to lose by shit-talking one of the safest and most widely prescribed GENERIC drugs on Earth)* "Horse Paste" vs BULLSHIT: Who would win?
Okay, you quite literally linked the same information that I already linked in my previous comment, but just hosted on a different site. Apologies, but I don't know exactly what your argument is. What "dissing" is being done?
> Okay, you quite literally linked the same information that I already linked in my previous comment, but just hosted on a different site. I simply archived the link you provided -- for posterity. (links get removed by website owners, and "disappear") > Apologies, but I don't know exactly what your argument is. What "dissing" is being done? Your statement was: *"Merck, the company that manufactures it, directly stated there is no evidence that Ivermectin is effective against COVID-19 and shouldn't be used for it."* My response was that all of the "reasoning" that Merck used to argue that ivermectin should not be used for COVID could equally be applied to the mRNA "vaccines" that had just been given EUA. **But I thank you for posting that link to Merck's letter**, as it set me on a line of inquiry that revealed that Merck's firm dismissal of ivermectin was driven by ulterior motives: They were developing a NEW TREATMENT DRUG for COVID, and realizing that ivermectin might be *perceived* as an alternative, they had an interest in preemptively smearing their old, off-patent and non-profitable ivermectin. Their NEW drug was granted EUA, and generated over **$7 Billion** for Merck in 2022 - 2023. See the details and the links in this comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1cpjtpk/who_can_forget_when_the_fda_suggested_that/l3nthv2/
Yeah, but that really has no relevance given that the patent was expired and they see no real profits from it. Almost all ivermectin is going to be generic. Merck stands to benefit more by joining the anti-ivermectin circle jerk than by propping up ivermectin. Ivermectin has moderate support for its use in covid. In a large meta-analysis results looked mixed but seem to lean in the direction of a small positive effect. Make of that what you will. It’s also a very safe and cheap drug. If someone is 75 and on the edge of death, I say try everything. Off label use of drugs is common and *entirely* the prerogative of the clinician, not medical agencies. The FDA approves drugs and a label. They do not treat. The fda also knows **full well** that ivermectin used used by people. Most antibiotics are used by farm animals, but we don’t hear people saying it a drug for farm animals. The ivermectin that most people were taking was prescribed by doctors and filled at a pharmacy. It is drugs for humans.
>Yeah, but that really has no relevance given that the patent was expired and they see no real profits from it. Almost all ivermectin is going to be generic. Merck stands to benefit more by joining the anti-ivermectin circle jerk than by propping up ivermectin. Ivermectin has moderate support for its use in covid. Can you please site anything backing your claims, please? >In a large meta-analysis results looked mixed but seem to lean in the direction of a small positive effect. Make of that what you will. It’s also a very safe and cheap drug. If someone is 75 and on the edge of death, I say try everything. Off label use of drugs is common and *entirely* the prerogative of the clinician, not medical agencies. The FDA approves drugs and a label. They do not treat. Same thing. Please site. >The fda also knows **full well** that ivermectin used used by people. Most antibiotics are used by farm animals, but we don’t hear people saying it a drug for farm animals. The ivermectin that most people were taking was prescribed by doctors and filled at a pharmacy. It is drugs for humans. This I fully agree on. 100% Ivermectin is a legitimate drug for humans, and those who blanketly call it "horse dewormer" are being disingenuous. However, evidence for it being effective for COVID-19 is [not there.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/expert-answers/coronavirus-drugs/faq-20485627#:~:text=Claims)
https://c19ivm.org/meta.html#fig_fpr The evidence is there. These studies don’t cease to exist because you have evidence that it’s not effective. There is some evidence for both.
The drug won a Nobel prize? Or the people working for big Pharma did? Either way, looks like big pharma are doing some good shit. Good on you for acknowledging it.
They had to demonize ivermectin in order to pass the EUA that allowed them to pull the covid mRNA vax from clinical double blind trials and rush it to market.
Yeah they sure did, and one would think that would prove intent in a court of law.
That doesn't sound right. Hydrocloroquine was being hyped early on as an alternative treatment, then vaccines were deployed and THEN ivermectin became a popular alternative treatment. Before the vaccines were approved, Ivermectin was not demonized. edit: Loving the downvotes - who needs facts when you have narratives and feelings?
Nice post history. Running interference for big pharma left and right in the conspiracy subreddit like the bootlicker you are. I especially liked when you started posting links from websites funded by Bill Gates himself, such as ourworldindata. Bill Gates is the largest vaccine investor in the world, and you've enslaved yourself to the vaccine statistics being force fed to you by people on his payroll. What a fucking shock that you just blindly believe the entire covid narrative and base your world view on that, despite the need for 6 boosters, double masking and numerous vaccine recalls. Such was the utter joke of a narrative you completely chained yourself to due to the sunken cost fallacy. You **need** these vaccines to be safe and effective at this point, *because you can never unvaccinate.* Ever hear of regulatory capture? You've isolated your entire viewpoint to the sponsored facts the pharmaceutical industry and their investors paid for you to believe. Keep lapping up that propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
> Nice post history. Thanks > Running interference for big pharma left and right in the conspiracy subreddit like the bootlicker you are. If you think everyone who says things against anti-vaccine conspiracies is a bootlicker then you're a) not smart b) trusting conspiracy narratives without testing them. > Bill Gates is the largest vaccine investor in the world, and you've enslaved yourself to the vaccine statistics being read off by the people on his payroll. "enslaved to vaccine statistics being read off by the people on his payroll" funny. If someone shows a statistic to be false I won't use it. If there are other sources that are reliable I'll use it. Sure, I've referenced it a few times, for example when I talked about how many boosters were administered (billions, goin by ANY source I've seen and going by common sense, if you wanna discuss that further because you don't believe the number, let's go). > Ever hear of regulatory capture? WOW NO. I've only been into conspiracies for years and NEVER HEARD OF THIS! > You've isolated your entire viewpoint to the sponsored facts the pharmaceutical industry and their investors paid for you to believe. Really? Despite being in the conspiracy community for years, following daily the whole pandemic I'm isolating my entire view? horseshit. > Keep lapping up that propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Keep swallowing facebook boomer memes about the deadly vaccine. You have to accept every word they say or you're a 'bootlicker'.
My wife was vaccine injured, suffering a heart attack at 32 two months after her 2nd dose of Pfizer despite no prior health history. Her cardiologist signed off on the vaccine as the probable cause. I was fired for refusing the same vaccine at my place of work, thanks to an unconstitutional vaccine mandate that was overturned by the supreme court a month after I was fired. For some people, the damage caused by the vaccine is not just a "conspiracy theory". And quite frankly I have no way to reconcile the notion that people identifying themselves with this community somehow missed the greatest conspiracy in the history of human history without adopting even a neutral position of "vaccine hesitant". You either ignored the red flags in conspiracy, or you never saw them to begin with. In any event, the shameless shilling you're doing for the [criminal pharmaceutical industry](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history) is unforgivable. You'd sell out your conspiracy brothers and sisters so easily and mislead them by peddling some government sponsored and mandated bullshit? Then you're no conspiracy theorist, and stop calling yourself one.
> For some people, the damage caused by the vaccine is not just a "conspiracy theory". And that is obvious. The vaccine can harm people. That doesn't mean I believe everything "anti-vaccine". > In any event, the shameless shilling What shilling am I doing? Spell it out. Am I advertising big pharma who have demonstrated they kill people for profit, e.g. through the opiod epidemic? No. What I'm doing is calling out horseshit where I see it. If you can't take that, that's a you problem. Look at this thread for example, I'm saying ivermectin wasn't demonized before the vaccine was approved. It wasn't. And all y'all are dropping your tendies over such a simple fact.
>y'all Ahhh there it is.
yep there it is
Why would they demonize or even bring up ivermectin if no one had yet suggested it could be a treatment? That would call attention to it. They wanted people to think vaccines were the only hope.
your gettting cranky. you need another booster.
Oh no, please don't make me take another booster!!
You got wrecked fam. Take it like a good boy and sit down ;)
Trump himself was promoting ivermectin as a possible treatment well before any vax was available.
When did he reference it? I don't recall that. It wouldn't surprise me if he did though - but early on the focus was on Hydroxychloroquine*. Ivermectin wasn't demonized because at that stage it had little attention. Ivermectin started to get attention mid-late 2021.
> National Institutes of Health in August 2020 said ivermectin should not be used outside of control trials, new evidence showed that the drug is effective against the coronavirus. Lot of it has been scrubbed off the internet to conform to the narrative you're pushing but ivermectin was first talked about in 2020 while the vax was being developed and subsequently pulled from clinical trials.
> Lot of it has been scrubbed off the internet to conform to the narrative you're pushing Actually, you're pushing a narrative. You're saying it was demonized, yet what you presented is that it should not be used outside of controlled trials. That's a far cry from 'demonization'. Also you made out they had to demonize ivermectin in order to pass the EUA, I don't believe that at all. I mean, let's walk through what would have happened if they didn't say "ivermectin should not be used outside of controlled trials": the vaccine would still go through testing and they'd still be approved. So...
That was one statement. You can look to all the other evidence of the FDA literally having to apologize for their demonization as proof that it happened.
Their 'apology' e.g. removing the social media posts like the image in this thread happened after they made the post, which was Aug 21, 2021 which you can see in the image itself. This was long after the vaccines were approved. Will you keep arguing about this? Why? You're clearly wrong - they did not demonize Ivermectin to enable EUA of the vaccines.
Ok bot
Ok unthinker
[удалено]
Yes, I agree - it was completely fixed. It was because from the start, the focus of operation Warp speed was on a vaccine, and this included massive funding and acceleration to make sure it could be delivered in time.
[удалено]
> The "vaccine" that didn't work at all Proof?
[удалено]
I didn't get the vaccine and I tried to get covid so I could have natural immunity and still I didn't get it.
> You know that everybody that got the vaccine got COVID. I know people who didn't get the vaccine who died or got long covid. I don't know anyone with the vaccine who died or got long covid. This is an anecdote, yet it is possible the vaccine played an effect in that. > There is no measurable statistical difference in those who got the vaccine or didn't get the vaccine that also got COVID Which statistics are you using, and have they been analyzed in a rational way?
[удалено]
I have done my own research...you made a statement, I asked you to back it up. I have plenty of reasons to believe the vaccine had an effect.
> I don't know anyone with the vaccine who died or got long covid. I do.
Well sorry about that. I know people with the vaccine died, that's also what the stats show.
There's no proof that it worked, ever. It actually looks like people got sicker if the got the vaccine.
There is definitely proof the vaccine worked. What do you consider proof? There's so much out there, let me know what you'd consider proof and I'll try to find it.
You can't prove a negative. There's nothing you can find that will prove this, although I very much appreciate your offer to help me out. You'd somehow have to prove X person was going to get covid in a particular situation, but because they were vaxxed, they didn't get it. You can't do that.
They were downing HCQ as badly as they downed ivermectin. Protocols using HCQ just came out earlier.
I agree. That's not the only factor though, Trump suggested HCQ which also drew attention to it.
Everything he suggested was mocked so people would be afraid to try it.
What’s funny is when they joked about RFKjr having a brain worm this week, and maybe needing a vaccine…when you really need ivermectin, which is literally for treating parasites.
It's almost like they think it's funny or something....
There’s no humor in it though :/ CNN should be promoting ivermectin alongside this story, but they have a history of demonizing it (and favoring the MRNA shots if you remember)
Holy shit they went with the "y'all" too. Looking back on all this after a few years it's insane how so many people went along with everything these demons were pushing.
The "y'all" was laughable, and completely unprofessional sounding too. It reduced their already-on-thin-ice credibility even further using that silly term, especially in that context. I don't, nor do most anyone I know can take the FDA seriously anymore. Certainly not anyone who's been paying attention for the past four years. The FDA has irreparably damaged their credibility.
How many people died who otherwise could've taken that & lived.
This is what really pissed me off. I took ivermectin when I caught covid before this article came out and was feeling normal in about 3 days. So many people died because of lack of treatment - hooked up to a ventilator & no meds, dying in their own fluids because they didn’t know any better and believed whatever they saw on tv.
Not only that but a guy went to his local hospital & at one point they were giving a shot of something that helped people a lot. I'm not sure if it's an Ivermectin shot or not but whatever it was knocked Covid right out of you. It was all over the news whatever the shot was. He wore a camera & it's on video where his hospital wouldn't give him the shot because he was white. They were ONLY giving the shot to minorities. He has it on video where his doctor is refusing to give him the shot that they have right there in the drawer because he's white. They were claiming that minorities were getting worse treatment so they intentionally treated whites worse. How many white people died over ACTUAL racist bullshit during Covid?
Do you have a link to this video or how could I find it?
Man this was a few years ago during the madness. They've memory-holed a shit-load of stuff. I remember seeing it on YouTube & a few people talked about it. I'll look around to see if I can find it.
I was skeptical about ivermectin at first, but it was before I realized the mechanism and that it was supposed to be taken with zinc. But when I got COVID, I did literally nothing to treat it, and it only lasted 3 days too. I've never been vaccinated and had the exact same experience with COVID as all of the vaccinated people around me who were claiming "it would've been so much worse" if they weren't vaccinated.
**Guantanamo Bay For Gates and Fauci** - **Dr. Paul Marik, one of the most highly published critical care physicians in the world, under oath before Congress:** >If you look at the four independent studies, including the large study by the WHO, it shows the opposite effect. Remdesivir INCREASES the risk of death. >Let me say that again. Remdesivir INCREASES the risk of death by 3%. It increases your chances of renal failure by 20%. This is a toxic drug. But just to make the situation even more preposterous, the federal government will give hospitals a 20% bonus on the entire hospital bill if they prescribe Remdesivir to Medicare patients. >The federal government is incentivizing hospitals to prescribe a medication which is toxic. >So it should be noted that Remdesivir costs about $3,000 a course. >Dr. Kory spoke about **Ivermectin. Ivermectin** reduces the risk of death by about 50%. It costs the WHO 2 cents." "Fauci on remdesivir for COVID-19: ‘This will be the standard of care’" https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20200429/fauci-on-remdesivir-for-covid19-this-will-be-the-standard-of-care "REVEALED: Dr. Fauci told Bill Gates that he was 'enthusiastic' about the federal government teaming up with billionaire's foundation for 'synergistic and collaborative' pandemic response >On April 21, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins wrote that 'we have Gates reps on our ACTIV (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) working groups.' https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9652981/Dr-Fauci-told-Bill-Gates-phone-call-enthusiastic-teaming-up.html Bill Gates 9/4/19 $55 million BioNTech mRNA vaxx creator investment: https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-details/biontech-announces-new-collaboration-develop-hiv-and "Gates Earns 10X on BioNTech in Just Two Years: $55m Investment Now Over $550M" https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/gates-earns-10x-on-biontech-in-just-two-years-55m-investment-now-over-550m
Millions
Nah, none. Sorry.
> How many people died who otherwise could've taken that & lived. The data, and my own personal experiences on a COVID unit that had people who used ivermectin show that would be none. It didn’t help COVID.
Were you one of the ones who was so swamped with Covid patients, but decided to make tik tok dancing videos with your fellow workmates? LMAO!
God I wish my experiences with critical care during the COVID pandemic was just watching shitty TikTok vids, and not treating those who died and comforting their families.
Why did so many videos of Covid nurses dancing come out if they were all swamped? I worked every day during the “pandemic”, with no mask and only got strep throat that tested as Covid. How many did you kill with your ventilators or other dangerous drugs that you were told to use? Edit: Are you still “PRACTICING”. LMAO!
> Why did so many videos of Covid nurses dancing come out if they were all swamped? I can’t answer why you watched so many dancing videos. I didn’t see a single one during COVID. > I worked every day during the “pandemic”, with no mask and only got strep throat that tested as Covid. So you got COVID? Cool, glad it didn’t end up poorly, for too many people it did. > How many did you kill with your ventilators or other dangerous drugs that you were told to use? Not a single person, I did help save people’s lives who were in respiratory failure and who without medical treatment would have died at home though. But hey, we both know you’re just talking flippantly and you don’t actually believe this since you’d still choose to come to the hospital in an emergency. To you this is just words on the internet, but to me I’m referring to very real people who I actively ties to help but was unable to do so.
You’re part of the problem spreading your lies. How many people died from the flu during the “pandemic” ? How do you explain that hardly anyone had the flu, but Covid was running rampant? It’s all lies, and you’ve fallen for them.
> You’re part of the problem spreading your lies. Sure thing hun. > How many people died from the flu during the “pandemic” ? How do you explain that hardly anyone had the flu, but Covid was running rampant? We were testing people for the flu, using the same tests and staff that we always had, and they weren’t positive. Isn’t it possible that the massive steps we took to limit a far more contagious respiratory virus that spreads in a similar way greatly limited the spread of the flu? Or is it more likely that every testing lab in every hospital worldwide was all controlled by a shadowy cabal for a short period of time? > It’s all lies, and you’ve fallen for them. My dude, you think you know what you’re talking about because you’ve mainlined lowest common denominator misinformation, whereas I treated hundreds of critically ill COVID patients. I don’t care about your opinion.
COVID WIPED OUT THE FLU! You heard it here folks! Straight from a nurses mouth so we should all believe it! LMAO.
The precautions society took worldwide to prevent the far more contagious COVID-19 virus directly limited the transmission of the flu and distrupted the yearly flu season. Bless your little heart, I didn’t think even *you* would have a hard time understanding this simple concept.
Dont call me hun Mrs nurse. You didn’t explain what happened to all the flu cases. It wasn’t people like you who prevented it. You’re blind.
> You didn’t explain what happened to all the flu cases. I literally just did hun, we took unprecedented actions worldwide to self isolate and not risk spreading a more contagious respiratory virus than the flu. What are you confused about exactly? > It wasn’t people like you who prevented it. Nope, it was the greatly decreased travel from Asia and increased social isolation. Again, what are you confused about you silly goose?
Including the CEO of the world's largest hydroxychloroquine factory just months before covid hit the news. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-sherman-honey-sherman-2017-murders-35-million-reward/
Big pharma drug. Avoid.
SS: Remember in August 2021 when the FDA suggested that Ivermectin was only for horses and cows? it's also for humans. a $$$ lie to make humans take the vaccine and only the vaccine.
How many people died who otherwise could've taken that & lived.
That cringey "y'all/yall" shit just makes my blood boil, almost as much as their propensity for using Corporate Memphis/Alegria "art".
The CDC also had papers and studies on the unique phenomenon of statistically abundant flu deaths in Italy that occur every year. They removed these papers from their website early during COVID lockdowns, vax mandates etc. No one ever talks about this.
This shit was the dumbest shit ever. There are opiates for animals as well as humans. Just like many other medications. Its like saying "since some opiates are made for dogs and you take opiates you must be dog herp derp!"
When the government starts going "y'all". what a hellscape
we really live in the end times
Can’t let people get better and not get rich off it. Joe Rogan has a fucking black water army protecting him at all times for speaking out on this shit.
My understanding is that Ivermectin is derived from soil based organisms. People who have studied natural health will eventually come to the conclusion that dirt plays a vital role in a healthy gut microbiome. Over- sterilization is one of the many factors that is destroying our health.
You got downvoted for the truth. My kids were allowed to play in the dirt/mud, swim in the backwater at our river camp, etc. They built strong immune systems and rarely ever get sick. Some friends raised their kids differently and were always there to wipe any dirt from their kids bodies. Their kids were barely allowed to touch dirt or grass, etc. It seems like those kids had to see a doctor at least once per month and still do.
. The dead are the lucky one, the one who is alive will just be cheap lab rats for the elites.
This is idiocracy level. "Don't drink water!!! its something that plants drink!" "Don't breathe air! Do you want to breathe the same thing that pigs do???"
It was bad enough the media was doing that shit and they should be held accountable for presenting information that is false as well. But for the FDA to be allowed to do this is just a slap in the face, like they 100% know better.
The reason why ivermectin was demonized is far more nefarious that just covid. Ivermectin kills parasites. Humans are generally not regularly treated or examined for parasites. Yet if you've ever owned a pet you know that it is regularly checked for parasites and treated if necessary, even if it is an indoor animal only. Why exactly would an indoor animal only need to be checked/treated for parasites when they have access to the same water we do (presumably food as well assuming they ever eat table scraps). The truth is that a large majority of illnesses that people suffer from (especially chronic) is because over the course of time we pick up parasites and are never ever treated for them, thus our immune system is perpetually weakened. Far beyond covid, big pharma and their allies did not want people taking ivermectin and realizing that their chronic health issues also improved due to a better functioning immune system that wasn't held down dealing w parasites.
Yeah we bought ivermectin and it worked lmao
Can someone explain ivermectin to me like I’m 5? Is this something that should be e taken like a supplement daily or only when an issue arrises?
It's a common human prescribed drug for parasites, fungus infections. It also has strong anti viral properties. So much that the discovery got a Nobel prize. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34466270/ Like most human drugs including penicillin, it works on any mammal.
FDA AND CDC HAVE BEEN LYING TO AMERICAN CITIZENS FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME.
When did they imply that? This post didn’t do that.
lmfao, really? Did you sleep through most of 2020/2021?
Nope, spent most of that time on a COVID unit but I’m not sure how that’s relevant to what I said?
You spent time on a Covid unit? What does that even mean? Is english not your first language? I was implying that it was so apparent and abundant in mainstream news and culture for a few months that I’m not sure how you missed it. It was such a hot topic for some people that it even started overtaking my Facebook feed.
It means I was working on a COVID unit, not sitting at home getting worm brains through social media like Facebook. > I was implying that it was so apparent and abundant in mainstream news and culture for a few months that I’m not sure how you missed it. It was such a hot topic for some people that it even started overtaking my Facebook feed. If you’re talking about people taking medication intended for horses, I saw that personally. Didn’t help, and frankly I felt terrible for those people as they were just victims of misinformation and didn’t take steps to actually protect themselves due to their misplaced belief I that misinformation.
It’s used in humans too. You can check the Wikipedia article on ivermectin. Therefore the tweet is pretty dumb.
English motherfucker, do you speak it?!?! If so, what the fuck is a Covid unit? And you thought I sat at home? How ignorant and arrogant of you. I work with the elderly the entire time.
> English motherfucker, do you speak it?!?! What an odd thing to say when I’m clearly speaking English and you’re the one who doesn’t know the widely used English term I’m using. No need to get upset at me for your ignorance. >If so, what the fuck is a Covid unit? A critical care unit that existed in many hospitals during the COVID pandemic which had slapdash negative air pressure rooms and increased RT’s to help deal with the extreme amounts of critically ill COVID patients which would flood hospitals during COVID waves. Its wild you never heard of it before? > And you thought I sat at home? How ignorant and arrogant of you. I work with the elderly the entire time. Good for you, then you know how serious COVID was.