- Joined
- Jul 11, 2021
Quick summary of 2 articles (1,2) concerning a recent deboonking stoody of ivermectin.
Clinical trial used a protocol where :
-the dosage was lower (400µg/kg < 600µg/kg) than recommended by FLCCC (Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance)
-patients were told to take the drug on an empty stomach, which seems to decrease bio-availability (absorption).
-3 days course of treatment instead of the 5 days recommended by the FLCCC
-placebo group poorly followed to ensure compliance with the protocol
-recorded and added all events, ranging from simple ER visit without stay to full hospitalization, to compare test and placebo
Ivermectin group had a slightly reduced occurrence of events, but not in a statistically significant way.
DEBOOOOOONKED. WSJ and NYT both ran stories based on this trial.
The bad faith, if not outright sabotage, is astounding. All the parameters were chosen in a way that minimizes the chances of finding a positive result. It's like proving that you can't win a race by intentionally dragging your feet. Very common junk science strategy unfortunately, same stuff they do to avoid finding a link between <thing> and <disease>.
Second article is talks about academia shenanigans circa January 2021.
A doctor (Andrew Hill) that was part of a group effort to support to promote ivermectin turned coat at a few days before publication.
He released a much less optimistic review of the evidence for ivermectin instead.
Boomers gonna boom, the pdf he released was digitally signed with the name Andrew Owen in the metadata.
Andrew Owen is a professor at the Uni of Liverpool, who had just received a $40 million grant a few days prior.
The grant is awarded by UNITAID (funded by Gates and a bunch of Govs) for a joint venture by UNITAID, Uni Liverpool and private pharma in which Owen is a shareholder.
This paper was instrumental in informing the WHO regarding ivermectin.
Note : I fucking hate this type of grifter website with their Kennedy book shilling and 20mn long videos adding sad music for drama. The info is good and valuable and they muddy everything with this shit. The substack of the guy who uncovered the pdf metadata is also paywalled. I understand those people spend a lot of time on this and need to get paid but all that stuff is in every "conspiracy theory red flags to watch out for" put out by legacy media. All this really undermines the dissemination of information and its optics.
Clinical trial used a protocol where :
-the dosage was lower (400µg/kg < 600µg/kg) than recommended by FLCCC (Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance)
-patients were told to take the drug on an empty stomach, which seems to decrease bio-availability (absorption).
-3 days course of treatment instead of the 5 days recommended by the FLCCC
-placebo group poorly followed to ensure compliance with the protocol
-recorded and added all events, ranging from simple ER visit without stay to full hospitalization, to compare test and placebo
Ivermectin group had a slightly reduced occurrence of events, but not in a statistically significant way.
DEBOOOOOONKED. WSJ and NYT both ran stories based on this trial.
The bad faith, if not outright sabotage, is astounding. All the parameters were chosen in a way that minimizes the chances of finding a positive result. It's like proving that you can't win a race by intentionally dragging your feet. Very common junk science strategy unfortunately, same stuff they do to avoid finding a link between <thing> and <disease>.
Second article is talks about academia shenanigans circa January 2021.
A doctor (Andrew Hill) that was part of a group effort to support to promote ivermectin turned coat at a few days before publication.
He released a much less optimistic review of the evidence for ivermectin instead.
Boomers gonna boom, the pdf he released was digitally signed with the name Andrew Owen in the metadata.
Andrew Owen is a professor at the Uni of Liverpool, who had just received a $40 million grant a few days prior.
The grant is awarded by UNITAID (funded by Gates and a bunch of Govs) for a joint venture by UNITAID, Uni Liverpool and private pharma in which Owen is a shareholder.
This paper was instrumental in informing the WHO regarding ivermectin.
Note : I fucking hate this type of grifter website with their Kennedy book shilling and 20mn long videos adding sad music for drama. The info is good and valuable and they muddy everything with this shit. The substack of the guy who uncovered the pdf metadata is also paywalled. I understand those people spend a lot of time on this and need to get paid but all that stuff is in every "conspiracy theory red flags to watch out for" put out by legacy media. All this really undermines the dissemination of information and its optics.