Ivermectin and More in the News

COVID-19: A Second Opinion

Senator Ron Johnson Published January 24, 2022 416,684 Views

https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html

Please share this video with family and friends. Yes, it is five hours long but well worth the watch!

Discussion begins around 40 minute mark. Sen. Ron Johnson moderates a panel discussion, COVID-19: A Second Opinion. A group of world renowned doctors and medical experts provide a different perspective on the global pandemic response, the current state of knowledge of early and hospital treatment, vaccine efficacy and safety, what went right, what went wrong, what should be done now, and what needs to be addressed long term.

---

Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching
Cureus, Published January 15, 2022

Abstract

A citywide prevention program using ivermectin for COVID-19 was implemented in Itajaí, a southern city in Brazil in the state of Santa Catarina. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of regular ivermectin use on subsequent COVID-19 infection and mortality rates versus non ivermectin users.

The study analyzed data from a prospective, observational study of the citywide COVID-19 prevention with ivermectin program, which was conducted between July 2020 and December 2020 in Itajaí, Brazil. 

In the absence of contraindications, ivermectin was offered as an optional treatment to be taken for two consecutive days every 15 days at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day.

Study analysis consisted of comparing ivermectin users with non-users using cohorts of infected patients propensity score-matched by age, sex, and comorbidities. COVID-19 infection and mortality rates were analyzed with and without the use of propensity score matching (PSM).

Results:

• There was a with a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate for the cohorts using ivermectin prophylactically (p < 0.0001). 

• The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality (p < 0.0001). When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70% (p < 0.0001).

• There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate among ivermectin users and non-users, respectively (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67% (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion (from the study): In this large PSM study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.

Obviously, this is an important study and validates the anecdotal data from various African countries where ivermectin is given prophylactically and incidence of COVID is very low (knowing that there are lots of confounding variables such has age, weight and vitamin D3 levels found in many of these countries).

The P values of this study are extraordinary and can not be discounted easily by main stream media.

---

Fact-Checkers Are Used to Confuse the Public: Sharyl Attkisson, Epoch Times, By Masooma Haq and Jan Jekielek, January 23, 2022

When does it end?

Five-time Emmy award-winning journalist Sharyl Attkisson was interviewed by Epoch Times regarding her research into fact checkers.

Attkisson criticized large news outlets for being a “mouthpiece” of the government or other special interest groups instead of challenging them or holding them accountable, particularly as it relates to the pandemic.

She said that soon after the pandemic began, she spoke to many scientists, government as well as private, about the virus and the course it was taking before she formed an opinion. She asked some of the scientists to speak out but they were afraid.

“They said they dare not speak out for fear of being controversial, and for fear of being called coronavirus deniers, because that phrase was starting to be used in the media. And secondly, they feared contradicting Dr. Fauci, who they said had been kind of lionized or canonized in the press for reasons that they couldn’t understand.”

---

Sharyl Attkisson said she has seen an increased effort to manipulate the public to appreciate censorship and disapprove of journalism. One of the strategies that has been employed is the use of third-party fact-checkers, she said.

“Nearly every mode of information has been co-opted, if it can be co-opted by some group, [and] fact-checkers are no different,” Attkisson told

“Either they’ve been co-opted, in many instances, or created for the purpose of distributing narratives and propaganda,” said Attkisson. “This is all part of a very well-funded, well-organized landscape that dictates and slants the information they want us to have.”

Attkisson said she first started to notice news being controlled in the early 2000s when the media company she was working for was actively trying to suppress certain stories.

“The pushback came to be more about keeping a story from airing or keeping a study from being reported on the news, not just giving the other side, not just making sure it was accurately reported,” she said of pharmaceutical company stories she was covering at the time.

In 2016 Attkisson heard former President Barack Obama say news needed to be curated, after which mainstream media outlets started to consistently use the term fake news to describe mostly conservative news stories that they deemed untrue.

“And I remember thinking that was such a strange thing to say, because there was no big movement among the public, that people needed to have their information curated, that someone needed to step in and tell us what to think, curate what was online. But … after that, if you look at the media, day after day, there were headlines about fake news and curation of what should and shouldn’t be reported.”