COVID-19 >> New Drug Activity & VACCINE TRACKING!!

[Gaon]

Israel is close to sixty five per cent vaccinated now. Outdoor mask mandate has been rescinded and kids can return to school soon.

[Anonymous]

Moderna cuts April vaccine deliveries to Canada by almost half..



Canada was due to receive 1.2 million doses of the vaccine by the end of April. That will now be cut to 650,000.

[cc]

Israel is close to sixty five per cent vaccinated now. Outdoor mask mandate has been rescinded and kids can return to school soon.

Nice. A country on the ball in every area does it again.

[cc]

Moderna cuts April vaccine deliveries to Canada by almost half..



Canada was due to receive 1.2 million doses of the vaccine by the end of April. That will now be cut to 650,000.

Our great leader should pay the price for being seen by companies as toothless. Seems only those he is (or rather should be) responsible for are the ones to suffer his incompetency and lack of clout.



In a real world he would have been gone the day he signed with China to "save" us



Note: No company  is screwing Israel around

[Anonymous]

Moderna cuts April vaccine deliveries to Canada by almost half..



Canada was due to receive 1.2 million doses of the vaccine by the end of April. That will now be cut to 650,000.

Our great leader should pay the price for being seen by companies as toothless. Seems only those he is (or rather should be) responsible for are the ones to suffer his incompetency and lack of clout.



In a real world he would have been gone the day he signed with China to "save" us



Note: No company  is screwing Israel around

Instead we'll reelect him.

 ac_unsure

[cc]

Yes, of course

[Anonymous]

Only in Canada would someone who deliberately raises the cost of living, sends resource jobs overseas and screws up vaccine procurement get another frickin chance.

[Anonymous]

120 doctors ask JAMA to retract misleading Colombian study downplaying efficacy of ivermectin

Why is there such an agenda to discredit cheap, repurposed drugs?

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-120-doctors-ask-jama-to-retract-misleading-colombian-study-downplaying-efficacy-of-ivermectin?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210416Trending-HorowitzIvermectin&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-120-doctors-ask-jama-to-retract-misleading-colombian-study-downplaying-efficacy-of-ivermectin?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210416Trending-HorowitzIvermectin&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News



We knew this would happen. The health establishment didn't use fabricated data from a study authored by a science fiction writer and porn star (later retracted), as they did with hydroxychloroquine, but it was almost as bad.



No, they didn't find any harm from ivermectin, but after every study showing the amazing efficacy of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 at every stage of the disease, the media breathlessly promoted a Colombian study supposedly showing no statistically meaningful benefit among those COVID-19 patients who were treated with it.



Last month, a group of Colombian researchers published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluding that, contrary to the findings of every other study, ivermectin showed no signs of bettering outcomes in COVID-19 patients in Cali, Colombia. "Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms," concluded the authors. "The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes."



After ignoring dozens of other studies on ivermectin for months, the New York Times got hold of this study the day it was published and penned an article titled, "Popular Drug Does Not Alleviate Mild Covid-19 Symptoms, Study Finds." I immediately thought this sounded suspicious, given all the evidence that ivermectin helps against even more severe symptoms.



It turns out that the study design was flawed from the beginning, in addition to the fact that the study's own results do not bear out the conclusion posited by the authors. In a letter signed by 120 doctors, concerned clinicians who have successfully treated patients with ivermectin note the following flaws with the design:



The study's flaws span subject population, design, execution and controls. The small sample size (n = 400) had a median age of 37 and a BMI of 26, making them extremely low risk for COVID-19 hard endpoints. Faced with this low-relevance study group, the study authors improperly changed primary endpoint midway, moving the main endpoint to full symptom resolution by day 21. This self-reported subjective endpoint, obtained through telephone survey, is not credible for avoiding nondifferential nullward bias of the results.

Anyone who has paid attention this past year knows that people in their 30s who aren't overweight rarely get severe symptoms, and most suffer quite unremarkable symptoms that are some degree less than a flu. To attempt to prove improved outcomes with a group like this never made any sense.



The letter also highlights three other flaws with the study:



The authors incorrectly administered ivermectin on an empty stomach, reducing drug bioavailability in lung tissue, the critical drug target, by a factor of roughly 2.5. Additionally, ivermectin is readily available over-the-counter in Colombia, where sales have been ubiquitous (1.6 doses per COVID-19 case) in Cali during the study period.[2] Lack of serum testing in the study prevented identification of subjects who may have used the drug at intervals longer than the study lookback.

Thus, you literally had a placebo control group where they didn't ensure they were not taking ivermectin! It would be bad enough not to control for this factor (the primary study point) in an area where ivermectin was not widely available. But it turns out that the department of health in the state of Valle del Cauca – where this study took place – began distributing ivermectin to COVID patients right when the study period began.



Also, just from June to July of last year when the study period began, over-the-counter sales of ivermectin in the Cali region quintupled — to the point that there were more doses administered than number of recorded COVID patients. Given the popularity of the drug in that region at that time, it's inconceivable that a number of those who tested positive in the placebo group did not avail themselves to this drug. In fact, so popular was ivermectin in Valle del Cauca during the study period that during the week of July 5, Google searches for "ivermectina" outpaced searches for "vacuna covid" (COVID vaccine) by a factor of 33.

[cc]

Yes. Vaccines are just part of the solution. Treatments for those infected are vital also



Misinformation in this area has been distributed from the gitgo .. mainly promoted by media + net entities cancelled good info

[Anonymous]

Yes. Vaccines are just part of the solution. Treatments for those infected are vital also



Misinformation in this area has been distributed from the gitgo .. mainly promoted by media + net entities cancelled good info

East Asian countries have been precribing treatments successfully that Western countries have rejected.

[Anonymous]

120 doctors ask JAMA to retract misleading Colombian study downplaying efficacy of ivermectin

Why is there such an agenda to discredit cheap, repurposed drugs?

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-120-doctors-ask-jama-to-retract-misleading-colombian-study-downplaying-efficacy-of-ivermectin?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210416Trending-HorowitzIvermectin&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-120-doctors-ask-jama-to-retract-misleading-colombian-study-downplaying-efficacy-of-ivermectin?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210416Trending-HorowitzIvermectin&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News



We knew this would happen. The health establishment didn't use fabricated data from a study authored by a science fiction writer and porn star (later retracted), as they did with hydroxychloroquine, but it was almost as bad.



No, they didn't find any harm from ivermectin, but after every study showing the amazing efficacy of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 at every stage of the disease, the media breathlessly promoted a Colombian study supposedly showing no statistically meaningful benefit among those COVID-19 patients who were treated with it.



Last month, a group of Colombian researchers published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) concluding that, contrary to the findings of every other study, ivermectin showed no signs of bettering outcomes in COVID-19 patients in Cali, Colombia. "Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms," concluded the authors. "The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes."



After ignoring dozens of other studies on ivermectin for months, the New York Times got hold of this study the day it was published and penned an article titled, "Popular Drug Does Not Alleviate Mild Covid-19 Symptoms, Study Finds." I immediately thought this sounded suspicious, given all the evidence that ivermectin helps against even more severe symptoms.



It turns out that the study design was flawed from the beginning, in addition to the fact that the study's own results do not bear out the conclusion posited by the authors. In a letter signed by 120 doctors, concerned clinicians who have successfully treated patients with ivermectin note the following flaws with the design:



The study's flaws span subject population, design, execution and controls. The small sample size (n = 400) had a median age of 37 and a BMI of 26, making them extremely low risk for COVID-19 hard endpoints. Faced with this low-relevance study group, the study authors improperly changed primary endpoint midway, moving the main endpoint to full symptom resolution by day 21. This self-reported subjective endpoint, obtained through telephone survey, is not credible for avoiding nondifferential nullward bias of the results.

Anyone who has paid attention this past year knows that people in their 30s who aren't overweight rarely get severe symptoms, and most suffer quite unremarkable symptoms that are some degree less than a flu. To attempt to prove improved outcomes with a group like this never made any sense.



The letter also highlights three other flaws with the study:



The authors incorrectly administered ivermectin on an empty stomach, reducing drug bioavailability in lung tissue, the critical drug target, by a factor of roughly 2.5. Additionally, ivermectin is readily available over-the-counter in Colombia, where sales have been ubiquitous (1.6 doses per COVID-19 case) in Cali during the study period.[2] Lack of serum testing in the study prevented identification of subjects who may have used the drug at intervals longer than the study lookback.

Thus, you literally had a placebo control group where they didn't ensure they were not taking ivermectin! It would be bad enough not to control for this factor (the primary study point) in an area where ivermectin was not widely available. But it turns out that the department of health in the state of Valle del Cauca – where this study took place – began distributing ivermectin to COVID patients right when the study period began.



Also, just from June to July of last year when the study period began, over-the-counter sales of ivermectin in the Cali region quintupled — to the point that there were more doses administered than number of recorded COVID patients. Given the popularity of the drug in that region at that time, it's inconceivable that a number of those who tested positive in the placebo group did not avail themselves to this drug. In fact, so popular was ivermectin in Valle del Cauca during the study period that during the week of July 5, Google searches for "ivermectina" outpaced searches for "vacuna covid" (COVID vaccine) by a factor of 33.

The West would rather use lockdowns than safe treatments that have been around for decades.

[Frood]

Israel is close to sixty five per cent vaccinated now. Outdoor mask mandate has been rescinded and kids can return to school soon.

Nice. A country on the ball in every area does it again.

It might depopulate them... on the ball, for genocide...

[cc]

The West would rather use lockdowns than safe treatments that have been around for decades.

Exactly

[Anonymous]

The West would rather use lockdowns than safe treatments that have been around for decades.

Exactly

The problem in the West is that people, including some doctors, were playing political games.

[cc]

The West would rather use lockdowns than safe treatments that have been around for decades.

Exactly

The problem in the West is that people, including some doctors, were playing political games.

Yes. That was what it was ALL about