On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 08:05:52 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<
noe...@verizon.net> wrote:
>"Andrew W" <
sp...@defense.com> wrote in news:ss6c2h$bfd$
1...@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>>
https://needtoknow.news/2022/01/documents-showing-ivermectin-and-hydrox
>> ychloroquine-effective-in-treating-covid-were-buried/
>>
>>
>> There are 67 controlled studies of Ivermectin’s effect on COVID-19
>> that show a 67% improvement in COVID patients. There are 298
>> Hydroxychloroquine studies that show a 64% improvement in patients for
>> COVID-19 patients. Despite the science, Dr. Fauci and the medical
>> elites have blocked the use of these effective treatments for
>> coronavirus patients. Fauci and other top US medical leaders were in
>> on the hydroxychloroquine lie that smeared the treatment as being
>> ineffective and dangerous. Jeremy Farrar, director of Wellcome Trust
>> and a WHO advisory group, was involved in two large hydroxychloroquine
>> trials that used extreme doses that killed about 500 people and was
>> used to sink the use of the drug for COVID.
>>
>> Documents stored on the computers of the Defense Advanced Research
>> Project Agency (DARPA) prove that the medicines Ivermectin,
>> Hydroxychloroquine and Interferon were proven “Curative�€? for
>> COVID-19 in April, 2020, but the cures were buried as “Top
>> Secret.�€?
>>
>> There have now been 67 Ivermectin COVID-19 controlled studies that
>> show a 67% improvement in COVID patients.
>>
>> There have been 298 Hydroxychloroquine studies that show a 64%
>> improvement in patients for COVID-19 patients.
>>
>> Despite the science, Dr. Fauci and the medical elites have blocked the
>> use of these effective treatments for coronavirus patients.
>>
>>
>
>
> Funny that when doctors get Covid they
>prefer to die rather than get treated with
>this stuff. Because they are protecting
>the "real truth" of it so "Big Pharma" can
>make more money.
>
> Makes perfect sense.
There are links to the studies in the "Red Pill University" 'paper'.
https://c19ivermectin.com/
https://c19hcq.com/
I'm not in the right spirit to look into all of the studies, but here
are two 'random' picks from the HCQ-link:
"Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of severe (ICU)
COVID-19 patients in Saudi Arabia: A single centre study
Retrospective 171 ICU patients in Saudi Arabia -->showing no
significant difference for HCQ treatment <-- in unadjusted results.
-->risk of death, 39.2% higher <--, RR 1.39, p = 0.52, treatment 29 of
128 (22.7%), control 7 of 43 (16.3%)."
(My emphasis)
"Pharmacoepidemiology, Machine Learning and COVID-19: An
intent-to-treat analysis of hydroxychloroquine, with or without
azithromycin, and COVID-19 outcomes amongst hospitalized US Veterans
Retrospective 1,769 hospitalized patients in the USA showing no
significant differences for HCQ, and higher intubation for HCQ+AZ."
I could have picked at least 20 other studies that conclude the same
'no significant difference', but I believe that we were not supposed
to go into details here. Who wants 'accurate numbers' anyway?
--
Malte Runz