BTC USD 60,458.4 Gold USD 1,738.05
Time now: Jun 1, 12:00 AM

# Covid-19Belgian Virologist Proposes Plan to Eradicate COVID-19 in 6 Weeks Using Ivermectin

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club

Ivermectin – time for action

A plan to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 in Belgium in six weeks using ivermectin was recently put forward by a Belgian virologist. As the number people testing positive grows and hospitals struggle to cope, this approach deserves serious consideration in other countries too

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was much talk of drug repurposing and the search for suitable candidate drugs began. It was not long before the majority of research effort and money was being poured into existing antiviral drugs and a sprinkling of others.1 In more than 500 trials registered in the first six months, the majority focused on a small number of drugs including hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, azithromycin, tocilizumab, lopinavir, chloroquine and ivermectin.

By late 2020, there was a wave of published results from therapeutic trials of medicines reporting a lack of impact on mortality with use of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon, convalescent plasma, tocilizumab,and monoclonal antibody therapy. One year into the pandemic, the only drug with proven benefits was dexamethasone (for patients who were already hypoxaemic). One drug that had received relatively little attention until recently was ivermectin.

Ivermectin has been widely used to treat a variety of human parasites since its introduction in 1981. It is estimated that four billion doses have been taken over the past 40 years. Such was its impact that the two scientists who discovered and developed ivermectin subsequently received the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Ivermectin is on the WHO’s model list of essential medicines.

A number of clinical trials with ivermectin have been running since early in the pandemic and it has become clear that ivermectin has activity against SARS-CoV-2 and that it is effective both for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19. A rigorous meta-analysis of the 15 randomised controlled trials and observational controlled trials that have so far reported their results has been carried out by Lawrie, in the UK.2 The results show that ivermectin treatment reduces deaths by an average 83% (95% CI 65%–92%). It also reduces the risk of deterioration by 53% (95% CI 23%–71%). Prophylactic ivermectin given to health care workers or relatives of infected persons reduces the risk of infection by 88% (95% CI 82%–92%).

A group of intensivists in the USA – the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance has called for the rapid introduction of ivermectin to stem the tide of infections.3 Furthermore, Marc Wathelet, a Belgian virologist has argued that SARS-CoV-2 could be eradicated in Belgium in the space of six weeks if ivermectin were used.4 Similar results could be expected in other countries if the same protocol was followed.

Wathelet’s proposal hinges on the use of ivermectin at all stages of COVID-19 infection – “a multi-pronged approach”, as advocated by the FLCCC Alliance. Critically, it calls for ivermectin prophylaxis to control the spread of the disease. He suggests two doses of 0.3mg/kg 72 hours apart every month, for health care workers and for family members of those who test positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Transmission within households in one of the major drivers of the pandemic and prophylactic ivermectin could cut this dramatically. Contacts of cases should also receive prophylactic treatment. The next step is ivermectin for early treatment of people with symptoms of COVID-19 infection to reduce the severity and duration of the disease.

At present only paracetamol is recommended. The third step is the use of ivermectin in severe COVID-19 infection to reduce mortality.

Barriers to ivermectin use

Wathelet acknowledges that the successful implementation of such
a plan would require “tremendous leadership”. Scientific counter arguments and practical hurdles would have to be overcome.

The most frequent counter-argument is that there is insufficient evidence and/or that studies have not been peer-reviewed. Lawrie’s meta-analysis includes nearly 4000 patients. Furthermore, the author of this analysis has systematically removed trials of low quality and/or high risk of bias so it is hard to see how the estimates of effect size will be significantly improved by waiting for more studies. Several more randomised, controlled trials are due to report before the end of January 2021. Assuming that they are included in an updated analysis, we can reasonably expect to see the confidence intervals narrow still further. There would now be a problem with planning additional placebo-controlled trials; given the weight of evidence in favour of ivermectin, it could no longer be considered ethical to commission a placebo-controlled trial.

Regarding the lack of peer review for some studies, the manuscripts for all the studies are available for all to see and appraise. Wathelet argues, “…it would be foolish to wait for the slow and flawed peer-review process in the context of a pandemic, when lives are at stake”. Others have noted that that remdesivir, corticosteroids, monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma and vaccines have all been adopted for clinical use before peer review and publication.3

Another common counter argument is that the effect cannot be real because the concentration of ivermectin needed to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro was about 2.5µM, a level that cannot be reached in the plasma in vivo in people. Ivermectin is highly lipid-soluble and consequently tissue levels are higher than plasma levels. Ivermectin has broad spectrum antiviral activity. It also has some anti-inflammatory activity. Several mechanisms of action have been identified but it is not known which are most important.

An unspoken counter argument appears to be a belief amongst decision-makers that vaccines will solve everything and no more treatment is required. This is clearly wrong because it will be many months before large enough numbers have been vaccinated to protect the population.

If we consider practical hurdles, the first is actually making the drug available. Some 20 countries have already included ivermectin in their COVID-19 management strategies and so there must be some lessons to be learned from them. Wathelet says, “The drug itself must be made widely available in all our pharmacies, and any regulatory red tape that would delay the rapid distribution of ivermectin for oral administration must be circumvented expeditiously.”

In the UK, clearly the best way forward would be for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency to authorise use of ivermectin for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 on the basis of the published evidence to date. The next step would be to put in place the mechanisms for the drug to be made available through community pharmacies either using a Patient Group Direction (PGD) or by making the drug a Pharmacy (P) medicine. It is worthy of note that the drug is available over the counter in several South American countries.

Obtaining a supply of ivermectin tablets might also be a modest hurdle because the drug is not in routine use in the UK and therefore supplies would need to be imported or manufactured in the UK. It is listed in the British National Formulary as an (unlicensed) oral treatment for onchocerciasis, chronic Strongyloides infection and for hyperkeratotic (crusted) scabies. It is also available as a 1% topical treatment for papulopustular rosacea.

Alongside the introduction of the drug via community pharmacies, Wathelet also advocates the rapid organisation of a prophylaxis trial among health care workers, and a treatment trial for the severe cases. He says, “The criteria for randomisation, including specific occupation of these workers, must be defined and the randomisation and drug distribution must be carried out promptly. The faster we act, the quicker we will be able to lead a life unencumbered by this virus.”

So where does this leave us? Ivermectin is cheap, well tried-and-tested over the past 40 years and already available as a generic product in many countries. It is effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and also in treating the disease. The evidence for effectiveness of ivermectin continues to grow and deserves our attention and action. Failure to act swiftly on this evidence might begin to look like dereliction of moral responsibility.

Dr. Pierre Kory makes a compelling case for Ivermectin on The Doctors 2/8/2021

Last edited:

#### TXT

##### CG Super Hardcore Club
Platinum Member
Top Poster #1

Ivermectin – time for action

A plan to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 in Belgium in six weeks using ivermectin was recently put forward by a Belgian virologist. As the number people testing positive grows and hospitals struggle to cope, this approach deserves serious consideration in other countries too

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was much talk of drug repurposing and the search for suitable candidate drugs began. It was not long before the majority of research effort and money was being poured into existing antiviral drugs and a sprinkling of others.1 In more than 500 trials registered in the first six months, the majority focused on a small number of drugs including hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, azithromycin, tocilizumab, lopinavir, chloroquine and ivermectin.

By late 2020, there was a wave of published results from therapeutic trials of medicines reporting a lack of impact on mortality with use of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon, convalescent plasma, tocilizumab,and monoclonal antibody therapy. One year into the pandemic, the only drug with proven benefits was dexamethasone (for patients who were already hypoxaemic). One drug that had received relatively little attention until recently was ivermectin.

Ivermectin has been widely used to treat a variety of human parasites since its introduction in 1981. It is estimated that four billion doses have been taken over the past 40 years. Such was its impact that the two scientists who discovered and developed ivermectin subsequently received the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Ivermectin is on the WHO’s model list of essential medicines.

A number of clinical trials with ivermectin have been running since early in the pandemic and it has become clear that ivermectin has activity against SARS-CoV-2 and that it is effective both for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19. A rigorous meta-analysis of the 15 randomised controlled trials and observational controlled trials that have so far reported their results has been carried out by Lawrie, in the UK.2 The results show that ivermectin treatment reduces deaths by an average 83% (95% CI 65%–92%). It also reduces the risk of deterioration by 53% (95% CI 23%–71%). Prophylactic ivermectin given to health care workers or relatives of infected persons reduces the risk of infection by 88% (95% CI 82%–92%).

A group of intensivists in the USA – the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance has called for the rapid introduction of ivermectin to stem the tide of infections.3 Furthermore, Marc Wathelet, a Belgian virologist has argued that SARS-CoV-2 could be eradicated in Belgium in the space of six weeks if ivermectin were used.4 Similar results could be expected in other countries if the same protocol was followed.

Wathelet’s proposal hinges on the use of ivermectin at all stages of COVID-19 infection – “a multi-pronged approach”, as advocated by the FLCCC Alliance. Critically, it calls for ivermectin prophylaxis to control the spread of the disease. He suggests two doses of 0.3mg/kg 72 hours apart every month, for health care workers and for family members of those who test positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Transmission within households in one of the major drivers of the pandemic and prophylactic ivermectin could cut this dramatically. Contacts of cases should also receive prophylactic treatment. The next step is ivermectin for early treatment of people with symptoms of COVID-19 infection to reduce the severity and duration of the disease.

At present only paracetamol is recommended. The third step is the use of ivermectin in severe COVID-19 infection to reduce mortality.

Barriers to ivermectin use

Wathelet acknowledges that the successful implementation of such
a plan would require “tremendous leadership”. Scientific counter arguments and practical hurdles would have to be overcome.

The most frequent counter-argument is that there is insufficient evidence and/or that studies have not been peer-reviewed. Lawrie’s meta-analysis includes nearly 4000 patients. Furthermore, the author of this analysis has systematically removed trials of low quality and/or high risk of bias so it is hard to see how the estimates of effect size will be significantly improved by waiting for more studies. Several more randomised, controlled trials are due to report before the end of January 2021. Assuming that they are included in an updated analysis, we can reasonably expect to see the confidence intervals narrow still further. There would now be a problem with planning additional placebo-controlled trials; given the weight of evidence in favour of ivermectin, it could no longer be considered ethical to commission a placebo-controlled trial.

Regarding the lack of peer review for some studies, the manuscripts for all the studies are available for all to see and appraise. Wathelet argues, “…it would be foolish to wait for the slow and flawed peer-review process in the context of a pandemic, when lives are at stake”. Others have noted that that remdesivir, corticosteroids, monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma and vaccines have all been adopted for clinical use before peer review and publication.3

Another common counter argument is that the effect cannot be real because the concentration of ivermectin needed to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro was about 2.5µM, a level that cannot be reached in the plasma in vivo in people. Ivermectin is highly lipid-soluble and consequently tissue levels are higher than plasma levels. Ivermectin has broad spectrum antiviral activity. It also has some anti-inflammatory activity. Several mechanisms of action have been identified but it is not known which are most important.

An unspoken counter argument appears to be a belief amongst decision-makers that vaccines will solve everything and no more treatment is required. This is clearly wrong because it will be many months before large enough numbers have been vaccinated to protect the population.

If we consider practical hurdles, the first is actually making the drug available. Some 20 countries have already included ivermectin in their COVID-19 management strategies and so there must be some lessons to be learned from them. Wathelet says, “The drug itself must be made widely available in all our pharmacies, and any regulatory red tape that would delay the rapid distribution of ivermectin for oral administration must be circumvented expeditiously.”

In the UK, clearly the best way forward would be for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency to authorise use of ivermectin for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 on the basis of the published evidence to date. The next step would be to put in place the mechanisms for the drug to be made available through community pharmacies either using a Patient Group Direction (PGD) or by making the drug a Pharmacy (P) medicine. It is worthy of note that the drug is available over the counter in several South American countries.

Obtaining a supply of ivermectin tablets might also be a modest hurdle because the drug is not in routine use in the UK and therefore supplies would need to be imported or manufactured in the UK. It is listed in the British National Formulary as an (unlicensed) oral treatment for onchocerciasis, chronic Strongyloides infection and for hyperkeratotic (crusted) scabies. It is also available as a 1% topical treatment for papulopustular rosacea.

Alongside the introduction of the drug via community pharmacies, Wathelet also advocates the rapid organisation of a prophylaxis trial among health care workers, and a treatment trial for the severe cases. He says, “The criteria for randomisation, including specific occupation of these workers, must be defined and the randomisation and drug distribution must be carried out promptly. The faster we act, the quicker we will be able to lead a life unencumbered by this virus.”

So where does this leave us? Ivermectin is cheap, well tried-and-tested over the past 40 years and already available as a generic product in many countries. It is effective in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and also in treating the disease. The evidence for effectiveness of ivermectin continues to grow and deserves our attention and action. Failure to act swiftly on this evidence might begin to look like dereliction of moral responsibility.

Maksud nya ada vaksin baru ke caner bang

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club
Maksud nya ada vaksin baru ke caner bang
bukan vaksin br tuan.. tapi drug yg dah lama digunakan,, utk ubati sesuatu penyakit...start bln 3 thn lps lg ..ramai pakar2 dah kaji dan trial guna kat pesakit covid ni,,harga drug ni pulok murah..

kalo betul2 berkesan memang company vaksin tak blh cari mkn..hahaha

#### TXT

##### CG Super Hardcore Club
Platinum Member
Top Poster #1
bukan vaksin br tuan.. tapi drug yg dah lama digunakan,, utk ubati sesuatu penyakit...start bln 3 thn lps lg ..ramai pakar2 dah kaji dan trial guna kat pesakit covid ni,,harga drug ni pulok murah..

kalo betul2 berkesan memang company vaksin tak blh cari mkn..hahaha

tu dia
nanti pengeluar vaksin tak senang duduk la
panas punggung
mungkin ada pulak mutasi virus baru lak

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club
India develops COVID treatment kit for less than $3 per person with ‘miraculous’ ivermectin INDIA, January 18, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — While the United States continues its aggressive military roll-out of novel, expensive and dangerous pharmaceutical vaccines, India has developed a “miraculously” effective and safe COVID-19 treatment kit which costs merely$2.65 per person and has helped put the nation’s case and fatality rates in “steep decline.”

Last month, several medical experts testified before the U.S. Senate Homeland Security Committee in favor of authorizing ivermectin for early treatment of the novel coronavirus. Among them, Dr. Pierre Kory, founding member of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), explained that ivermectin, a Nobel Prize–winning anti-parasitic agent, “basically obliterates transmission of this virus,” with “miraculous effectiveness.”

TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

“I’ve been treating COVID pretty much every single day since the onset,” Kory said. “When I say ‘miracle’ I do not use that term lightly…that is a scientific recommendation based on mountains of data that has emerged in the last three months.”

FLCCC has developed a treatment regimen incorporating ivermectin, which the group claims has led to up to 83% lower-than-average COVID-19 death rates in hospitals that have applied it.

However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused emergency authorization of ivermectin to treat coronavirus, stating for months that “[m]ore testing is needed.”

In contrast, on the other side of the world, India has embraced the treatment protocol specified by Dr. Kory and his colleagues and is now manufacturing this product under the brand name “Ziverdo Kit” and it only costs approximately \$2.65 per person.

Though the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommends no treatment for those suffering from SARS-COV-2 “unless the patient is hospitalized and requires oxygen,” in India, they began treating coronavirus patients early, including the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ).

Dr. Makarand Paranjpe and his wife, both 77 year-old Indian physicians, fully recovered from the COVID-19 virus using early treatment last November, TrialSiteNews (TSN) reports. She used hydroxychloroquine, and he took ivermectin.

“Without any treatment, we know that the virus enters the cells and replicates there,” Paranjpe said. “They can create disease that gets much more severe.” Stopping such replication as early as possible is the simple function of these inexpensive and safe treatments.

Last March, as debates raged in the U.S. over the merits of HCQ, following President Trump’s endorsement of the drug, India had already recommended it in its national guidelines affirming it “should be used as early in the disease course as possible…and should be avoided in patients with severe disease.”

Following the June discovery of ivermectin’s efficacy in treating the virus, along with significant subsequent testing, the largest state in their nation, Uttar Pradesh (UP) (pop. 230 million), announced in August that it was replacing their HCQ protocol with ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club
RT [FULL STORY]
@MasaKekana
looks at the unfolding scientific developments around repurposing the veterinary medicine #Ivermectin for treatment of #COVID19. We'll continue following this story as it develops. #CarteBlanche

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club
WHO working on pooling data and signaling an ivermectin rec will be made within about a month/month and a half. They reference that a GRADE framework will be applied. Anyone who watches my stuff should understand this by now. I predict a 2A recommendation

#### InstaForexRebat

##### CG Hardcore Club
Sheba researcher: Antiparasitic drug reduces length of COVID-19 infection

An Israeli tropical-disease expert says he has new proof that a drug used to fight parasites in third-world countries could help reduce the length of infection for people who contract coronavirus.

Prof. Eli Schwartz, founder of the Center for Travel Medicine and Tropical Disease at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer, last week completed a clinical trial of the US Food and Drug Administration-approved drug ivermectin, a broad-spectrum antiparasitic agent that has also been shown to fight viruses.

The double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 100 people with mild to moderate cases of the disease who were not hospitalized for the virus. It tested whether ivermectin could shorten the viral shedding period, allowing them to test negative for coronavirus and leave isolation in only a few days.

According to his still unpublished data, Schwartz said the drug was shown to help “cure” people of the virus within just six days. Moreover, the chances of testing negative for coronavirus were three times higher for the group who received ivermectin than the placebo, he told The Jerusalem Post.

“From a public-health point of view, the majority of patients with corona are mild cases, and 90% of these people are isolated outside of the hospital,” Schwartz said. “If you have any kind of drug that can shorten the duration of the infectiousness of these patients, that would be dramatic, as then they will not infect others.”

Moreover, instead of isolating for a minimum of 10 days and maybe more, this period could be shortened, benefiting the economy.

Finally, although Schwartz’s study did not focus on this, he said the results indicate that it is likely if the drug were given at the beginning of one’s illness, it could prevent deterioration and hospitalization.

Schwartz is currently preparing the data from his study for publication. On Monday, he is scheduled to present his findings to the Health Ministry and will also submit a report to the FDA.

Since April, there have been many trials and analyses suggesting the effectiveness of ivermectin against the novel coronavirus. But only a handful have been conducted effectively as double-blind, placebo-controlled tests such as Schwartz’s.

“There is insufficient data for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19,” the US National Institutes of Health said in a statement last Thursday. “Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.”

However, NIH did verify that for other indications, “ivermectin has been widely used and is generally well tolerated.”

“Ivermectin is a chemical therapeutic agent, and it has significant risks associated with it,” Hebrew University of Jerusalem Prof. Ya’acov Nahmias told the Post.

“We should be very cautious about using this type of medication to treat a viral disease that the vast majority of the public is going to recover from even without this treatment,” he said.

When Israel launched its mass vaccination campaign, there were many who believed there would no longer be a need for medication, Schwartz said.

“Now we know that this was an illusion,” he said. “Even in Israel, not everyone is taking the vaccine. There is quite a big population of youngsters under the age of 16 for whom it will be at least months until we have a vaccine for them. And if you look worldwide, vaccinating everyone will take a few years.”

Because ivermectin is FDA-approved, its safety does not have to be proven, Schwartz said. Rather, approval just needs to be received for its use in this new indication, he said.

Schwartz said he hopes the new study will “be a cornerstone to get this permission.”

“The numbers are not high, but they are convincing enough that they should open the gates for more studies and for its preliminary use, especially when we don’t have anything else to offer,” he said.