Peer-reviewed: Immediate global ivermectin use will end COVID-19 pandemic
Image: MedPage Today
Peer reviewed by medical experts that included three U.S. government senior scientists and published in the American Journal of Therapeutics, the research is the most comprehensive review of the available data taken from clinical, in vitro, animal, and real-world studies.
Led by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), a group of medical and scientific experts reviewed published peer-reviewed studies, manuscripts, expert meta-analyses, and epidemiological analyses of regions with ivermectin distribution efforts all showing that ivermectin is an effective prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19.
“We did the work that the medical authorities failed to do, we conducted the most comprehensive review of the available data on ivermectin,” said Pierre Kory, M.P.A., MD, president and chief medical officer of the FLCCC. “We applied the gold standard to qualify the data reviewed before concluding that ivermectin can end this pandemic.”
A focus of the manuscript was on the 27 controlled trials available in January 2021, 15 of which were randomized controlled trials (RCT’s), the preferred trial of the World Health Organization, U.S. National Institutes of Health, and the European Medicines Agency. Consistent with numerous meta-analyses of ivermectin RCT’s since published by expert panels from the UK, Italy, Spain, and Japan, they found large, statistically significant reduction in mortality, time to recovery and viral clearance in COVID-19 patients treated with ivermectin.
To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin in preventing COVID-19, 3 RCT’s and 5 observational controlled trial’s including almost 2,500 patients all reported that ivermectin significantly reduces the risk of contracting COVID-19 when used regularly.
Many regions around the world now recognize that ivermectin is a powerful prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19. South Africa, Zimbabwe, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Mexico, and now, India, have approved the drug for use by medical professionals. The results as seen in this latest study demonstrate that the ivermectin distribution campaigns repeatedly led to “rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality.”
“Our latest research shows, once again, that when the totality of the evidence is examined, there is no doubt that ivermectin is highly effective as a safe prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19,” said Paul E. Marik, M.D., FCCM, FCCP, founding member of the FLCCC and Chief, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School. “We can no longer rely on many of the larger health authorities to make an honest examination of the medical and scientific evidence. So, we are calling on regional public health authorities and medical professionals around the world to demand that ivermectin be included in their standard of care right away so we can end this pandemic once and for all.”
The published research can be found in the latest edition of the American Journal of Therapeutics: https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Fulltext/2021/00000/Review_of_the_Emerging_Evidence_Demonstrating_the.4.aspx
See more here: eurekalert.org
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Brendan
| #
The published research appears to have been dis-published.
Clicking on the link returns ‘error code 404 – Page Not Found’.
Reply
Brendan
| #
Cancel that last. Found it.
Reply
krasnit
| #
The link to the article is wrong. Here is correct link:
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Fulltext/2021/06000/Review_of_the_Emerging_Evidence_Demonstrating_the.4.aspx
Reply
Barry Walsh
| #
Indonesia, Japan and Zimbabwe are all now promoting the use of Ivermectin.
Sadly in Zimbabwe it took the death of three government ministers over a period of a few days to bring about the change in policy.
How many more deaths from COVID will it take before other governments wake up to the responsibility the have to care for their citizens health and not the health of pharmaceutical companies bank balances.
There are so many publications demonstrating the effectiveness of the protocols published by the FLCCC and the BIRD group that the claim that “ There is insufficient evidence to support the use of Ivermectin “ would be laughable if it were not criminal.
Also the bleating that in the absence of a LARGE double blind random controlled trial that all the other evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin should be discounted, is to say the least, insulting and owes its roots to the idea of colonialism.
IE research not conducted in Europe or the USA is not to be taken heed of, what absolute rubbish.
Question? Do I need a double blind RCT to tell me that a 9 mm slug in the back of someone’s head will likely cause injuries incompatible with life, or will a simple observational trial provide more than enough evidence.
Case Rests.
Reply
Barry Walsh
| #
Indonesia, Japan and Zimbabwe are all now promoting the use of Ivermectin.
Sadly in Zimbabwe it took the death of three government ministers over a period of a few days to bring about the change in policy.
How many more deaths from COVID will it take before other governments wake up to the responsibility they have to care for their citizens health and not the health of pharmaceutical companies bank balances.
There are so many publications demonstrating the effectiveness of the protocols published by the FLCCC and the BIRD group that the claim that “ There is insufficient evidence to support the use of Ivermectin “ would be laughable if it were not criminal.
Also the bleating that in the absence of a LARGE double blind random controlled trial that all the other evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin should be discounted, is to say the least, insulting and owes its roots to the idea of colonialism.
IE research not conducted in Europe or the USA is not to be taken heed of, what absolute rubbish.
Question? Do I need a double blind RCT to tell me that a 9 mm slug in the back of someone’s head will likely cause injuries incompatible with life, or will a simple observational trial provide more than enough evidence.
Case Rests.
Reply