I don’t want to be writing this blog post. I really don’t. This is both because I detest that there is even a need for me to write it and also because I would much rather be working on my art today. However, my conscience is seriously bothering me for not doing so, leaving me feeling like a morally repugnant being for not at least trying to share what I’ve learned when so many are living in various states of fear and suffering right now. So I humbly apologize to you all for not doing this several days ago when I learned what I’m about to share, and realized I should probably do my part with this blog post.
I also want to apologize for the vague wording in my title and social media posts if you came here as a result of those. I don’t understand why this material is being censored, or why our health “authorities” aren’t the ones presenting it to you instead of me, a guy who beats on metal with hammers. My goal with the initial vagueness is to hopefully evade some of the algorithms that might censor or shadow ban my posts preventing you from seeing this so you can evaluate it and decide for yourself what to make of it. Now that you’re here and past the initial paragraphs I’ll stop being vague.
If you are concerned about Covid-19, know someone who has it, or know one of the far too many souls often called the “long haulers” who have been suffering complications for extended periods of time then there is reason to rejoice. Numerous recent studies done all over the world have been concluding that the drug ivermectin doesn’t just help a little, but is extraordinarily effective in both preventing and treating this disease! It is a common, low cost drug, said to be safe and well tolerated by most people that is available NOW.
What do I mean by extraordinarily effective? In recent US senate testimony Dr. Pierre Kory presented, among much other data, the results of a new trial where 800 medical workers were prophylactically given ivermectin and a control group of 400 other medical workers were not. In the group of 400 who did NOT get the drug 237 got sick. With the 800 who took the drug NOT A SINGLE ONE GOT SICK!
There are also dramatic statistics for those who were already sick with Covid and were treated with ivermectin, including the so called “long haulers” who have had lingering symptoms for weeks or months.
Why I’m really writing this post is just to share a couple videos with you that present this information far better than I can. I urge you to watch them so you can have the information and make up your own minds. The first video I’ll embed directly below was produced by Chris Martenson of PeakProsperity.com who I feel has been producing some of the best coverage from the start of the pandemic. He aims to focus on science and data and that is what he’s presenting in the video. The video itself got banned from YouTube and other social media for whatever reason. His frustration with the politicizing of medicine and censoring of data is the distressing, blood boiling aspect. However, I’d encourage you to overlook that part and instead focus on the data itself which I see as a shining ray of hope and light in all this. It’s something you can act on right now to turn things around and improve your life!
If you go to the video on the Rumble page (Vimeo has now banned it too!) then below it in the notes you will find links to where he is getting his data from. Of particular interest to me, and perhaps you as well, is the one that is a meta analysis of 24 studies looking at ivermectin for covid-19. Let me share a small section from the top of that paper.
•Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19. 100% of studies report positive effects. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 24 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 17 million (p = 0.00000006).
•Early treatment is most successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.51].
•100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
I also wanted to highlight from this meta analysis that looking at the 4 studies they had where ivermectin was use as a pre-exposure prophylaxis (ie. using it before you get sick) the results showed a 98% improvement!
Finally let me try to embed a video of Dr. Pierre Kory’s senate testimony that mentioned earlier which I also recommend watching. (Please ignore that it is from a mainstream new organization you may or may not like. The video itself is just a recording of the testimony, not any sort of opinion piece.) As I understand it he is a prime person involved in gathering all this data and research together. You can hear his passionate desire as a doctor to help those suffering, and his frustration at bearing witness to all the death he’s seeing first hand that need not be happening based on the data we now know but is not being widely disseminated. (This one is on YouTube and so far has not been banned/censored. If you find the link broken or embed not working this might have changed.)
Let me finish with a link to the East Virginia Medical School Critical Care Covid-19 Protocol, which Dr. Kory is associated with, that was presented in the first video by Chris Martenson. On page 8 of this PDF document you can find the I-MASK+ recommended treatment chart should you want to study it longer than it’s on screen in the video. This includes the dosing recommendations for ivermectin at various stages as well as dosing recommendations for other common, available substances that have also been shown to be effective, such as vitamin D, vitamin C, and zinc.
Normally I conclude these blog posts with a Studio Snippet showing a bit of what I’m doing in my art studio at the moment. I’m going to forgo that this time. I don’t understand why seeking to gather and develop our best available knowledge to treat a worldwide pandemic disease should become a politically charged, hot button topic resulting in bans and censorship, often with accusations of self serving ulterior motives. I have no interest in getting tangled up in that minefield. So if you happen to be drawn here to my blog site for the first time by this post I don’t want to leave you with the final impression that I’m really just here to promote my artwork. If you want to see my art you should be able to find it readily enough.
The goal of this post was to try and help bring some light back into a dark time, to share information which I don’t feel is being given the attention it warrants. Information which could seriously help you or your loved ones. Information I felt morally compelled to share.
May be peace be with you in these trying times. Let us all try to honor our differences in opinions and approaches with dialog and sharing rather than shouting and censorship.
Take care everyone. Be well.
January 17, 2021
I wanted to insert a bit of an update into this blog post. Today I was delighted to read that the NIH (National Institutes of Health) have now looked at the latest data that Dr. Kory and his group was presenting and they have revised their guidelines to include ivermectin as a treatment! Here is a link to the FLCCC press release about this.
Also I found another version of Dr. Kory’s US senate testimony which runs longer and presents more of his information as he answers senators questions. I’d highly recommend it. You can start at about 8:45 into it to get right to the new stuff.
August 3, 2021
This is likely my final short update here. Probably the best place to get the actual data and updates on this topic is from the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance. This is a group of some of the most highly published clinicians in the world who are also actually out there treating patients. They are keeping their site up to date with all the latest studies and info of what is and is not working.
I’m happy to have a site where I can again allow comments. (I had to shut them off on my old website because the spam was simply uncontrollable!) So please I encourage you to share thoughts of your own. My general rule about comments though is just to play nice. Differing views are fine, but I’m not interested in engaging in or moderating verbal fights. If I feel things get out of hand, by whatever criteria I decide, I’ll just start blocking or deleting things.
David,
Thanks for posting this. This drug and these studies should get much wider attention.
Thanks for the response and support for the post Carl. It’s reassuring to me since these really aren’t the sorts of blog topics I feel comfortable writing.
David, I appreciate your interest in a variety of things that you post information about, including the COVID-19 medical topic.
My first instinct is “why wouldn’t Dr. Fauci tell us about this medical breakthrough?” I just trust him and the new coronavirus team- and believe they wouldn’t be holding back information from the American public. Bottom line, I just refuse to believe that the medical professionals in that administrative team and at the CDC and NIH would be suppressing information critical to saving lives.
As a matter of fact, my own father is COVID 19 positive right now- at the Grand Rapids Veterans’ Home. I worry about him there now-even though he doesn’t present with the most severe of symptoms. He is losing hope.
I just pray he makes it through this okay- at 85, it will be a Herculean feat.
I wish the best for your father. It certainly sounds like he qualifies for the high risk group. It’s encouraging that he isn’t presenting with the most severe of symptoms so far. Let’s hope it remains that way!!
I fear the whole subject has become so much of a poltical fight and crazy rabbit hole one can dive down in terms of who to trust. I’ve learned to most trust myself, at least on matters relating to me. So I like to get the data when I can to be able to evaluate and make my own decisions. That’s why I felt such a compelling need to share this here, so others could know about the data and decide for themselves if they want to dive deeper into it.
Someone else commented on one of my social media posts something to the effect that they felt front line doctors would be all over this if it were true. My response is that from my understanding these are front line doctors and this may well be what the process of being all over it looks like. As best as I can tell Dr. Fauci the NIH and CDC are really focused on new treatments in development specifically for Covid-19. What this group of practicing doctors have been focused on is finding things we’ve already developed that can be effectively repurposed to treat this disease as well. They are using the tools they know well from their personal frames of reference and have been testing and studying the results to see what is working best. This is all an ongoing thing and now the data is coming in that ivermectin seems to be working really well so they are trying to share that. It’s such a dynamically changing situation perhaps this is what the process really looks like for learning on the fly how to treat this disease.
I just wanted you and others to know about this so you can decide for yourself whether the potential risks are worth the potential rewards based on what the current study results are indicating.
Please take care and support your father however you feel best.
Laurie, not all of us have the same faith in the appointed leadership. The NIH is anti-ivermectin, even though they themselves cite a study where the mortality rate was significantly lower among the ivermectin group (https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/). It’s one more tool.
Why aren’t we educating the highest risk group, those with BMIs over 35? That’s the biggest risk factor, by far! Instead, as a nation, we’re focusing on those with almost zero risk of death.
Thanks for your contribution to the discussion Julie. I’ll add a gentle word of caution to not let this devolve into personal attacks or grudges with those who don’t share all the same views.
I appreciate you providing the link to the current NIH guidelines. As you note they cite a study showing positive results and also note that better studies are needed. That is exactly what Dr. Kory and his group have been providing and asking the NIH to review!
It is indeed frustrating to see so many in fear and suffering and yet having our “authorities” seeming to push only one treatment, vaccines, when many other treatments are already available which could be used alone or in conjunction with the vaccines.
I feel I should note as an addendum to my post above that Julie wasn’t out of line at all with her comment. I didn’t view her comment as attacking Laurie, and hope Laurie didn’t see it that way either. I could just see where things could quickly degenerate into that position and hope to head that off. Different viewpoints are most certainly welcome here. It’s how we learn what drives and motivates each other so hopefully we can communicate when differences exist instead of simply talking (or sadly all to often these days shouting) past one another.