Does Ivermectin Take a Quantum Leap? Prominent Physicians Think So

Does Ivermectin Take a Quantum Leap? Prominent Physicians Think So

Dr. Choudhury Hasan, an associate clinical professor working for Mount Sinai Health System in New York, and Pauline Francisca Gomes a research fellow with the Shomman Foundation in Bangladesh, recently authored a piece arguing that mounting evidence supports Ivermectin as a possible treatment against the novel coronavirus. As Bill Gates recently shared, the next six months-plus portends dark times due to this pandemic. Although there have been  a couple of vaccines authorized under emergency use, unfortunately up to 40% of the American public are leery of accepting this as an option in the short run. Little is known of the long-term benefit of these experimental vaccines, other than after a few months of data covering just a couple hundred individuals that actually fell ill to the pathogen, no one can say the true efficacy nor how long immunity is ensured—if at all. Moreover, after $12.5 billion of public expenditure involving Operation Warp Speed, there is little to show in the form of therapies as the novel monoclonal antibodies approved under experimental use also raise just as many issues as they do answers. But as TrialSite has consistently published, there is an existing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drug, used by billions annually to fight parasites, that evidences considerable promise, even as a pre-exposure prophylaxis targeting COVID-19.  Many believe it’s too good to be true. How could so many smart people in the global power centers of research and regulatory affairs—in American and Europe—not have seen this coming? Is it because of this that the general media turns the cheek the other direction, bashing those that even dare to question the current narrative about COVID-19.  

Important Study Reveals PreP Potential

Professor Hasan  isn’t any lightweight: the New York-based cardiologist and research co-author notes the results of an important study out of Bangladesh Medical College and Shomman Foundation, under the guidance of Dr. Tarek Alam, professor and Head of Medicine Department in Bangladesh Medical College and investigator for the recent study covered by TrialSite and published in the European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences on December 15. Dr. Alam has been interviewed by TrialSite a couple times. In this study centering on healthcare workers in Bangladesh, of 118 healthcare workers, 44 out of 60 (73.3%) didn’t receive a regular dose of Ivermectin and contracted the novel coronavirus. Those that did take the PrEP regimen did better: only 4 out of 58 (6.9%) actually went on to become ill. Along with many other studies that research elites in American and Europe question as shaky science, such as Dr. Alam and Dr. Murshed’s study showing great efficacy of what is known in Bangladesh as “the people’s medicine;” i.e., the combination of Ivermectin and Doxycycline to treat COVID-19 patients. 

Mounting Evidence 

The New York and Dhaka based researchers also referred to other research TrialSite has tirelessly followed, such as the work of Dr. Pierre Kory of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance and their comprehensive meta-analysis showcasing the evidence for Ivermectin’s efficacy against COVID-19. Calls thereafter for National Institute of Health (NIH) to show support for this economical generic drug made sense as markets and societies need a low-cost alternative to help precent COVID-19. Also brought up in the recent article by Dr. Hasan and Ms. Gomes were studies TrialSite has followed form Argentina, India, France, Egypt, and of course Bangladesh. The authors rightfully referred to the ICON study out of Broward County, Florida, as well. Dr. Jacques-Jean Rajter with Julianna Cepelowicz Rajter, MD, conducted a well-designed observational study published in the peer-reviewed medical journal Chest. Of 173 patients at 4 hospitals during ICON who were given Ivermectin, they experienced a far lower mortality rate (39%) than those in a group of 107 patients who weren’t given the antiparasitic medication (81% death rate).

Proud Moment for Bangladesh

Dr. Hasan and Ms. Gomes share their connection to Bangladesh and the pride associated with such a big milestone: that what is traditionally a poor, third world country can be deemed at the forefront of fighting COVID-19. Could it be that research power centers in America, Europe, and elsewhere do not agree with these compelling findings for other reasons?

Ego, Power & Money

TrialSite discovered Ivermectin by simply chronicling study after study that evidenced some form of positive result. Journalists and analysts associated with TrialSite wondered why more people weren’t interested. Why weren’t research agencies tasked with also looking at repurposing existing approved drugs not curious? Why was the mainstream media so silent? Why was there so much hostility vented at anyone that dared suggest a different narrative? Well, the answer should be clear to all. Yes of course its about money.  Months before the Monash University findings  that Ivermectin, in a lab’s cell culture, obliterated COVID-19, the most powerful, well-endowed research agencies were working with commercial pharma to accelerate vaccines and monoclonal antibodies therapies, as well as antivirals such as Remdesivir. 

So, the research train had left the station, and stopping everything to look at some cheap, widely-available drug used almost exclusively in the third world made absolutely no sense. And too much capital was now committed anyway. The race for a vaccine and high-end monoclonal antibodies, as well as commercial antivirals was on, and the NIH and big pharma would save the day. But that led to yet another key rational for the avoidance of  any Ivermectin investigation: pure ego-driven hubris. Although NIH is full of wonderful, committed brilliant people as an institution, it along with the FDA under the existing POTUS-inspired politically charged environment turned or transformed the research endeavor into an economic mission, surrounded by political circus. Hence research centers and their leadership hunkered down and centered activity on what would, in their minds, most likely lead to the best outcomes. 

Research Around the World

A centralization of research power ensued, memorialized under the NIH’s ACTIV (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) program;  probably necessary and rational given the severity of the pandemic and the importance of consolidating and rationalizing research funding and ongoing studies. 

Yet for any and all centralization of power and control over such critical decision making, such as where taxpayer dollars were spent on research, a dark side also can emerge. That is, all federal-sponsored research, at least in America, would be driven a small and elite cadre of insiders. Of course, these are good, well intentioned people, but the forces associated with such endeavor were already evidencing investment bias in regards to  what funds go to what studies. 

That clinics in places like Peru, Colombia or Argentina, or for that matter academic medical centers in Bangladesh or India, would also embark on research efforts—even including randomized controlled trial—would not be as scientifically impeccable as research coming out of America or Europe. Yes, that’s right: research power centers in America and Europe looked down on the research out of Dhaka or Mumbai or Buenos Aires—it was inferior research and therefore should be factored out even for purposes of reviewing Ivermectin study findings. 

Of course, if research out of Europe led to contradictory conclusions, then that research would be immediately attacked by industry as “flawed.” For example, the SOLIDARITY study, sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO) primarily out of Europe. The findings included that remdesivir, the drug that the NIH spent a lot of money, time, and political capital to support, wasn’t effective at all.  What was the NIH’s response—just ignore the findings and let industry representatives attack the underlying quality of the study. 

Substantial evidence exists that ego, power, and money shape research agendas, even in a pandemic time with over 330,000 Americans now gone. If Ivermectin could have helped, shouldn’t the medical establishment have at least showed a little curiosity?


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Although some governments have started to test Stromectol (ivermectin) and might even have endorsed it, India has dropped it from its treatment protocol for COVID-19:

    Stromectol (ivermectin) has only a mediocre safety profile:

    Meanwhile, Alinia (nitazoxanide) has a very good safety profile like Avigan (favipiravir), Foistar (camostat), and artemisinin, all of which have shown moderately good efficacy against early COVID-19:

    Foistar (camostat):


  2. Professor of Medicine at the University of Queensland, Wendy Hoy, who has first hand experience using ivermectin, and knows its safety, first called for human trials of ivermectin against covid in the British Medical Journal in April.
    Very soon after the Doherty Institute discovery in Melbourne, Dr Johnny Tavares started using ivermectin for covid treatment. With n=3099, Morgenstern and team have published the positive results.
    Prof. Hoy repeated the call with Dr Vishal Diwan in BMJ later in the year, and then Sydney Dr Tom Borody who had used it in the Solomon Islands advocated it in August, and together we all advocated it in the BMJ more recently. Apart from prophylaxis and treatment generally, there is also real concern about the reducing “long covid”, and more effective care in home isolation.
    Australian member of parliament Craig Kelly has also been active on ivermectin on behalf of everyone who has or is going to get this terrible disease. Hector Carvallo has made a good video, as have John Campbell too, Dr Hibberd in Florida, Pierre Kory, Jean Jacques Rajter, Paul Marik, Dr Osgood, and Marc Wathelet in Belgium. Australian Dr Manikappa has advocated it in Odisha state in India. Sorry if I have missed anyone – other readers please fill in the gaps.
    West Bengal, Goa and Uttar Pradesh states in India have adopted it, Belize has approved it, Macedonia is considering doing so.
    Over the last three months ivermectin has been drawn to the attention of key people in England, Wales, Scotland, the US, the European Commission, Czechia, Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, Bulgaria, Poland, Spain, Japan, The Phillipines, and South Korea. Scotland, the EC and Bulgaria have specifically rejected it (not enough evidence). Discussions continue with the Philippines.
    Trialsite has given ivermectin good air time. Facebook’s Ivermectin MD too. And Reddit.
    And a reminder of the positive studies:

    Gorial, Iraq, n=87
    Shouman, Egypt, n=304
    Alam (2 trials), Bangladesh, n=100, n=118
    Carvallo, Argentina, n=1195
    Morgenstern, Dominican Republic, n=3099
    Khan, Bangladesh, n=248
    Mahmud, Bangladesh, n=400
    Behera, India, n=186
    Afsar, Pakistan, n=95
    Elgazzar, Egypt, n=200
    Hashim, Iraq, n=70
    Budhiraja, India, n=34 of 976
    Niaee, Iran, n=180
    Rajter, US, n=173
    Ahmed, Bangladesh, n=72
    Spoorthi, India, n=100
    Krolewiecki, Argentina, n=45

    1. In Australia ……. if you and colleague, Wendy, at UQ,had joined forces with Borody you may have been able to talk some commonsense into the National Covid Taskforce. I know Borody tried but failed to do so.
      Paul Marik’s protocol, MATH+ became I-MASK when he replaced HCQ with Ivermectin and Quercetin(as the zinc ionophore).
      I think this was done in late April, because I sent him a copy of the Dougherty paper just after it was released end of March( I had had prior contact with Paul Marik for some time relating to Sepsis).

      Published results by him, using his protocol, showed a mortality rate of 5%. Australian official epidemiolgy reports show a mortality rate of 24%!!
      Melbourne’s second wave was around June 2020. How many lives could have been saved?

      Note also. Methylprednisolone was part of Marik’s protocol early March. Here Dexamethasone was not included until RECOVERY trial result in June.

  3. You’ve raised a lot of questions. Got a solution? If you’re old enough you remember Eisenhower warnings us about the military industrial complex, but that’s nothing to the power of the medical industrial complex. I just don’t see. a solution.

  4. Yes. Yes. “Follow the money” is always good advice to those who seek to understand deeds and motives of people and institutions whose intent is concealed. Big pharma certainly benefits by controlling the public perception that throwing billions of dollars of public funding at a problem that big pharma claims it can successfully address, is the best course of action to defeat a worldwide plague. Of course the existence of inexpensive and widely available drugs that effectively prevent and treat Covid-19 endangers that flow of taxpayer provided money to the pharmaceutical industrial complex. It is essential that the majority of humans, whom voices of big government and big business refer to as “workers” and are perceived as a resource to serve purposes other than their own, remain ignorant. But pharmaceutical companies are certainly not the sole beneficiaries of the suppression of knowledge that HCQ and Ivermectin are effective treatments and preventives. It is in the institution of power that we should seek to understand why millions of people are allowed to suffer and die, and why the entire global economy is being allowed to collapse while the means of salvation is ignored though its supply is abundant. Following the money will only lead us to understanding the henchmen of power. To get to the bottom of the issue we must follow the trail of POWER.

    It is no mere accident that the disease was released from the most oppressive and powerful absolutist government on earth and that the first infected population was isolated from the rest of China while air traffic to the rest of our planet remained unrestrained. It is no accident that the first and most persistent means of containing the viral disease advocated by power structures everywhere is total economic and personal lockdown. Populations in industrialized nations have become accustomed to obeying extraordinarily intrusive mandates by governing authorities. Almost none in the mass media establishment noted that the trials that governing agents claimed demonstrated not just the inefficacy but the dangers of Hydroxychloroquine, would not have passed muster in a high school science fair. Could it be that the undermining of public education, the dumbing down of the public through public schools and even Ivy League universities, has finally produced populations in all industrial or post industrial nations that so readily accept governing authorities supported by their hand-picked “experts”?

    As one hand washes the other, institutions dependent on government funds and commanding the loyal support of their employees, cooperate with one another and are in turn required to cooperate with professional politicians. Trialsitenews is doing heroic work in placing before interested readers a body of facts concerning the results of trials of several medications being considered as treatments for a number of diseases and conditions. Trialsitenews’ reports long ago convinced me of the efficacy of Ivermectin as preventive and treatment of Covid-19. The same is true of my understanding of Hydroxychloroquine. It is encouraging that more Doctors are aware of the usefulness of both drugs. It is discouraging that so many remain unaware or unconvinced. In the case of Ivermectin, though a prescription from a Doctor is necessary for its procurement. Prescribed Ivermectin is expensive compared to Ivermectin in a preparation for veterinary use. A preparation of 1% Ivermectin, 40% glycerol and the balance of propylene glycol under the brand name Agri-Mectin is formulated to provide 200mcg per Kg when given according to printed instructions. One ml provides that dose to a 110 pound animal. Taken orally rather than injected, a dose for a 180 pound man can cost as little as 37 cents. Nameless authorities recommend against using this compound because it is labeled as an anti-parasite agent for cattle. Yet all of its ingredients are approved by FDA for human consumption. Those who insist on obeying authoritarian proclamations are open to infection while those who trust in their own judgment have access to both information and ingredient until supreme authority takes even those away. Yes, follow the money. Compare thirty seven cent Ivermectin that works to $3,000 remdesivir that does not, or to vaccines whose effects are not firmly known.

    Better yet compare the people killed by Covid-19 to those killed by Ivermectin. Millions to zero? Compare your life now to your life in December of 2019.

  5. That train left the station at Warp Speed. The decision was cast in stone beforehand. Even the amazing SUMMIT computer study back in early March, which looked at countless compounds looking for spike protein binders and came up with a list of 77 candidates went nowhere. Of the 10 best that SUMMIT found, cuercetin and Herba Santa were in there, but nobody even took a look. Somehow though, months later, we see cuercetin as an alternate ionophore in several of the protocols. But Herba Santa? Nada. Because it’s used by brown people who don’t speak English as a treatment for all kinds of lung illnesses, for centuries. It’s leaves from a weed, made into a tea. They couldn’t possibly know anything. Shamanists. Herbalists. Dirt people.

    Funny how Big Pharm was all about saving the rain forest a few years back, because of all the natural medicines they might find there. Was that all just empty virtue signalling?

    Funny how all this funding for “repurposing” research never went past the list of high profit medicines still under patent. Generic drugs, native cures, herbal remedies, even long established practices were thrown straight into the garbage without even a glance, because this virus was ALL NEW and therefore nothing else that worked for anything deserved any attention at all. So don’t be naive and hold onto hope for an old cheap medicine that works against at least a dozen other illnesses.

    Smells a wee bit fishy? Much. The fix was in from the get-go. Very glad to see TrialSiteNews speaking up about it.

    Yes, there is systemic racism. Right up at the top of our government, at least in the Health arena. Or perhaps it’s Ivy League elitism, which amounts to the same thing for us common deplorable plebes. Don’t ever forget that the very first thing our top elected representatives did when the virus came around was to short the stock market and pocket millions. And then figure out how to use the virus as a political weapon. After that it was all about funneling zillions to Big Pharm. The health of the citizens was way, way, way down the list, except where that could be used as a rationalization to strip them of their freedoms.

    So I’ll post this so your moderators know someone reads your site, and that I agree with them. But like nearly every other comment I write here, this one won’t be published either.

  6. Money is more important than lives in affluent western nations.

    From the moment that Covid 19 was made public, probably before, the dollar signs were popping up in the western world.
    The makers of medical products and the pharmaceutical industry recognized that it presented a treasure trove of money making possibilities.

    It was so important that anything that allayed fears, any good news, had to be suppressed and the mainstream media, recognizing that the stopping of the virus was the end of sensational news that their profits depended on, did their bit by putting down any simplistic and cheap solutions. They are still doing it.

    The populations of these western countries have been conditioned to trust their doctors and rely on them totally. They make no effort to gain personal knowledge to be able to take responsibility for their own health. The doctors have let them down! They also are dependent, but in their case it is on pharmaceutical companies advising them how to treat. Not to simply follow their training and do anything to make the patient better. More money, more throughput the easy way.

    Ivermectin has shown from the beginning of the year to be effective and, in early treatment, so has Hydroxychloroquine.

    It is the medical profession that must take responsibility for the current situation. There is nothing stopping doctors from using Ivermectin off label. If you are a medical doctor, take the ring out of your nose and stop being led by the corrupt dollar seeking corporations and bureaucrats. Get back to saving lives!

  7. Very forceful writing.
    We hope the darkness will go.
    Ivermectin may be detrimental to all the strains of SARS-COV-2 virus including mutating Coronaviruses.