Covid-19 Early Treatments
Group for people looking for treatment or prevention for Covid-19 and the corona virus. What are you experiences with the available treatment options? We want to hear them so that others may learn. To Join this group – Login First.
Ivermectin prophylactically then become positive….
- MemberAugust 25, 2021 at 4:43 pm
Sorry if this has already been asked. A friend asked me today if someone takes a lower dose of Ivermectin prophylactically twice a week, does that affect anything if you get Covid and begin a higher dose treatment? In other words does taking Ivermectin prophylactically in any way lessen the power of Ivermectin once you become a positive case?
- MemberAugust 26, 2021 at 5:35 pm
I certainly have no idea. Nevertheless, I’ve decided that I’d rather take ivermectin prophylactically in the hopes of avoiding getting sick. I’m taking 6mg twice a week; I weigh 85 kg so that’s .14mg/kg. My guess is that such a dose should be enough to avoid an infection at the initial point of ingestion of the virus. Should I feel ill and suspect I might have become infected I could take 18mg for a few days consecutively and hope that the symptoms disappear; thereupon, resume 6mg twice a week.
- MemberSeptember 3, 2021 at 10:29 am
Your doses are too small. Follow the FLCCC new protocol for the Delta. You do need 0.2mgs/kg 2x/wk to prevent and the treatment dose is now 0.4-0.6 mgs/kg beginning with first symptoms. I-MASK+ Protocol | FLCCC | Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (covid19criticalcare.com)
- MemberAugust 27, 2021 at 9:30 am
This is an interesting video about taking Ivermectin prophylactically. These two hosts are not anti-ivermectin, but discuss some interesting points/questions about prophylactically taking ivermectin.
- MemberAugust 27, 2021 at 2:10 pm
Tell media hosts and FDA to stop playing “school crosswalk safety monitor” to little children. The nation was founded on faith in Providence and liberty to act on the trust in such. The definition of preventative, personal disease control and success in the matter, is not even close to what is offered by government – a faithful relationship to a mRNA coding system that Nature did not equip humans with.
Medicine can, rather bluntly said, “come from the dirt” – and that is the wonder of this living existence – there MIGHT just be intelligent design in our symbiotic relationships with the living things on the Earth…and we don’t need to evolve.
I, and other responsible ivermectin users, are not little children. It is not for the media to decide for persons making treatment choices for themselves, to cease treatments. The FDA’s public attempt to be at peer-to-peer advice level is condescension with attempted mass guilting.
Some of us are not asking for approval or mass distribution of off-label people ivermectin, nor approval for using horse formula. Real-world evidence is sufficient. I ask, kindly mind your own health, I’ll care for my own health, my own body. Your fears are your own.
If I need a doctor for every healthcare decision, it’s totally unnatural to exist on earth this way…and many healthcare providers and BIG PHARMA THRIVE while thier customer base grows. In a way, they lie in wait for me to think I am incapable of knowing when something (medicine from earth) is helpful to diagnose, prevent, treat or cure…or not. Perhaps the trademark on that phrase is restricted from FDA fir giod reason in the Bill of Rights. FDA does not have a legal right, nor a moral, nor safety one – to take that right away from any living person in the USA who is making one’s own healthcare decisions.
Maybe it’s not for YOU, if your are “channeling” other people’s fears, (like the FDA did in the agency’s latest ad) against the use of the excellent horse ivermectin formula. By you “parroting” on Twitter (or acting like a lyrebird) at others and to others – the warning of a condescending country stereotype (or even an “ebonics” stereotype)- in addressing stupid bumpkins or “ignorant bruthas and sistahs”), you are spreading DISINFORMATION with FDAs “You are not a horse…” sh*t. FDA won’t take the BIG PHARMA ads off the TV, ads that TELL YOU their ingredient compounds are inherenly risk at first try. FDA does not have a safety study that crosses veterinary to human adverse (or beneficial) compound reactions.
Have you ever used Bag Balm for nursing, milk producing cattle…on your human hands? Have you ever given your pet dog or cat a “human-only” product? Then you are a hypocrite, if (and I qualify IF strongly) you consider FDA authority only should pour out its wrath on ivermectin users.
Read about the ivermectin trial in healthy people. Read about real world experiences of successful recoveries from COVID-19. Then mind your own healthcare business, media people. You know little of your enemy – TRUTH. Unless you listen and learn about how ivermectin has saved, and continues to save lives.
I will give you credit, media, that there are risks in taking ivermectin. There is the line. Show “fair use” by exposing the FDA- approved compounds that allegedly trigger adverse reactions.
VETERINARY Ivermectin, with its three or so unidentified paste/gel compound ingredients in an oral delivery system (because horses spit out pills – that’s all!!!), is not The Poison of the Century, and those ninety-eight percent plus portion of “horse paste” pass the LD50 acute toxicity in rats test BETTER than ivermectin itself.
So going on, I’ll address how toxic or not ivermectin itself is:
Excerpt [addressing “people” ivermectin]
A study investigating escalating high doses of ivermectin in healthy adults was performed to explore the safety of its use in the treatment of head lice. The authors documented no evidence of CNS toxicity in doses up to 10 times the highest FDA-approved dose of 200 µg/kg. However, the study population was limited to a total of 68 subjects, almost 90% of which were of Hispanic origin.<sup><sup>20</sup></sup> Drug safety surveillance for idiosyncratic reactions has been recommended.<sup><sup>19</sup></sup>
The product label for ivermectin notes that the neurological events of dizziness (2.8%), somnolence (0.9%), vertigo (0.9%), and tremor (0.9%) were observed in human clinical trials for the treatment of strongyloidiasis and assessed as at least possibly related to ivermectin, whereas drug-related headache (0.2%) was observed in trials for onchocerciasis. The label further includes warnings for the occurrence of serious neurological adverse events in the contexts of concomitant infection of onchocerciasis and loiasis and accidental intoxication with veterinary formulations of ivermectin.<sup><sup>1</sup></sup> Although some of the adverse events experienced by subjects in this case series were observed in clinical trials (dizziness, headache), there were other events of a more serious nature which are suggestive of ivermectin penetration into the brain: loss of consciousness/depressed level of consciousness, abasia, tremor, vomiting, and coma.
Clinical review of the cases within this case series has focused largely on three important confounders: co-administered drugs with known CNS effects, overdosing, and evidence of secondary impairment of the blood-brain barrier. A number of cases report co-administered drugs with known CNS-effects, such as antihistamines (case 3), antidepressants/antipsychotics (cases 9 and 20), anxiolytics, and/or antiepileptics (cases 9, 11, 12, 15, and 17). In only case 3 was the concomitant drug reported as “suspected” as a potential cause of the reported adverse events. Further assessment of the other cases is complicated by lack of information on the treatment courses of drugs which were not “suspected.” However, in one case (case 11) the symptoms apparently resolved when ivermectin was discontinued (“positive dechallenge”), and in another (case 12) the events recurred with repeated dosing of ivermectin (“positive rechallenge”). Five cases noted concomitant administration of albendazole whose package insert describes both headache and dizziness as possible adverse drug reactions (cases 22–26); in all cases, albendazole was considered also to be “suspected.” In case 22, however, the reported adverse event of “unconsciousness” would not be an expected event from this additional anti-parasitic agent. There was no evidence of overdosing in any of the cases upon review of dosage recommendations and weight data provided in the case reports.
Now let’s address your fear concerns and your accusations of criminal behavior against me and others who, not unlike the “hippies” of 1960s to 1970s…experimented with compounds in our bodies.
VETERINARY IVERMECTIN IS PHARMACOLOGICALLY EQUIVALENT TO “PEOPLE” IVERMECTIN.
We are not going around drooling saliva down our chins with green paste on the corners of our mouths. Disdain expected, from immature, “protect the public”, human health agencies (who won’t even consider having a licensed pharma who is interested in trials do a trial on “The Effects Of Veterinary Equine Bimeda-Manufactured, Durvet and Farnam Distributed Compounds On Human Subjects Who Have Taken Them”), we do not expect you too to imitate this feigned shock and disgust. If you express it, you are no better nor any more threatening than a lyrebird imitating a chainsaw sound. You are a wonder and a curiosity, but not an authority on my subject matter.
It is a State like Colorado that can exercise a 10th Amendment, like it did with cannabis and THC legal status, and a citizen in Colorado that can take it to the Law of the Land level and stand on both the 10th and 9th Amendments…and plead them in constitutional hearings. I have not committed a crime by using veterinary ivermectin equine formulation internal-use paste at a dosage, based on body weight, that is the same for humans and animals.
Have Bimeda, the manufacturer, dragged into court, if you want to know what is in veterinary paste formulation. Have the boldness to subpeona corporations to expose publically, the lists of ingredients in their Propietary Compounds. You can’t…there are corporate privacy laws. Respect and uphold natural persons’ rights equally…or more so.
Do you understand that when you ingest compounds (such as food) you, the brains of the project, aren’t concerned about “dose” ( unless you are a dieter, body builder, athlete or a nutritional eater?
You consume to alleviate hunger and thirst…and for pleasure.
We take ivermectin for a disease mitigation benefit. Is that a validated reason to you?
What does your body do with the excess compounds…after you eat and drink?
The organs that process waste – the skin sweat glands, the stomach, intestines, liver, kidneys, gall bladder,appendix, urine bladder, mucosal cells, saliva, etc. – these are all The Immune System.
Ivermectin personal usage doesn’t have to be “it takes a village to raise a child”.
You do your prescriptions for your disease symptoms, I’ll do my prevention, I’ll do my privacy to treat the cause.
Sometimes it’s your mental state of looking for disease all around you and in strangers that allows you to cross a barrier into mental illness and towards becoming a hypochondriac with pathological desires toward the healthy, dissenting-with-pharma, natural person. The next level sickness in persons who are afraid and intolerable of anyone who chooses their own healthcare is when you demand their death and wish it upon them because they do not do what you desire…
James 4 New Life Version (NLV). “
4 What starts wars and fights among you? Is it not because you want many things and are fighting to have them? 2 You want something you do not have, so you kill. You want something but cannot get it, so you fight for it. You do not get things because you do not ask for them.”
Ask God for your own health and stay distant from me for COVID-19 reasons of safety that applies to all. Don’t be concerned that He gives health to others according to their faith and how well they treat the body as a holy temple.
I’m going camping. So long. 🐴🕷🌲🌞🐾🍻
- MemberSeptember 11, 2021 at 12:31 pm
The media is so dishonest when it comes to ivermectin, it is truly astounding
Hopefully more people can awaken as to how bad they are.
- MemberAugust 28, 2021 at 9:54 am
I talked with animal science professor. He said to follow the weight guide and smear it on Ritz crackers once a week
- MemberAugust 30, 2021 at 8:36 am
Thanks very much for the insightful replies. Just to be clear, I am very pro-Ivermectin but like to hear answers for questions I receive about Ivermectin.
- MemberAugust 30, 2021 at 9:06 am
My GP told me 15 yars ago There is no Silver Bullet in medicince except for Coors
- MemberAugust 31, 2021 at 3:52 pm
As far as I know, using IVM as a preventative does not impact its later use as a treatment medicine. FLCCC updated its COVID treatment recommendations last week to catch up to the Delta variant and the even more severe Gamma variant.
- MemberSeptember 3, 2021 at 10:23 am
No, it does not lessen the effect of IVM. Pierre Kory was taking 0.2mgs/kg 1x/week and works with COVID patients. Just before his next weekly dose he got COVID. This is because the Delta is more infectious. He immediately began the treatment protocol and he experienced just 2 days of mild symptoms. After this, the prevention protocol was changed to 2x/wk. If you can, watch the FLCCC weekly update videos – they keep you up-to-date.
- MemberSeptember 3, 2021 at 3:14 pm
The draconian efforts by the regulatory agencies and professional medical associations to eliminate the use of Ivermectin for COVID19 reveals the fact that the regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical companies are threatened by an inexpensive safe and effective drug that has both antiviral and anti-inflammatory mechanisms of action. I believe that due to the existence of this “treatment” for COVID19, the EUA’s should be abolished!
See Bird_group.org and FLCCC.net!
- MemberSeptember 16, 2021 at 9:21 pm
Our public health agencies rely exclusively on what they call evidence based medicine (EBM). Don’t listen to me but listen to the conclusions of the editors in chief of peer reviewed journals.:
As you likely know, two of the most prestigious journals of medicine are The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).
Dr. Marcia Angell, Harvard physician and editor in chief of the NEJM for 2 decades said this in 2009-“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor.”
Dr. Relman, another former editor in chief of the NEJM said this in 2002 – “The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”
Richard Horton, editor in chief of The Lancet said this in 2015 “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.”
Given the regulatory capture of our academic/research/and public health agencies, we must create new methods and procedures for validating scientific research which isn’t defined by Big Pharma. This is especially true for repurposed, FDA approved drugs.
- MemberSeptember 17, 2021 at 9:46 pm
Source for study on ivermectin high dosages for other uses?
- MemberSeptember 17, 2021 at 9:55 pm
What’s evidence or suggestions for those who take the full vaccines and also want to use Ivermectin for early treatments/early exposure? Thoughts, advice? Ph.D. nurse educator John campbell in britain is both pro-Ivermectin use , featuring the UK’s Tess Lawrie on his daily video program and also advocated getting fully vaccinated to his 1.1 million viewers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ju5v4TAaQ and he’s critical of the new Australia anti-IVM guidelines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gndsUjgPYo But he also raises alarms about what’s happening in Idaho now with the new emergency crisis of care guidelines in Idaho due to what health officials there in a Republican state say are mostly unvaccinated people crowding the ICUs. Your and others’ take on this pro-IVM and pro-vaccine perspective? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_Et4PUyS94
- MemberSeptember 18, 2021 at 9:42 am
A few weeks ago, an MD guest on the FLCCC weekly update said that he found people who were vaccinated responded very quickly when given IVM for early treatment.