Pfizermectin Being Rushed To Market?
With A Third Of Americans Unvaxxed There's Money To Be Made
Zerohedge has the story:
Pfizer Launches Final Study For COVID Drug That's Suspiciously Similar To 'Horse Paste'
Another piece of the US anti-Ivermectin puzzle may have emerged. On Monday, Pfizer announced that it's launching an accelerated Phase 2/3 trial for a COVID prophylactic pill designed to ward off COVID in those may have come in contact with the disease.
Coincidentally (or not), Pfizer's drug shares at least one mechanism of action as Ivermectin - an anti-parasitic used in humans for decades, which functions as a protease inhibitor against Covid-19, which researchers speculate "could be the biophysical basis behind its antiviral efficiency."
Lo and behold, Pfizer's new drug - which some have jokingly dubbed "Pfizermectin," is described by the pharmaceutical giant as a "potent protease inhibitor."
…
The timing - which coincides with the whole "horse dewormer" smear campaign - just seems odd.
The similarity between Pfizer's upcoming offering and Ivermectin has not gone unnoticed:
In other news, Pfizer is testing Ivermectin, now renamed PF-07321332, to help with Covid. They have done this so they can make this drug more expensive than Ivermectin, despite the fact, they are the same drug.....
/sarcasm. https://t.co/D1besDEJ2d— Krena (@WGrrrl) September 27, 2021
After a crafted "horse dewormer" smear campaigns on a 35yr old safe, effective, off-label drug, i.e. Ivermectin, media brazenly started to praise unproven pills for which Pfizer & Merck are pushing EUA following that of experimental vaccines. https://t.co/fhopikcPVP
— Kwanghoon Seok (@khoonseok) September 25, 2021
Pardon me while I vomit.
Big Pharma—blood on their hands. Not for the first time, but this is so egregious.
Denninger today, in "CDC Beclowns All Mandates":
< the next problem for the CDC, which is their own data once again:
{chart showing}
... for someone under 17, the risk of death from Covid-19, assuming you get infected, is 2/100,000 (or 0.002%)
For someone 18-49, it is 50/100,000 (or 0.05%)
For someone 50-64, it is 600/100,000 (or 0.6%)
And for someone 65+, it is 9,000/100,000 (or nine percent)....
VAERS says the risk of death, shortly following vaccination for Covid-19, is at least 15,386 / 200,000,000 (remember, this is "died *with*" not "died *of*", in both cases of vaccination and infection) or 7.69/100,000. This, by the way, is wildly higher than that for the *flu* shot (about 20-30 deaths per year across 170 million shots delivered) and thus is very unlikely to be a coincidence.
Here's the problem -- this rate of risk is *per vaccine* delivered. For someone under 17, the risk of the vaccine *exceeds* the risk of their dying from Covid-19. For someone in 18-49 the math looks better -- if you only take *one shot* ever.
But that's not the paradigm, is it? Nope. So the risk of the vaccine over *three shots* a year is 21/100,000, and over six shots in total, or approximately 18 months, it is virtually the *same as* the disease.
Yet over the first 16 months or so -- most of which was during a time when there were no vaccines -- only 20% of the population was infected. The risk is taken when you *get jabbed* (is certain), but the risk of infection is only taken if you *get infected* (is not certain.)
In other words, since we now know from the CDC itself, that the vaccines are not durable, and must be repeated every four months, for someone under 50 the cross-over of risk occurs in *less than two* years, after which they are better off being infected.
For someone under 18, they are *always* better off being infected.
Remember that infection confers sterilizing immunity and, on the science, is durable. How durable we do not know precisely....
... quarantining someone *known infectious*, with reasonable scientific certainty with an infectious disease, is reasonable, because the public benefit is clear, and the personal cost limited in *time and impact*, with a zero risk of mortality due to temporary constraint on personal movement.
In the context of mandated vaccinations, the USSC has been clear as well; for a disease (e.g. smallpox) where the fatality *rate was 30%*, and the vaccine killed you one or *two times in a million*, the argument held for this reason. You had a tiny risk of dying from the vaccination (personal harm), but the public benefit with a disease that killed 30% of the time was immense.
Further, for all persons not previously infected, the personal *risk .vs. reward* odds were always positive, by utterly ridiculous ratios. When your personal risk of the smallpox vaccine killing you was 1/500,000 (0.0002%), yet the disease killed 30% of the time in non-vaccinated persons, there's little argument to be had.
This is clearly not the case here; in those under 50, repeated vaccination is, on balance, *more-dangerous* than the virus, and in those under 18, it is *always* more-dangerous, even from the first use. Never mind that the jabs *contribute nothing* to population immunity (a public good), since you can still be infected and become contagious, while infection and recovery does.
Biden's position, and that of the Federal Government, is unsupportable, on both the facts and the law. >
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/icmr-removes-ivermectin-and-hydroxycholoquine-hcq-from-covid-19-treatment-guidelines/articleshow/86461488.cms
Providing no explanation, the DGHS revised its guidelines for the treatment of COVID-19 and removed nearly all of the repurposed drugs it had previously recommended for the treatment of asymptomatic and mild cases. They include the antibiotic doxycycline, zinc hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and even multivitamins.
https://www.vogon.today/economic-scenarios/after-the-success-india-removes-ivermectin-from-the-covid-19-protocol-the-shadow-of-the-who/2021/06/09/
Of course, claiming that the protocols using other drugs have not been effective is difficult enough, given the results obtained from the peak of cases on April 24, as the situation in India seemed to have completely gotten out of control.
Sounds to me like India was told to play by the rules or no vaccines/pharmaceuticals for you. Or perhaps US funding/support to India was threatened?
Personally, I know a person who travels for work and uses the same clinic as I do caught covid in the last week. The clinic told him to call back in two weeks if he doesn't improve and to see the ER if he can't breath. He had Ivermectin on hand from frontline. Recovered in 2 days. I think the Ivermectin is really only useful if you have it on hand and start at the first feeling of Covid even if its a false feeling. I am not a doctor so don't take my advice. My body, my choice.