Suppression of early treatments and natural immunity

Public health insiders increasingly are calling out the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over the “insanity” of pushing COVID vaccines on people who have already acquired natural immunity.

At the worst moment, Internet censorship has driven scientific debate itself underground

On February 9th a prominent member of the medical establishment here came out in a very public manner in favor of ivermectin as a treatment for not only patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19, but also their caregivers. Reported in The Nikkei, a prominent Japanese economics and business focused publication, Haruo Ozaki, chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association, came out and recommended the emergency use of drugs such as Ivermectin administered to those COVID-19 patients, declaring they exhibit efficacy toward preventing disease progression in other nations. Clearly, Dr. Ozaki falls on the side of a rapidly growing group of physicians and researchers that align with significant meta-analyses involving dozens of randomized controlled trials, observational studies and case series around the world. Ozaki also calls out for Japan health authorities to use dexamethasone shown to help lower the death rate in certain more severe situations in hospitalized patients.

After COVID-19 emerged on U.S shores, providers began reviewing the emerging basic science, translational, and clinical data to identify potentially effective treatment options. In addition, a multitude of both novel and repurposed therapeutic agents ...

FLCCC is The Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance: Dedicated to COVID prevention & treatment, empowering individuals for better health.

Peter McCullough, MD, MPH speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of AAPS on October 2, 2021. Slides: https://www.scribd.com/document/530328436/Slides-from-Peter-McCullough-MD-Oct-1-2021-Lecture Patient Gui

In this article, Marc Girardot - a member of PANDA - explores the extent and evolution of our pre-existing immunity to Covid-19.

Administration of vitamin in the infected found to have reduced mortality

A TrialSite community member recently submitted an entry associated with a purported "fact checker" seeking to squash any possible linkage of the dramatic turnaround in cases in Indian states such as Uttar Pradesh with the population-wide use of ivermectin. TrialSite includes the entry authored by a group affiliated with British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD). On the 17th of May, Jim Hoft published on his blog page a short article titled “Elites Worried: Covid Cases in India Plummet after Government Promotes Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine use”.  He reportsm “The India health ministry updated its guidelines on April 28 for quarantines, treating the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms of COVID-19. The agency now says that asymptomatic patients should “consider Ivermectin (200 mcg/kg once a day, to be taken on an empty stomach) for 3 to 5 days.” Caregivers of patients in quarantine are instructed to “take Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis as per protocol and as prescribed by the treating medical officer.” An article authored by Pablo Rougerie at the “Fact Checking” Health Feedback declared in response there is no data to justify such a link. But are the fact-checkers in fact correct? Or do they represent a particular bias or point of view and hence are more measured in what they purport as truth?

Thomas Borody MB,BS, BSc (Med), MD PhD, DSc, FRACP, FACP, FACG, AGAF, touts FDA and TGA approved Ivermectin, which he reports to use regularly in his hospital as it evidences positive results for COVID-19 and should be used immediately to fight the pandemic. The developer of the world’s first cure for peptic ulcers, which saved millions of lives worldwide, employed the same methodology to come up with the Ivermectin triple therapy. With over 30 formal clinical trials, many dozens of observational real-world initiatives and hundreds to possibly thousands of doctors already using the medicine, a particular momentum gains speed for additional randomized controlled trials and, just as importantly, a more serious dialogue about the potential of this approach for pragmatic and economical treatment options for COVID-19.

'A combination of FDA and TGA approved Ivermectin, Zinc and Doxycycline has shown positive results for COVID-19 and should consider immediately to fight the pandemic' says CDD Medical Director Professor Thomas Borody

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.

'This is a major breakthrough for the people of SA as we believe that Ivermectin can assist in this pandemic', says Bongani Luthuli.

Ivermectin is seen as a repeat of hydroxychloroquine and not to be taken seriously. Belief in it, worthy only of derision.

In this Buffalo hospital room, a grandmother led the global fight for the drug that would ave her life and end the pandemic.

Sources in the government said that the decision to replace Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with Ivermectin was taken after encouraging results in Agra, where it was used on an experimental basis.

This is an updated version of an article that was first published in July 2021 A recent peer reviewed meta-analysis evaluating ivermectin ...

Double-blind study shows ivermectin reduces disease’s duration and infectiousness • FDA and WHO caution against its use

Nature Immunology - SARS-CoV-2 infection is milder in children, but direct comparison with adults is rare. Here the authors show that immune responses are higher in children, retained for 12 months...

Last week Project Veritas revealed that US Military documents contradicted Fauci’s sworn testimony about gain-of-function.  Since then six Congressional Members have sent letters to the CDC, S…

It seemed a truth universally acknowledged that the human population had no pre-existing immunity to SARS-CoV-2, but is that actually the case? Peter Doshi explores the emerging research on immunological responses Even in local areas that have experienced some of the greatest rises in excess deaths during the covid-19 pandemic, serological surveys since the peak indicate that at most only around a fifth of people have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2: 23% in New York, 18% in London, 11% in Madrid.123 Among the general population the numbers are substantially lower, with many national surveys reporting in single digits. With public health responses around the world predicated on the assumption that the virus entered the human population with no pre-existing immunity before the pandemic,4 serosurvey data are leading many to conclude that the virus has, as Mike Ryan, WHO’s head of emergencies, put it, “a long way to burn.” Yet a stream of studies that have documented SARS-CoV-2 reactive T cells in people without exposure to the virus are raising questions about just how new the pandemic virus really is, with many implications. At least six studies have reported T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 in 20% to 50% of people with no known exposure to the virus.5678910 In a study of donor blood specimens obtained in the US between 2015 and 2018, 50% displayed various forms of T cell reactivity to SARS-CoV-2.511 A similar study that used specimens from the Netherlands reported T cell reactivity in two of 10 people who had not been exposed to the virus.7 In Germany reactive T cells were detected in a third of SARS-CoV-2 seronegative healthy donors (23 of 68). In Singapore a team analysed specimens taken from people with no contact or personal …

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. Methods Employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System working in Ohio on Dec 16, 2020, the day COVID-19 vaccination was started, were included. Any subject who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 days earlier was considered previously infected. One was considered vaccinated 14 days after receipt of the second dose of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection over the next five months, among previously infected subjects who received the vaccine, was compared with those of previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated, previously uninfected subjects who received the vaccine, and previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Results Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study. In a Cox proportional hazards regression model, after adjusting for the phase of the epidemic, vaccination was associated with a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among those not previously infected (HR 0.031, 95% CI 0.015 to 0.061) but not among those previously infected (HR 0.313, 95% CI 0 to Infinity). Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before. Summary Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined among 52238 employees in an American healthcare system. COVID-19 did not occur in anyone over the five months of the study among 2579 individuals previously infected with COVID-19, including 1359 who did not take the vaccine. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement There was no funding for this study. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The study was approved by the Cleveland Clinic Institutional Review Board. A waiver of informed consent and waiver of HIPAA authorization were approved to allow access to personal health information by the research team, with the understanding that sharing or releasing identifiable data to anyone other than the study team was not permitted without additional IRB approval. All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes De-identified subject-level data and code to reproduce the results are available on a public data repository.

The study findings reveal that individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection do not get additional benefits from vaccination, indicating that COVID-19 vaccines should be prioritized to individuals without prior infection. The study is currently available on the medRxiv* preprint server.

Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders - The COVID-19 pandemic requires a rapid understanding of the pathogenesis of the spectrum of the disease and factors associated with varied clinical...

The McCullough Report with Dr. Peter McCullough – Dr. Meyer describes the snowballing of events that led to his termination from hospital medical staff and his search for independent practice. Dr. Meyer describes a chilling case where he ordered ivermectin for a critical COVID-19 patient, and the hospital pharmacist and nursing staff did not execute that order...

No legal prohibition authorized or justified hospitals to withhold the drug from dying patients. Let the lawsuits begin.

Agency claims its smearing of wonder drug was a "recommendation"

Study Indicates Prior Infection, Milder Strains were Protective while Vaccination Backfired and Increased Risk of Hospitalization