Posted on 10/05/2021 9:35:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A patient with Type 1 diabetes called to tell me the pharmacist at our local Walgreens refused to fill the prescription I had written for ivermectin, so I called to ask why.
The young pharmacist, a few years out of pharmacy school, informed me he did not understand why I was using ivermectin for early treatment of COVID because “SARS-CoV-2 does not have an exoskeleton.”
I explained I was not using ivermectin as an anti-parasitic medication, but that it had impressive data as an anti-inflammatory and anti-viral. Furthermore, as a pediatrician, I have more than 40 years of experience managing multiple viral illnesses. There is value in treating viruses early, often with inexpensive natural remedies, rather than “staying at home until you have problems breathing then go to the hospital” as U.S. public officials have advised for COVID.
The pharmacist was not buying my initial explanation. “I am not going to fill prescriptions for ivermectin that are used in pseudo vaccine doses,” he told me.
I was surprised a young pharmacist was able to override an experienced physician’s prescription, effectively removing an inexpensive prevention and treatment option for selected patients in the middle of a pandemic.
The medical educator in me kicked in. “I would be happy to send you some references about the use of ivermectin for treatment and prevention. There are impressive studies from Argentina, Peru, Africa and India that suggest much better outcomes than we are achieving here in the U.S. with our single-minded focus on vaccines.”
He told me the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not recommend ivermectin for COVID. I asked to see the documentation and he agreed to fax it to me. I hand-delivered 93 references and a great review article to the Walgreens. The pharmacist faxed back a post from March 5, on the FDA website entitled “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”
The next day, I received notice that a pharmacy in Northern Virginia would not fill any prescriptions for ivermectin if the diagnosis code mentioned COVID.
I had written an ivermectin prescription for a patient who has a history of bad reactions to vaccines and significant autoimmune illness. His adolescent age means that he is at very low risk of death from COVID itself.
Based on my experience as his doctor for over a decade, I was worried about potential adverse events if he got the COVID vaccine. I dug into the data about ivermectin, and it seemed like a great option for him to have on hand for early treatment of COVID if he got sick.
A pharmacist in a drug store, who never examined my patient or learned his extensive medical history, got to trump my best medical judgment by refusing to fill the prescription.
The same day, in a conversation with a compounding pharmacy, we learned of a case in which a patient’s family had to take a hospital to court to obtain treatment with ivermectin.
Bear in mind that the safety profile for ivermectin is excellent and the drug is spectacularly less expensive than the vast majority of hospital interventions.
In an open letter to Rachel Maddow, Diane Perlman, Ph.D., challenges @maddow to correct statements the talk show host made on her show about ivermectin, especially as it relates to treating COVID-19.
SIGN UP #TheDefender: https://t.co/zL66Edfiw5https://t.co/nQytDs0QJa
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) October 1, 2021
Three days later, on a zoom call with a colleague whose parents live in Colorado, I learned that a pharmacist at a major drugstore was not only refusing to fill ivermectin for 86- and 87-year-old patients who held valid prescriptions, but the pharmacist was taking the initiative to remind the other King Soopers pharmacies in the state not to fill those prescriptions either.
My analysis of the medical literature is that ivermectin has an impressive safety record and there are multiple studies from around the globe suggesting it can decrease morbidity and mortality from COVID 19.
Two doctors who were actually in the ICU treating real patients, Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Pierre Kory, looked at their prior experience with similarly sick patients and reviewed treatment strategies to determine what could be helpful.
As Dr. Anthony Fauci advised us to “stay home and wait for the vaccine,” frontline doctors took care of the patients before them, learning valuable lessons about what worked and what did not.
Let’s hit the highlights, quoting directly from the review paper by Kory et al, Jan 2021:
Kory and Marik compiled eight studies (three randomized controlled studies and five observational controlled studies) demonstrating efficacy in prevention of COVID-19 with significant decreased transmission.
They found 19 controlled studies that showed significant impacts on time to recovery, hospital stay, decrease in viral loads, reductions in duration of cough and decreased mortality.
In medical history pre-COVID, this body of research about ivermectin would be applauded for bringing value in the midst of a pandemic. In the medical era pre-COVID, the judgment and experience of clinicians at the patient’s bedside counted for something.
Pre-COVID, we taught medical students to use keen observational skills and keep accurate records of whether the patient improved or deteriorated after the treatment strategies used.
In the Age of COVID, pharmacists who chide doctors that “COVID does not have an exoskeleton” deny patients ivermectin — a safe, cheap, effective and potentially life-saving early treatment.
If you or your patients are having trouble getting ivermectin prescriptions filled for COVID 19 prevention or treatment, see this excellent resource from the Front Line COVID 19 Critical Care Alliance.
“A relatively safe, familiar, cheap drug reduced the relative risk of mild Covid getting worse by nearly 30 percent. The drug is fluvoxamine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor—an antidepressant. (It’s also an anti-inflammatory, and inflammation and an overreacting immune system are hallmarks of serious Covid infection, so that might be why it seems to help). Get a bunch of people with Covid and randomize them into two groups; 739 get fluvoxamine and 733 get a placebo. Only 77 of the fluvoxamine-takers end up in the hospital; 109 of the placebo group do.”
https://www.wired.com/story/better-data-on-ivermectin-is-finally-on-its-way/
“In the Together trial, that drug[iveremectin], commonly used against things like river blindness and intestinal roundworms, didn’t keep anyone with Covid out of the hospital any better than a placebo. Of 677 people with Covid who got 400 micrograms per kilogram of weight per day for three days, 86 ended up in the ER or hospital; of the 678 people who got a placebo, 95 went. That’s not a significant difference, and Mills’ team dropped it from the study. (Vaccination, I should add, is still the most effective, safest, cheapest, and easiest way to avoid getting sick.)”
https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/what-we-know-about-ivermectin-correlation-is-not-causation/
;-)
Horse paste is more effective than the vax.
Not enough money to be made in the sale of ivermectin. If Fauci would just endorse the product....
Of course when Fizermectin, Modernavectin or JJmectin come out at a much higher price then it will be OK to use for treatment of Covid-19.
NOTE: Merck had the original patent on Ivermectin.
Merck has just introduce their new and improved pill for COVID.
RE: If ivermectin paste weren’t safe, it would have killed me by now.
You’re obviously following the mg/kg. dosage guide given by the Frontline doctors.
Unfortunately, some people don’t and they get sick as a result.
The objective, when you’re a bureaucrat, is to increase your own little tinhorn dictatorial power AND put lotsa money in your pocket. You can’t do that when it’s a $2 pill but you CAN do that when it’s a $300 injection.
cant get an EUA for the vaccine if there are approved therapies. therefore the high priests of govt have declared there are no effective therapies no matter the evidence.
$$$$$
That goes by the familiar name Prozac. It is used by millons everyday.
OK, next question — what’s the objective? To conquer the disease or to make big pharma rich?
—
That’s an easy one. The NIH and CDC are full of people who float into eventually very lucrative jobs in Big Pharma. Their first concern is their own pocketbook. Their second concern is Big Pharma’s pocketbook. Treatment of disease is a distant third, at best.
The Branch Covidians are going to be upset.
Right you are. It's not candy, but it's very, very safe as long as a person follows the dosage advice. There is a huge latitude for error too. The lethal dose would be something like 30 tubes of paste consumed at once. Tylenol is far, far deadlier.
I have been taking it for months and the only side effect I notice is more energy the next day. I think it kills all virus and parasites in my system. It really feels like a miracle drug.
We have also cured 5 people with the paste.
Ivermectin ( tablet, if you can get it ) plus Vitamins C and D3, Quercetin, and Zinc, taken in conjunction, at the earliest sign of the virus, is the ticket.
Of course, Big Pharma and Big Brother don’t want you to know this.
moneymoneymoneymoneymoneymoneymoneymoneymoney................
There is no money to be made using it, only lives saved.
Project Veritas needs to find out where all the Ivermectin is being hidden from the citizenry ?
Of course, if 60 Minutes had the gonads to do it, it would make the Facebook revelations of this week pale in comparison.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.