Posted on 05/15/2021 12:37:08 AM PDT by SecAmndmt
(...) To use an old cliché, “the cat is out of the bag.”
For perhaps the first time since the COVID Plandemic started at the beginning of 2020, Americans who get most of their information solely through the corporate media, which is heavily funded by Big Pharma, got a dose of reality on just what exactly has been going on for the past 16 months or so, thanks to Tucker Carlson, and his 45-minute interview with Dr. Peter McCullough last week on his “Tucker Carlson Today” show on Fox News.
Dr. Peter McCullough is well-known to most Health Impact News readers, as we have featured his testimony before the Texas Senate as well as the U.S. Congress in previous articles. See:
CENSORED: Dr. Peter McCullough, MD testifies How Successful Home Treatments for COVID Make Experimental Vaccines Unnecessary (...)
(Excerpt) Read more at healthimpactnews.com ...
Roman_War_Criminal wrote: “Paid Gubmit troll!”
The last ditch defense of a person who’s lost an argument, call the other person a “paid government troll”.
Just found out today that my cousin’s dad passed away - four days after his first covid shot. Completely out of left field and unexpected.
Do you know what kind of shot it was?
No. I was so shocked I forgot to ask!
“How many of those 10,000 were asymptomatic cases, aka false positives due to the PCR test being dialed up to 40 or 45 cycles?”
Who knows...I only look at reported case numbers. But it would not surprise me if Israel is testing a lot less now, as far fewer people are sick there.
And as it is, with the virus over in Israel, it’s got to be fun to kick a little PA butt!
There is no profit incentive for the drug companies to study HCQ or Ivermectin. The drug companies are set up by design to perform clinical trials on new drugs that will make them money. They are bound by the number of people they have that can run a trial. That is a finite resource. They can't just pick 100 drugs to test. They must narrow their choice to the fewest drugs that will be both helpful and profitable.
In Eli Lilly's case they chose bamlanivimab and etesevimab as the drugs to be placed under study. These medications were subject to a randomized placebo controlled study. Which found that bamlanivimab monotherapy is no better than placebo and they no longer offer it under an Emergency Use Authorization. But that combination therapy bamlanivimab and etesevimab did reduce viral load and significantly reduced follow up medical events when compared to placebo.
That's the statistical analysis of the issue. Eli Lily will move forward with the combined therapy. From an economic standpoint it would have been more profitable if the monotherapy had succeeded. There is only a certain cost the market will bear even for an effective treatment. Getting $1000 per dose for 1 monoclonal antibody is going to be more profitable than getting $1000 for 2 combined (prices are a guesstimate for comparison purposes). But competition with Regeneron who also has an effective monoclonal antibody therapy will place a cap on what Eli Lilly can charge.
The doctors at Broward Health did a very good thing which you would have thought would have been done at institutions across the US. They threw HCQ and Ivermectin at patients (before anyone was even talking about Ivermectin) since they had in-vitro evidence the drugs may have some effect against COVID-19. That's where we get the one US study (that I can find) on Ivermectin having potential benefit in actual patients.
The issue as I see it is poor leadership from NIH and CDC. They need to push a coordinated effort to see that drugs with known in-vitro activity are studied in a clinical setting. But here unfortunately we are up against institutional group think that viruses are best treated with vaccines and antivirals. Therefore limited resources are targeted to these modalities. Good luck getting it changed.
If it weren't for President Trump dedicating resources to both therapeutics and vaccines we probably wouldn't have monoclonal antibody treatments from Regeneron or Eli Lily.
Finally I don't think embarrassment has anything to do with this. Drug companies go where the money is. They may lobby for extra money for their own aims in this crisis thereby taking money away from other therapies. They may campaign against the cheaper medications because it would hurt their bottom line. That is what they do. The blame would be on the government agencies that squandered the funds so that repurposed medications couldn't be studied.
Read later
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.