Posted on 12/11/2021 12:01:36 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
David DeLuca of Sicklerville, New Jersey will never know if the Ivermectin prescribed by an out-of-state doctor for his wife would have saved her life. Colleen DeLuca, 62, died of COVID-19 on Oct. 10, at Jefferson Washington Township Hospital in Sewell, New Jersey, before he could get a court order to administer the drug.
Ivermectin has helped in some cases, but across the United States, many hospitals don’t include it in their COVID protocol for treatment and refuse to use it, even as a last effort on a dying patient.
Buffalo, New York attorney Ralph Lorigo has spent the last 11 months handling cases where the family wants to try Ivermectin and must get a court order to force hospitals to allow the drug to be administered. DeLuca had Lorigo draw up papers for court, but because Lorigo doesn’t practice in New Jersey, he instructed DeLuca to find a New Jersey attorney to file the papers and handle the case. However, DeLuca couldn’t find an attorney willing to take on the case.
“They kept telling me the magistrates of New Jersey will never let this go through. Now I’ve got to go through the next 25 years without her,” grief stricken David DeLuca, 62, told The Epoch Times. “My 3-year-old granddaughter kisses her photo at night.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theepochtimes.com ...
That’s a very good question. I was talking to one of my friends about getting it and he mentioned that he actually has the people version and he gave it to me. It’s really that simple.
The general consensus seems to be one week is what you have as a timeline for early treatment regardless of what you have for treatment. If the cytokine storm is active the window for early treatment is past.
So these folks who are pre taking it have wasted their time if they still get COViD?
Exactly. After 10 days, the viral load is gone. Ivermectin is beneficial during the first week.
The correct dosage is a critical aspect that is often overlooked by people attempting to treat COVID-19 with Ivermectin at home without proper guidance.
Administering Ivermectin (IVM) early when infection is suspected (testing for COVID-19 later) is important, but equally or more important is the proper dosage of IVM for early treatment of the disease and the schedule followed for the dosing. The mg of IVM per kg of body weight dosage and the number of days per week of the dosing is quite different for a prevention protocol versus the dosing for early treatment of the disease.
My family has confidence in the dosages recommended for the COVID-19 prevention and early outpatient treatment protocols developed by the wonderful doctors of the FLCCC from their research and extensive personal experience treating thousands of patients. I have been taking the recommended dosage of IVM for the FLCCC prevention protocol for several weeks without any adverse effects.
There is a hospital in the Houston area (United Memorial Medical Center) that administers the FLCCC MATH+ treatment protocol for patients admitted for treatment of COVID-19. There have been numerous examples of COVID patients making remarkable, rapid recovery once admitted to this hospital. Patients have been transferred to the hospital, some by LifeFlight air-ambulance, specifically for the treatments offered which include IVM together with adjunct medications. The hospital recorded a mortality rate for COVID-19 of 4.4% compared to other hospitals averaging 22% over the same time period. The other hospitals follow the standard protocol that only permits the expensive, ineffective and dangerous Remdesivir (it has been nicknamed RunDeathIsNear) followed by a ventilator.
It was me that needed it. And I was going to, but a guy that had a human version source offered me a free bottle so I took it. If I need more I’ll probably use the horse paste. 🙂
Some appear to think that right try means the unilateral ability to demand something when they apparently graduated from the google school of medicine.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well OK...You are looking at this from the doctor/hospital view.
How about you consider the patient/patient family view? I ask because probably the saddest, most difficult day of my life was spending hours in the hospital waiting and watching my father die...I would have done ANYTHING—ANYTHING to help him.
If he had COVID I would have snuck Ivermectin to him if the hospital had not allowed it. When someone is dying why not allow out-of-box thinking. Why are these hospitals denying patients from a treatment that some say definitely works—others say probably works? We are talking about family, people—not statistics!
To the hospital, the person in room ABC is patient XXX, to the family there is a husband, wife, mother or father. THINK!
Ok moving on...thank you for the clarification...trying vs. receiving.
It is a very sad distinction IMHO... Why should a patient not be able to receive? Especially since the cases I am familiar with here in the publicized cases in IL all had family members who indemnified the hospitals from liability?!
I am not a grad of “google school of medicine” — thanks for the snark—tho based on our previous conversations, I expected better from you. Actually my comment regarding Right to Try Act came from a family member with medical career...Again we live in Illinois, and I don’t understand why the h*ll the hospitals are fighting tooth and nail to prevent near death patients from getting something that might change their outcome? And actually has changed the outcome of some. Again, the hospitals are indemnified.
I have never claimed expertise in data analysis, virology, infection control, etc. Tho you are a doctor, I am not sure if you have the expertise in these particular areas either...
As I have stated to you privately, I do have family members who have far more medical expertise than me—and perhaps you. However, I choose to look at the expertise of people outside of my family who have a lot of expertise and a lot to lose and have put their careers on the line—like Drs. McCullough, Malone, Martin, Kory.
As stated, I live in Soviet Republic of Illinois...(working on changing that). There are 3 hospitals that have fought furiously to prevent Ivermectin being administered on patients in ICU or vented. WHY???? The 2 patients in ICU/on vent who were successful in receiving Ivermectin survived, were discharged, and are working on getting their health back to where they were before admission. One patient who was denied Ivermectin died. what a shame...Why the h*ll didn’t that hospital just allow the patient to get the treatment they requested? Sadly, the next paragraph may provide insight...
From what I have read, our government has incentivized hospitals treating COVID in ICU...The hospitals have an incentive to diagnose patients with covid, prescribe the “approved” protocols such as Remdesivir and venting...It is sad. IMHO It is a travesty. Please dispute this.
I live 5 minutes from one of the hospitals in IL that has been in the news regarding lawsuits flying regarding Ivermectin. They have had a decent track record/rating/reputation. I have been at that facility as have my family members. But at this point, I don’t believe they have my best interest or my back...I am updating my paperwork regarding medical choice.
Sadly your comments don’t instill any confidence going forward.
It is unlikely that ivermectin or any medication will help someone who is already on the edge of death. The question is why wait so long to have it administered?
Billions in payoffs/bribes from the drug companies always have kept the medical profession under tight control...
The alternative is Tylenol, cucks.
Until you turn blue, then it's Rundeathisnear and a ventilator at your friendly local Auschwitzpital ER.
So spare us the faucx concern, whydontcha.
https://www.barnhardt.biz/ivermectin/
There are going to be some huge lawsuits in the future because hospitals are violating “right to try” AND there is far more science supporting the effectiveness of IVM versus other large class actions like John “Pretty Boy” Edwards breast implant suit and others.
Hospitals and corporate medicine are going to try and hide behind the fact that they were just doing what the disgraced (he will be by then) Fauci and CDC/NIH said to do.
We need to rethink medicine in the United States with more preventative care and less reliance on big pharma. I don’t think any of us had any clue that the system was so corrupt that they would kill people to make big money for big pharma.
My wife and I made it a point when we saw what was happening and did our own research to find a family practice doctor who was a believer in HCQ, IVM, vitamin D, and steroids. He is aggressive at treating and said he will do so until the state comes for his medical license. He has been VERY successful with his patients and we have about a dozen or more friends who switched primary care to his office. He successfully treated a few of them with serious risk factors immediately - none of this “call me or come in when you can’t breath crap”.
Get away from corporate medicine folks..... they are NOT concerned with your wellness (they make more on catastrophic care) and they are pawns of big pharma and their merry minions in the AMA, CDC, WHO, and NIH.
They are killing people. Yes, I said it. Absolutely killing people who do not have to die. They are harming many more who don’t have to be so sick or have long lasting injuries from the illness. They are killing our children by promoting a failed leaky vaccine that kids do not need and are more likely to be harmed by than the virus.
This is criminal. It’s time everyone begins to say it out in the open and loudly. Big pharma has made tens of billions for their stockholders and NIH/CDC but there will be a reckoning. They need to believe that they are putting THEIR money where THEIR mouth is because many of them know the truth and I bet that will come out also. The GOP needs to keep getting louder about this like Ron Johnson.
It is unlikely that ivermectin or any medication will help someone who is already on the edge of death. The question is why wait so long to have it administered?
It has helped some, but it is best administered early and that is even more true for HCQ/Zinc.
Why?
Big pharma needs to make billions. CDC/NIH gets their cut of it also. It is criminal.
No.
Just give them a Zillow printout of their house and address...
There is a lot of emotion in your statements, and let me from the onset state I am sorry for being snarky. I can see that I was, and while not intended to be directed at you, the fact that I insulted you is not acceptable and none ws intended. Please forgive.
I agree with you that this is an extraordinarily difficult issues. It is also quite emotional for all of us both on the treating and receiving end. One one hand I understand the indemnification of the hospitals, but I am not sure it would stand up in court. Not that that is a reason to give or not give treatment, but there are a thousand zillion lawyers who would be quick to point out that you cannot give away rights, and that you cannot forgo rights based on un reasonable stances. For example, I cannot say that I will indemnify someone against an illegal act.
I do think of it from my family perspective everyday. And the fact is that this is so politicized and charged that I think there is emotional information that is giving a lot of people false hope. HCQ is really no longer considered by anyone who has the first understanding of this virus or that drug as a reasonable prophylaxis or treatment. Recalling at first that it was all we had and it was a theory at best, but now it is just not reasonable for anything. But we have a conga line of people here who even talk about making their own HCQ or advancing theories that are either disproves or wildly dangerous.
Secondly, I think there is a lot of confusion over if Ivermectin actually works. IT is stated that is should be given early in the course (after diagnosis) and that usually you are better in several days. Well, that is the natural history of CoVID - 19 if you are going to get better anyway. I used ivermectin on several cases, some early (now this was before the widespread availability of MABs) and some while in the ICU. I thought it may have turned around one in the ICU early on, but it was never an observation that I repeated, and I also prescribed it to a lot of people early on to try to keep them from coming to the ICU, and a sizable proportion of those who received it progressed anyway.
As such, based on my own personal prescription of the medication, I have NOT seen it deliver that which is widely anecdotally purported by people with friends of friends who have got better based on it. In theory, Ivermectin is a macrolide like medication, and azithromycin shows nome anti-inflammatory effects in the long (ie severe COPD exacerbation without culture proof of infection) but thats about as far as it goes.
So in my experience and hands, what I have seen is that if I am able to treat someone early, then it has to be monoclonals. As we have discussed a lot of other times in threads we are both mutually responsive to, MABs should be used early, and even in the latter parts of “early or intermediate disease” up to 10 days, I have literally seen it turn people around, some from the brink of disaster. I will give you that we have an easier time procuring it in the Southeast than other areas based on reports from fellow FReepers, however that leads us back to the political question, which makes me sick to think that an obvious an excellent treatment that is both efficacious early only and as a 90 day prophylaxis is not widely available based on who the president is and the governor of the state is TOTALLY UNACCEPTBALE
When it comes to ivermectin, you are paining the picture of something called a 2B intervention — possible helpful, but little evidence as to its utility, and not hurtful. IF I have two treatments — one like Ivermectin which is 2B intervention, and one like MAB therapy which is category I (helpful, with strong evidence of same), then would it not be negligent for me to use the lesser proven treatment by both direct experience and evidence?
I also disagree that the government has incentivized the use of ventilators. The reason why is having seen the horrific deaths that COVID 19 and particularly delta has caused, there is no way even with an incentive that any physician would permit a patient to be ventilated for financial gain. The fact of the matter is that physicians alone a responsible for the treatment plan, and no incentive to a hospital would sway a physician to act one direction or another. A physician makes no more money based on the presence of absence of a ventilator (physician E/M coding including critical care codes) are reimbursed independently of the DRG reimbursement of a hospital. It is a complex economic system that I have described in other posts - but it is just not an accurate statement that there is physicians who are happy to stick patients on ventilators for financial gain.
I teach my residents and employees exactly what you say — we take care of patients — and that patient is someones mother, father, son, daughter, sister or brother. Accordingly, it is our job to do our best in every situation, offering the best approach (which means an individual approach based on each patients individual interactions of their body with a disease) and to always to good and never to do harm. These are the tenants of the oath that directs every physician out there. I think there is harm in stating ivermectin will save people if only they get it when I know -MABs have a much better ability to fulfill that promise.
On a personal note, it gets tiresome getting called killer, murderer, negligent, criminal, and malpractitioner by the conga line of people who will not listen to valid and evidence based argument. We can disagree on the evidence and data — and argue it accordingly, however perhaps in my statement in response to your post mentioning google medical school, I was truly thinking of the plethora of those who do not make a reasoned argument, like you, but simply cut and paste and regurgitate talking points with little thought or scrutiny. This does not seem to be you.
But I am sorry, I have offended you, and I will try my best to avoid that in the future.
Thank you for your thoughtful response.
Get the patient out of the hospital.
-PJ
I thought so.
Good advice.
Needs to be used in the onset not as a last resort
From the FLCCC treatment protocol: 0.4 mg/kg per dose (take with or after a meal) — one dose today, repeat after 48 hours.
If you weigh 220 pounds, you weigh 100 kg [kilograms]
0.4 mg x 100 kg = 40 mg for 5 days [(3 and a half) 12 mg pills daily (42 mg)]
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.