Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

**Gwin Ru** · 31st January 2021 14:56

Ivermectin – A new way of defeating Covid-19

by Robert
January 30, 2021

On day four I was cured, had my energy back and was able to work from Daylight to Dark.
_____________

Ivermectin – A new way of defeating Covid-19

David Christian
I came down with Covid-19 over the Christmas weekend and was sick for almost 2 weeks and couldn’t get over it.

A friend of my wife at work told her about a new way of defeating Covid-19.

This friend, like us, owns a farm and raises cattle. As it happens, her husband back in mid December tested positive for Covid-19 and was placed on antibodies by his doctor. Like me, he couldn’t get over it.

While outside treating his cattle with the veterinarian, he explained he had tested positive 2 weeks earlier and was still trying to recover from the Covid-19.

The Vet laughed and said,

“I’ve got something which will knock that Covid bug right out. You will think I am joking but it works.”

The Vet told him to use Ivermectin Injection for Cattle and Swine 1% Solution. To use 2-3mL by mixing it in some Juice or Gatorade. Then repeat 3 days later and he would be cured.

When My wife came home from work and told me this story, I went to our local feed store and bought some Durvet Ivermectin 1% Solution. Cost $34.95. I took the recommended rate and mixed it with Gatorade.

The next morning I woke up coughing my head off for about 20 minutes. Each time I coughed up green and yellow mucus, and I felt better later that day.

On day three I took my second dose.

On day four I was cured, had my energy back and was able to work from Daylight to Dark.

I personally know numerous farmers in the area who have taken this treatment along with Vitamin C and it cured them in 4-5 days by taking it at the first signs of sickness.

The best thing is now we know another way to treat colds and Flu in the event the SHTF happens.

**iota** · 2nd February 2021 00:22

Posted by Gwin Ru (here)
Ivermectin – A new way of defeating Covid-19

by Robert
January 30, 2021

On day four I was cured, had my energy back and was able to work from Daylight to Dark.
_____________

Ivermectin – A new way of defeating Covid-19

David Christian
I came down with Covid-19 over the Christmas weekend and was sick for almost 2 weeks and couldn’t get over it.

A friend of my wife at work told her about a new way of defeating Covid-19.

This friend, like us, owns a farm and raises cattle. As it happens, her husband back in mid December tested positive for Covid-19 and was placed on antibodies by his doctor. Like me, he couldn’t get over it.

While outside treating his cattle with the veterinarian, he explained he had tested positive 2 weeks earlier and was still trying to recover from the Covid-19.

The Vet laughed and said,

“I’ve got something which will knock that Covid bug right out. You will think I am joking but it works.”

The Vet told him to use Ivermectin Injection for Cattle and Swine 1% Solution. To use 2-3mL by mixing it in some Juice or Gatorade. Then repeat 3 days later and he would be cured.

When My wife came home from work and told me this story, I went to our local feed store and bought some Durvet Ivermectin 1% Solution. Cost $34.95. I took the recommended rate and mixed it with Gatorade.

The next morning I woke up coughing my head off for about 20 minutes. Each time I coughed up green and yellow mucus, and I felt better later that day.

On day three I took my second dose.

On day four I was cured, had my energy back and was able to work from Daylight to Dark.

I personally know numerous farmers in the area who have taken this treatment along with Vitamin C and it cured them in 4-5 days by taking it at the first signs of sickness.

The best thing is now we know another way to treat colds and Flu in the event the SHTF happens.

i take it once a month!! and my partner's grandmother who was elderly with underlying conditions recuperated after 3 days astonishingly after taking ivermectin along with Zinc, Quercetin, Vitamin C and D and antibiotics to assist with secondary infections here

i linked post back to this thread

**iota** · 2nd February 2021 00:33

but i came in here to post this news:

amazing!

**Tintin** · 2nd February 2021 16:26

The University of Oxford soon kicks “the PRINCIPLE Trial” into a higher gear now, in what they consider a pathbreaking “high-quality trial” of Ivermectin, a generic drug already evidencing significant efficacy in over two dozen clinical trials around the world, according to some researchers. The UK government also backs this pivotal study via the Department of Health and Social Care. Searching for early-onset, home-based ambulatory treatments for COVID-19, the PRINCIPLE Trial seeks to meet a gap in research in the world’s richest nations to date.

Nearly all of the taxpayer-financed research-based expenditures of governments in the US, UK and Europe, for example, have gone into vaccines, novel monoclonal antibodies, and novel therapeutics, with an emphasis on treating severely ill patients. Ivermectin, hailed as the “wonder drug” or “the People’s medicine” for COVID-19, gains growing attention worldwide made more widely available, frankly, partly due to TrialSite’s consistent chronicling of these trials around the world since the original University of Monash breakthrough.

The team discovered that in a lab cell culture, Ivermectin obliterates the novel coronavirus within 48 hours. Since then, TrialSite has covered most studies worldwide, whereas, by the summer, groups in the U.S., such as the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), commenced meta-analysis covering the dozens of Ivermectin studies around the world.

According to these physician/scientists, the results reveal compelling data that Ivermectin actually reduces the COVID-19 death rate while accelerating viral clearance and transmission reduction.

Enter the preeminent University of Oxford and the PRINCIPLE Trial: the globe’s top investigators now seek to finally test if Ivermectin and antiviral Favipiravir, both low-cost, orally-administered, generally available generic drugs, can be proven safe and effective in a “properly designed trial.” Led by Co-Chief investigator Chris Butler, Professor of Primary Care, Nuffield Department of Primary Care, Health Services at Oxford, the study team is generally upbeat about the prospects. Still, Dr. Butler notes the “gap in the data.”

A critically important trial, the PRINCIPLE Trial, is also causing a stir. Groups such as the FLCCC raise the Helsinki Accords: from their vantage, they remind all about the question of ethical conduct—is it right and proper to conduct a randomized placebo-controlled trial when there is sufficient evidence that a drug can save lives? Couldn’t a dose control study or well-designed observational study be run instead to both generate data and protect patients? On the other hand, that Oxford is the first major center to embrace this important generic drug is truly game-changing and demonstrates the leadership position of that research institution again.

‘Not a Great Place to be’

-----------------------------------

Oxford’s PRINCIPLE Trial: Bringing Ivermectin Directly into the Developed World in the Battle Against COVID-19

By TrialSite Staff January 25, 2021

Source: TrialSite News

On Saturday, The Times’ scientific correspondent Rhys Blakely rightly identified growing frustration worldwide with apex research agencies such as the American National Institutes of Health (NIH) and a number of funding governments use of taxpayer money. In the U.S., for example, Operation Warp Speed, in conjunction with the NIH’s ACTIV, has spent over $13 billion of taxpayer money on just a handful of vaccine and novel monoclonal antibody developers, yet the nation has experienced a staggering amount of death from the pandemic.

A growing cry by physicians and other medical professionals for drugs that can be used at the early onset of the virus, to impede the progression of infectious severity, hasn’t been reflected in the research spent to date.

But other nations have commenced with programs to treat early-onset treatments with antivirals or Ivermectin. Albeit, these tend to be low-to-middle-income countries (LMICs) with far fewer resources than would be available in America, Britain or Europe, for that matter. These poorer countries must be ever more resourceful—they don’t have many billions of dollars to spend during a pandemic on lengthy, randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

Russia led a series of agile studies that led to the approval of Favipiravir, as has India (with multiple generic versions), and several other countries. Ivermectin is used in India’s state of Uttar Pradesh, with 210 million people, health officials there swear by the results. The same is occurring in some Brazilian states, Bangladesh, and for that matter, Peru and Argentina. TrialSite commissioned a documentary about this unfolding situation in Peru. In Europe, at least in the south eastern fringe, the use of Ivermectin gains steam in Greece and the Balkan Peninsula.

Frustration Enters the “First World”

But the “First World” that is the wealthiest Western nations have experienced some of the most horrific losses from this pandemic. The U.S. has been the epicenter of the pandemic, with over 400,000 deaths.

The Times’ Blakely spoke with Wellcome Trust’s Nick Cammack, who shared that there are only “…two strong new antiviral candidates in the pipeline to date. One is called molunpiravir (EIDD-2801) from Merck.” Taken via tablet form and reported on by TrialSite, it is apparently designed to actually “…interfere with an enzyme that the virus relies on to replicate.” Cammack shares that if the clinical trials perform, the drug could be available toward Q3 2021.

Dr. Cammack also introduced Roche’s AT-527, another antiviral drug that is early in the pipeline. This gap, Cammack frets is, “…worrying.” That is, “To have only a few potential therapeutics for a nasty disease during a global pandemic—it’s not a great place to be. We need a big push in R&D.”

In the United States, TrialSite was one of the only media at the time to report on the breakthrough findings of the ICON study in Broward County, Florida. There, Dr. Jean-Jacques Rajter and the team from Broward Health discovered amazing results from the ICON observational study, which evidenced, among other things, that Ivermectin could lower the COVID-19 death rate. The results were finally published in CHEST, but they were not considered strong enough as ICON was observational and not a randomized, placebo controlled study.

Many doctors in the U.S. started prescribing off-label, and with every trial result that TrialSite reported on, the data gained strength. There was some mounting evidence that Ivermectin definitely could inhibit the coronavirus. TrialSite for months called out for NIH funding of Ivermectin studies: the online media platform’s founder even wrote an urgent email communication to NIH Director Francis Collins.

Article continues

**Gemma13** · 8th February 2021 14:25

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-hospital.html

EXPERIMENTAL CANCER DRUG COULD HELP HOSPITALIZED CORONAVIRUS PATIENTS RECOVER IN 5 DAYS - ISRAELI TRIAL CLAIMS

PUBLISHED: 03:44 AEDT, 6 February 2021 | UPDATED: 04:06 AEDT, 6 February 2021

An experimental cancer drug could help hospitalised coronavirus recover quicker, researchers believe.

Israeli academics today claimed 29 of 30 patients with moderate to severe case of Covid treated with EXO-CD24 made a full recovery within five days.

Further human trials are now needed to prove that the inhaled drug - designed as a medication to fight ovarian cancer - actually works.

The study did not compare the drug to a placebo, meaning scientists cannot say for certain that the medicine was behind the patients' speedy recovery.

However, data shows the average coronavirus patient needing hospital treatment spends up to three weeks in a bed.

Scientists gave 30 patients with serious or moderate Covid infections a dose of the drug.

It is not clear how old the patients were but data shows younger patients are much less likely to die from coronavirus and recover quicker.

Twenty-nine showed significant improvement within three to five days. It is not clear whether the patients were also receiving other drugs or treatment.

The thirtieth patient's symptoms also got better but outside of the five-day window, Israeli media claimed.

The trial's sample size was also too low to draw any note-worthy conclusions about the drug's efficacy. The data was not published in a journal.

Professor Nadir Arber, of Ichilov's Integrated Cancer Prevention Center, spent years developing the drug for ovarian cancer before trialling it on coronavirus patients.

EXO-CD24 is taken once every five days and is relatively inexpensive, according to Professor Arber, but he did not reveal exactly how much it costs.

It was initially developed to treat ovarian cancer before researchers considered its potential for coronavirus treatment.

It works by reducing the immune system's overreaction to the virus.

Coronavirus can trigger a brutal immune response that shuts down the body's main organs known as a cytokine storm.

The drug uses tiny carrier sacs called exosomes that shuttle materials between cells to deliver a protein called CD24 straight to the lungs.

Researcher Shiran Shapira told the Times of Israel: 'This protein is located on the surface of cells and has a well known and important role in regulating the immune system.'

Professor Arber told Israeli news site Arutz Sheva: 'Even if the vaccines do their job, and even if there aren't any new mutations, one way or another, the coronavirus will be staying with us.

'That's why we developed this special medication: EXO-CD24. This is unprecedented.

'It's been about half a year from the time the idea was hatched and the technologies created, to the first human trials conducted and phase one of testing completed.'

The researchers are planning to carry out studies of the drug on hundreds of patients and compare the results to a placebo.

Israel announced today it will ease lockdown measures but keep its international airport and land borders closed following a slight fall in the spread of coronavirus cases.

The government has accepted a proposal from the prime minister and the health minister to ease lockdown measures from 7am on Sunday,' their offices said in a joint statement.

Despite what has been termed the world's fastest vaccination campaign per capita, Israel has still been registering a daily average of 6,500 new Covid-19 cases, down from around 7,000 last week, official figures show.

A strict nationwide lockdown in force since December 27 has been extended four times to combat the infection rate, but January was the deadliest month with more than 1,000 Covid fatalities.

According to latest figures from the health ministry, Israel has registered a total of more than 675,000 cases of Covid-19, including 5,019 deaths.

**Journeyman** · 8th February 2021 14:53

Posted by Tintin (here)
[I][INDENT][INDENT]
Many doctors in the U.S. started prescribing off-label, and with every trial result that TrialSite reported on, the data gained strength. There was some mounting evidence that Ivermectin definitely could inhibit the coronavirus. TrialSite for months called out for NIH funding of Ivermectin studies: the online media platform’s founder even wrote an urgent email communication to NIH Director Francis Collins.

Article continues

So I see this and think, 'at last, they're going to heed the news from India and elsewhere and give sick people a safe, cheap, antiviral treatment that can make a difference.

Then I read on via the link you included:

The Times reports that some experts such as Penny Ward, visiting professor in pharmaceutical medicine at Kings’ College London critiques the study, sharing with The Times’ Rhys Blakely that, “They’re allowing a recruitment window 14 days from the onset of symptoms, but the virus peaks on day three—and it’s too late to use an antiviral after the peak of virus replication.”

Dr. Ward continued for The Times, “And if you don’t intervene very rapidly with an antiviral, you will have a failed trial—even though the drug itself might, in fact, have been effective if given correctly. If they do get the skates on and get patients into those trials within two or three days of the first onset of symptoms, then there’s a fighting chance that one or two of those might actually be effective.”

Do you recall what happened in the early days of the pandemic as Hydroxochloroquine was showing good results? There was a NHS Recovery that rubbished it, said it was worse than placebo:

“These data convincingly rule out any meaningful mortality benefit of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalised with COVID-19”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....15.20151852v1

The Lancet published a report that said it was dangerous then retracted it when they failed to provide sources:

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/2020...oroquine-study

So the cheap, widely available and clinically tested over many years drug is rubbished in favour of experimental vaccines.

And yet:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32418114/

and then it turns out that they ignored NICE's own dosing instructions for HCQ and were giving people 4 times the highest recommended dose in the Recovery trial.

See the comments under this report:

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipelin...oxychloroquine

See also:

The trial’s hydroxychloroquine dosage
The high doses of hydroxychloroquine used in RECOVERY—800 mg at 0 and 6 hours followed by 400 mg at 12 hours and then every 12 hours for up to nine additional days—have raised concern among experts.

David Jayne, professor of clinical autoimmunity at Cambridge University, said that current recommended doses for rheumatologic disease are typically 300-400 mg/day and that the maximum dose for malaria has been 800 mg in the first 24 hours. “The reasons behind the dose selection in the RECOVERY trial are unclear,” he says. “Hydroxychloroquine overdose is associated with cardiovascular, neurological, and other toxicities, occurring with doses over 1500 mg, and higher doses are associated with fatality.” He is concerned that hydroxychloroquine toxicity may have contributed to the adverse outcomes and that conclusions based on these results may be unreliable.

Martin Landray, RECOVERY’s deputy chief investigator, says, “We did not choose these doses by accident. The dose comes from modelling by Nick White, professor of tropical medicine at the University of Oxford, and his team, who have extensive experience with this drug. They developed detailed pharmacokinetic models, considering the best way in which to rapidly achieve drug levels that might be high enough to kill the virus but not so high as to trigger toxicity. Their work has recently been published as a preprint on medRxiv.

Were they deliberately sabotaging the test? Killing people to ensure that a viable treatment option was ignored so the death figures would rise and they could achieve their goals? Are they doing the same now with Ivermectin?

I wonder if some of these people have broken the oaths they took when they took up medicine, or if they've sworn other oaths they consider more sacrosanct?

**Eva2** · 19th February 2021 07:51

A humorous look at homemade options (not trying to take away from the seriousness of this virus)
'Feeling under the weather? Have a look at these flu remedies.

Disclaimer: no responsibility taken for any side effects you may experience after putting an old sweaty sock around your throat, rubbing mustard and lard on your chest or any other remedy herein mentioned.'

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LpLEbYW3Mqw

**onawah** · 22nd February 2021 04:06

The Insanity of the PCR Testing Saga
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 19, 2021
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1087896723

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Curative offers a PCR test using spit rather than swabs from the back of your nasal cavity. Initially only authorized for use on symptomatic patients, the company has requested the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expand its authorization for use on asymptomatic individuals
According to company data, the spit test accurately identifies about 90% of positive cases when compared against a nasopharyngeal PCR test set to 35 CT
According to the FDA, that comparative CT is too low, and will produce too many false negatives. This, despite the scientific consensus, which states anything over 35 CTs is scientifically unjustifiable as it produces enormous amounts of false positives
According to an April 2020 study, a CT of 17 must be used to obtain 100% confirmed real positives. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically. At 33 cycles, the false positive rate is 80%. Beyond 34 cycles, the false positive rate reaches 100%
Because the PCR test cannot discern between live virus and dead, noninfectious viral debris, the timing of the test is important. Recent research shows the median time from symptom onset to viral clearance confirmed by viral culture is seven days, whereas the PCR test continues to detect nonviable (noninfectious) SARS-CoV-2 for a median of 34 days

For several months, experts have highlighted the true cause behind the COVID-19 pandemic, namely the incorrect use of PCR tests set at a ridiculously high cycle count (CT), which falsely labels healthy people as “COVID-19 cases.” In reality, the PCR test is not a proper diagnostic test, although it has been promoted as such.

An important question that demands an answer is whether the experts at our federal health agencies and the World Health Organization were really too ignorant to understand the implications of using this test at excessive CT, or whether it was done on purpose to create the illusion of a dangerous, out-of-control pandemic.

Regardless, those in charge need to be held accountable, which is precisely what the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,1 or ACU),2,3 intends to do.

They’re in the process of launching an international class-action lawsuit against those responsible for using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic in order to implement economically devastating lockdowns around the world. I wrote about this in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation.”

FDA Demands Higher False Positives

An interesting case detailed in a January 21, 2021, Buzzfeed article4 that raises those same questions in regard to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is its recent spat with Curative, a California testing company that got its start in January 2020. It has since risen to become one of the largest COVID-19 test providers in the U.S.

Curative’s most popular PCR test differs from other providers in that it uses spit swabbed from the patient’s tongue, cheek and mouth rather than from the back of the nasal cavity.

In April 2020, the FDA issued an accelerated emergency use authorization5 for the Curative spit test, but only for patients who had been symptomatic within the two weeks prior to taking the test, as the data available at that time showed it failed to catch asymptomatic “cases.”

However, the test was subsequently used off-label on individuals without symptoms anyway, and the company has been urging the FDA to expand its authorization to include asymptomatic individuals based on newer data.

In December 2020, Curative submitted that data,6 showing its oral spit test accurately identified about 90% of positive cases when compared against a nasopharyngeal PCR test set to 35 CT.7

The FDA objected, saying that Curative was comparing its test against a PCR that had a CT that was too low, and would therefore produce too many false negatives.8 According to the FDA, the bar Curative had chosen was “not appropriate and arbitrary,” Buzzfeed reports.9

This is a curious statement coming from the FDA, considering the scientific consensus on PCR tests is that anything over 35 CTs is scientifically unjustifiable.10,11,12

From the start, the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended running PCR tests at a CT of 40.13 This was already high enough to produce an inordinate number of false positives, thereby labeling healthy people as “COVID-19 cases,” but when it comes to Curative’s spit test, the FDA is demanding they compare it against PCR processed at a CT of 45, which is even more likely to produce false positives.

Medically speaking, a “case” refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness.
The FDA’s concern is that Curative’s test is missing infections and giving infectious people a clean bill of health. However, in reality, it’s far more likely that the test is accurately weeding out people who indeed are not infectious at all and rightly should be given a clean bill of health. It seems the FDA is merely pushing for a process that will ensure a higher “caseload” to keep the illusion of widespread infection going.

When Are You Actually Infectious?
A persistent sticking point with the PCR test is that it picks up dead viral debris, and by excessively magnifying those particles with CTs in the 40s, noninfectious individuals are labeled as infectious and told to self-isolate. In short, media and public health officials have conflated “cases” — positive tests — with the actual illness.

Medically speaking, a “case” refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, “case,” has been arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of noninfectious viral RNA.

The research is unequivocal when it comes to who’s infectious and who’s not. You cannot infect another person unless you carry live virus, and you typically will not develop symptoms unless your viral load is high enough.

As it pertains to PCR testing, when excessively high CTs are used, even a minute viral load that is too low to cause symptoms can register as positive. And, since the test cannot distinguish between live virus and dead viral debris, you may not even be carrying live virus at all.

These significant drawbacks are why PCR testing really only should be done on symptomatic patients, and why a positive test should be weighed as just one factor of diagnosis. Symptoms must also be taken into account. If you have no symptoms, your chances of being infectious and spreading the infection to others is basically nil, as data14 from 9,899,828 individuals have shown.

Of these, not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive. This study even confirmed that even in cases where asymptomatic individuals had had an active infection, and had been carriers of live virus, the viral load had been too low for transmission. As noted by the authors:15

“Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.

In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.”

PCR Picks Up Dead Virus for Weeks After Infection Has Cleared
Because the PCR test cannot discern between live virus and dead, noninfectious viral debris, the timing of the test ends up being important. One example of this was presented in a letter to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine,16 in which the author describes an investigation done on hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Seoul, South Korea.

Whereas the median time from symptom onset to viral clearance confirmed by cultured samples was just seven days, with the longest time frame being 12 days, the PCR test continued to pick up SARS-CoV-2 for a median of 34 days. The shortest time between symptom onset to a negative PCR test was 24 days.

In other words, there was no detectable live virus in patients after about seven days from onset of symptoms (at most 12 days). The PCR test, however, continued to register them as “positive” for SARS-CoV-2 for about 34 days. The reason this matters is because if you have no live virus in your body, you are not infectious and pose no risk to others.

This then means that testing patients beyond, say, Day 12 to be safe, after symptom onset is pointless, as any positive result is likely to be false. But there’s more. As noted in that New England Journal of Medicine article:17

“Viable virus was identified until 3 days after the resolution in fever … Viral culture was positive only in samples with a cycle-threshold value of 28.4 or less. The incidence of culture positivity decreased with an increasing time from symptom onset and with an increasing cycle-threshold value.”

This suggests symptomology is a really important piece of the puzzle. If no viable virus is detectable beyond Day 3 after your fever ends, it’s probably unnecessary to retest beyond that point. A positive result beyond Day 3 after your fever breaks is, again, likely to be a false positive, as you have to have live virus in order to be infectious.

Even more important, these results reconfirm that CTs above 30 are inadvisable as they’re highly likely to be wrong. Here, they found the CT had to be below 28.4 in order for the positive test to correspond with live virus. As noted by the authors:18

“Our findings may be useful in guiding isolation periods for patients with Covid-19 and in estimating the risk of secondary transmission among close contacts in contract tracing.”

Testing for Dead Viruses Will Ensure Everlasting Lockdowns
To circle back to the Curative PCR test, the company argues that the test is accurate when it comes to detecting active infection, and as CEO Fred Turner told Buzzfeed:19

“If you’re screening for a return to work and you’re picking up everyone who had COVID two months ago, no one’s going to return to work. If you want to detect active COVID, what the ‘early’ study shows is that Curative is highly effective at doing that.”

Again, this has to do with the fact that the Curative spit test has a sensitivity resembling that of a nasopharyngeal PCR set at a CT of 30. The lower CT count narrows the pool of positive results to include primarily those with higher viral loads and those who are more likely to actually carry live virus. This is a good thing. What the FDA wants Curative to do is to widen that net so that more noninfectious individuals can be labeled as a “case.”

In an email to Buzzfeed, Dr. Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, stated that using a CT of 45 is “absolutely insane,” because at that magnification, you may be looking at a single RNA molecule, whereas “when people are sick and are contagious, they literally can have 1,000,000,000,000x that number.”20

Mina added that such a sensitive PCR test “would potentially detect someone 35 days post-infection who is fully recovered and cause that person to have to enter isolation. That’s crazy and it’s not science-based, it’s not medicine-based and it’s not public health-oriented.”21

While the FDA has issued a warning not to use the Curative spit test on asymptomatic people, Florida has dismissed the warning and will continue to use the test on symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals alike. Only Miami-Dade County is reconsidering how it is using the test, although a definitive decision has yet to be announced.22

The Lower the CT, the Greater the Accuracy
While the FDA claims high sensitivity (meaning higher CT) is required to ensure we don’t end up with asymptomatic spreaders in our communities, as reviewed above, this risk is exceedingly small. We really need to stop panicking about the possibility of healthy people killing others. It’s not a sane trend, as detailed in “The World Is Suffering from Mass Delusional Psychosis.”

According to an April 2020 study23 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at just 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.

By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.

Similarly, a December 3, 2020, systematic review24 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases, which assessed the findings of 29 different studies, found that “CT values were significantly lower … in specimens producing live virus culture.” In other words, the higher the CT, the lower the chance of a positive test actually being due to the presence of live (and infectious) virus.

“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT,” the authors noted. Importantly, five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24.

In cases where a CT above 35 was used, the patient had to be symptomatic in order to obtain a live virus culture. This again confirms that PCR with a CT over 35 really shouldn’t be used on asymptomatic people, as any positive result is likely to be meaningless and simply force them into isolation for no reason.

PCR Testing Based on Erroneous Paper
In closing, the whole premise of PCR testing to diagnose COVID-19 is in serious question, as the practice appears to be based on an erroneous paper that didn’t even undergo peer-review before being implemented worldwide.

November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review25 challenging the scientific paper26 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman (the so-called “Corman-Drosten paper”).

According to Reiner Fuellmich,27 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee mentioned at the beginning of this article, Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.

The scientists demand the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”28 one of which is the fact that it was written, and the test itself developed, before any viral isolate was available. The test is simply based on a partial genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020. In an Undercover DC interview, Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, stated:29

“Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper … When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate.

They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology … the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up. They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks …

There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper ... But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …

There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.”

The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by the November 20, 2020, study30 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in any PCR-positive cases. I referenced this study earlier, noting that not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive.

But that’s not all. After evaluating PCR testing data from 9,899,828 people, and conducting additional live cultures to check for active infections in those who tested positive, using a CT of 37 or lower, they were unable to detect live virus in any of them, which is a rather astonishing finding.

On the whole, it seems clear that mass testing using PCR is inappropriate, and does very little if anything to keep the population safe. Its primary result is simply the perpetuation of the false idea that healthy, noninfectious people can pose a mortal threat to others, and that we must avoid social interactions. It’s a delusional idea that is wreaking havoc on the global psyche, and it’s time to put an end to this unhealthy, unscientific way of life."

**onawah** · 22nd February 2021 19:29

Bicarbonate Proves to be Cheapest Fastest Safest COVID Treatment
February 22, 2021
Dr. Sircus
https://drsircus.com/general/bicarbo...RGsMEqZ9HKJIRs

"One does not have to be an anti-vaxxer to see and understand that COVID vaccines are not needed. They are not required legally or for any medical or public health reason to treat or prevent COVID-19. There is a broad range of both natural and pharmaceutical treatments widely available, many already proven to be very useful.

Now comes some excellent news for the human race. There is an official study in Acre, Brazil that has doctors amazed at how fast COVID infected patients got better after nebulizing with 3 grams of sodium bicarbonate (widely available baking soda) in 100 ml of water administered in a nebulizer.

However, the bad news is that there are powerful forces, which we will discuss below, that hate good news and will do everything in their power to censor useful medical information.

Some people and organizations will do everything to push dangerous experimental vaccines over safer, cheaper, and more effective methods of treating viruses. This is in full view in the news from the White House, where they are not even trying to hide their fascist activities. They and the big tech giants need to know that baking soda has nothing to do with "dangerous conspiracy theories, COVID-19 disinformation, and malign foreign propaganda."

The new bicarbonate research adds to the lengthening list of treatments. And it is no surprise to anyone who knows how and why bicarbonates work. Doctors and health care officials should, but do not know or even want to know, that viral infections are unanimously sensitive to pH changes. The simple alkalinization of the blood reduces the cells’ susceptibility to viruses. Meaning bicarbonates can be taken orally as a preventative, and as we find out below, can be nebulized and even pumped into the lungs in ICU patients when their lungs are impaired.

The research was carried out by the Federal University of Acre (Ufac) in partnership with the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), an organization dedicated to viral and vaccine research. The study was approved by the National Ethics and Research Commission (Cnep). The treatment, which seeks to improve oxygen saturation in the blood, has already been done in about 300 people in Acre.

Researcher Dr. Carolina Pontes, says that the solution based on bicarbonate leaves the lung secretion more fluid. In patients with mild symptoms, treatment is done with nebulization. In more severe cases, the bicarbonate is injected directly into the lung and sucked back.

Dr. João Rodrigues, 32 years old, underwent the treatment. He had 80% of his lungs compromised and had already spent five days in the hospital. "The improvement was extremely significant, something that even as a doctor, I was surprised because I had never seen such a rapid improvement."

Coronavirus infectivity is actually exquisitely sensitive to pH. The MHV-A59 strain of coronavirus is quite stable at pH 6.0 (acidic) but becomes rapidly and irreversibly inactivated by brief treatment at pH 8.0 (alkaline). Human coronavirus strain 229E is maximally infective at pH 6.0. Infection of cells by coronavirus A59 at pH 6.0 (acidic) rather than pH 7.0 (neutral) yields a tenfold increase in the infectivity of the virus.

Data suggests that the coronavirus IBV employs a direct, low-pH-dependent virus-cell fusion activation reaction. "Fusion of the coronavirus IBV with host cells does not occur at neutral pH, and that fusion activation is a low-pH-dependent process, with a half-maximal rate of fusion at pH 5.5. Little or no fusion occurred above a pH of 6.0."

Bicarbonate is also a critical fungicide and is the only medicine for Candida Auris, which is resistant to pharmaceutical fungicides. This is a highly lethal infection threatening the world even more than COVID, which is benign by comparison, yet hardly a word is said about it.

This information about bicarbonates will not see the light of day in the mainstream, which is sad. Doctors worldwide have struggled to help patients with intelligent treatments since the pandemic started. The system itself, the mainstream press and governmental agencies, and people like Dr. Fauci have insisted on promoting the mainstream narrative, which is always against the truth that there already are safe and effective treatments for COVID-19 and its mutations.

They are only interested in selling vaccines to the public and could not care less for public health or safe vaccines. They have terrorized an entire generation of children to the point where a considerable percentage are contemplating suicide, and they are getting away with it.
Commentary

Many people have made health and safety their gods—over freedom, over luxury, over progress and ingenuity, over God, over everything, at least that is what they think they are doing. During the "Age of Covid," we have seen people sacrifice everything (jobs, family, religion, social life); however, in the places where this is the most intense, death and infection rates are higher, and ignorance and fear far greater.

Fear and ignorance are the watchwords of the day, and this is nowhere more apparent than in medicine and public health. The public has been preyed upon by pharmaceutical interests that have exploited our tendency for fear and ignorance both. No words can describe how pharmaceutical terrorism, medical ignorance, and medical hype gang up on humanity, keeping us as far away as possible from helpful natural treatments and into medicines and dangerous vaccines that kill.

"Both the HCQ/zinc/antibiotic treatment and the Ivermectin/zinc/antibiotic treatment are proven, safe, and inexpensive. Yet, the evidence has been kept from the public. Even the most knowledgeable experts are de-platformed when they say anything that conflicts with the vaccination/lockdown agenda. The media are complicit in keeping the public uninformed," writes Paul Craig Roberts.

COVID vaccine reactions are painfully high, higher than for any other vaccine to date, yet the CEOs and owners of the terrorist press has not a word to say about it, but the truth is leaking out anyway, scaring the witts out of people, making almost half the public into COVID vaccine skeptics.

The information and power behind bicarbonate medicine offer a clear view of how bad things are in the field of public health. Public health officials are more like death and destruction angels than providers of health and safety because of their professional training, which stimulates them to provoke fear and solidifies them against real answers to threats against public health.

In Nepal, which is doing great in the Age of COVID, "public health experts" are livid that they’ve been ignored. "The government has been very inefficient," says Dr. Anup Subedi, an infectious disease physician. "There has been a reluctance to engage experts and use data and science." The entire world should learn a lesson and ignore these experts who have led the world into a new form of hell. They are not to be trusted.

If one does not think for oneself in the Age of COVID, one is in for a rough time. If one does not think for oneself, one becomes a virtual slave to people and organizations with evil (ignorance) in their hearts, meaning they do not have our best interests at heart.

Though it is not new, we do have a form of terrorism loose on the planet, and we can easily see what it is doing to the children. COVID-minded health officials are guilty of massive child abuse with their lockdown, mask, and social distancing madness, none of which have been necessary for a disease that over 99.6 percent survive even without the best treatments, most of which have been repressed.

Death eventually comes to everyone, but it will come later rather than sooner if the truth of bicarbonate medicine was ever released to the world.

We should all be alarmed when prominent voices such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are censored, silenced, and made to disappear from social media for voicing ideas that are deemed politically incorrect, hateful, dangerous, or conspiratorial.

His level headed views about vaccines confronts the terrorism I speak of, so beware and take care. or you and your children will be added to the long list of victims who have been hurt and died at the hands of medical terrorists who have been trained to smile no matter what they do.

One might ask what happens after such prominent targets are muzzled? But in the case of medicine, it is better to study what has been happening since the Rockefellers took over the field of medicine 100 years ago. In the history of baking soda, we find that in 1918 doctors used bicarbonates successfully to treat the Spanish Flu.

Conclusion

There are three forms of bicarbonate. There are sodium, potassium, and magnesium bicarbonates. They are nontoxic primary alkalizing agents for the prevention and treatment of cancer, liver disease, Type I & Type II diabetes, Lupus, heart disease, pharmacological toxicosis, vascular surgery operation, tonsillar herniation due to cerebral edema, lactic acid toxicosis, and hyponatremia or low salt or loss of salts due to excessive or over-exercise. Research by British scientists at the Royal London Hospital shows that sodium bicarbonate can dramatically slow chronic kidney disease progression. Yet, the debate and ignorance around these simple medicines continue.

The United States army acknowledges that sodium bicarbonate is the medicine of choice to clear Uranium toxicity from the kidneys. It is the only medicine rated to do that. Bicarbonates are also the ultimate form of chemotherapy, and one can only laugh (or cry) at the mile-deep lunacy that prevents all doctors from accepting this fact.

At about three dollars a pound, sodium bicarbonate will outperform chemotherapy and radiation treatments because it targets acidity and low oxygen conditions. Treating cancer with bicarbonates treats the fundamental reasons cancer cells form and get aggressive, so it’s a medically sound therapy that should be denied to no one. Bicarbonate administration also makes these traditional cancer therapies safer and more effective.

Sodium, potassium, and magnesium bicarbonate are miracle medicines not because of any mumbo jumbo but because of hard medical science, medical history, and basic physiology. It continues to be a medical tragedy that the least expensive, most widely available safe, and effective medicine is overlooked.

Important After Thought

An important point is that bicarbonates work with other medicines in perfect harmony, whether pharmaceutical or natural. Even when the most toxic drugs are used, like in chemo or radiation therapy, bicarbonates will soften the poisonous effects. When used with other natural medicines, its healing power will only be amplified."

**Constance** · 22nd February 2021 19:33

ddddddddddddddddddddddddd

**onawah** · 23rd February 2021 19:32

Note today from Dr. Sircus on Facebook
"Some of you might have noticed that Facebook just up and deleted yesterday's post on the use of sodium bicarbonate in the treatment of ICU patients with COVID. Not sure what to do but will not be able to publish much here anymore since Facebook, Google, Tweeter and Youtube have turned fully into fascism and medical terrorism."

(That's in reference to the article by him which I posted just above, in post #429 )

**Tintin** · 7th March 2021 14:30

.....

Effective March 4th, 2021

Decision on the provisional authorization of the distribution, supply and use of the unregistered human medicinal product HUMEVEC 3 mg tablets containing the active substance ivermectin

Source: Czech Ministry of Health

Link to PDF

**onawah** · 16th March 2021 06:23

FDA Warns Dr. Mercola to Stop Writing About Vitamin D
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
March 15, 2021
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1107573125

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=47W5cR8BB-E

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
In the summer of 2020, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) launched a social media campaign to put an end to Mercola.com. It now admits it pressured the FDA to issue me a warning letter to stop writing about nutritional products that can lower your risk of respiratory infections such as COVID-19
CSPI is a consumer advocacy group bankrolled by billionaires and their corporate ties to Monsanto, the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Fund and Bloomberg Philanthropies
CSPI rails against published science demonstrating certain nutrients can boost your immune function and help lower your risk of severe infection, saying it discourages mask wearing, which has no published scientific evidence to back its universal use
CSPI has a history of promoting industry science and propaganda, having supported artificial sweeteners, trans fats, GMOs, fake meat and the low-fat myth. They’ve also actively undermined transparency in labeling efforts
We have fully addressed the warning letter, and put the FDA on notice that it cannot stop speech it does not like

In the summer of 2020, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) — a consumer advocacy group partnered with Bill Gates’ agrichemical PR group, the Cornell Alliance for Science,1 and bankrolled by billionaires with ties to Monsanto, the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Fund and Bloomberg Philanthropies2 — launched a social media campaign to put an end to Mercola.com.

July 21, 2020, CSPI issued a press release3 in which they accused me of falsely claiming “that at least 22 vitamins, supplements and other products available for sale on his web site can prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19 infection.” This despite the fact that their Appendix of Illegal Claims4 clearly show no COVID-19-related claims exist on any of the product links.

The group also testified in a Senate hearing on the topic of COVID-19 scams and urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Trade Commission to take regulatory action against me.

In an August 12, 2020, email, CSPI president Dr. Peter Lurie5 — a former FDA associate commissioner6 — made the spurious claim that I “profit from the COVID-19 pandemic” through “anti-vaccine fearmongering” and reporting of science-based nutrition shown to impact your disease risk.

Former FDA Official Pulls Strings to Target Natural Health
Seeing how Lurie is a former FDA official, it’s disheartening, but not surprising, that the FDA has now issued us a warning letter7 for “Unapproved and misbranded products related to COVID-19.” Lurie has publicly taken credit for the FDA’s action,8 thereby establishing the potential that CSPI is pulling strings under the new administration through relationships they did not have back in August when they first launched their assault on my free speech.

According to the FDA, vitamin C, vitamin D3 and quercetin products are “unapproved new drugs sold in violation of section 505(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” The agency is also listing Mercola.com on its Fraudulent COVID-19 Products page.

Lurie seems to be hinting that he also wants federal authorities to remove my StopCOVIDCold site, where you can download a free scientific report detailing the benefits of maintaining appropriate vitamin D levels to protect against viral infections. He’s also urging “state attorneys general to investigate how they may further protect consumers from Mercola’s illegal marketing.”9

“Americans are justifiably concerned about becoming infected with the coronavirus and contracting COVID-19. Being misled to believe that supplements could prevent or treat COVID-19 could cause consumers to fail to take protective measures such as mask-wearing, putting themselves and others at risk, or fail to seek actual medical treatment if sick,” Lurie writes.10

It’s ironic that Lurie dismisses offhand peer-reviewed published science demonstrating certain nutrients can boost your immune function and help lower your risk of severe infection — be it from SARS-CoV-2, the seasonal flu or anything else — and touts mask wearing, which has no published scientific evidence to back its universal use, as one of the most important prevention strategies against COVID-19.

Sadly, this is where we are nowadays. “Trust the science,” they say, while simultaneously promoting scientifically unverified claims and trying to eradicate anyone who simply reports the findings that are actually published in the medical literature that may negatively impact the pharmaceutical industry.

CSPI and FDA Cannot Censor Speech
The CSPI is trying to censor my efforts to educate people on how to avoid vitamin D deficiency which, without doubt, places them at far higher risk of complications and death from respiratory infections. Well, I am not going to allow people to die from COVID-19 and other respiratory infections due to vitamin D deficiency.

In October 2020, I co-wrote a paper together with William Grant, Ph.D.,11 and Dr. Carol Wagner,12 both of whom are on the GrassrootsHealth vitamin D expert panel, demonstrating the clear link between vitamin D deficiency and severe cases of COVID-19. This paper was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal Nutrients.13

With that, I have established my medical and scientific merit, and will continue to express my professional opinions, based on the available science, and defend my freedom of speech as the U.S. Constitution provides for.

The FDA’s warning letter highlights statements in articles on my website that are fully referenced and supported by published science. I am committed to providing truthful information, for free, to anyone that wants it, and I’m all for having a rigorous scientific debate when necessary. CSPI has taken credit for pressuring the FDA to issue this warning letter to suppress free speech. The FDA’s warning letter is simply another attempt by CSPI to smear me with false accusations.

If scientists and researchers are publishing these studies, how can it be a crime to report their findings? At the end of the day, the CSPI’s attacks on this website amounts to an effort to suppress science itself.
As CSPI well knows, thanks to the U.S. constitution and the first amendment, I have every right to speak publicly on matters regarding health, so this is nothing but another attempt to “cancel” me while concealing its own duplicity. For the record, we have fully addressed the warning letter; the FDA cannot simply stop free speech that CSPI does not like.

This Is NOT the First Time CSPI Has Endangered Public Health
CSPI continues to be a vitamin D denier even though overwhelming evidence points to its ability to reduce the risk of developing severe COVID-19. This isn’t surprising, coming from a Rockefeller-funded organization that pushed deadly trans fats on the American public until the facts became undeniable, at which point they simply rewrote the organization’s history on this subject to hide its past stance.

In 1986, CSPI described trans fat as “a great boon to Americans’ arteries.”14 Two years later, in 1988, they still praised trans fats,15 saying "there is little good evidence that trans fats cause any more harm than other fats" and that "much of the anxiety over trans fats stems from their reputation as 'unnatural.'" Meanwhile, in the real world, the CSPI’s highly successful trans fat campaign resulted in an epidemic of heart disease.

The CSPI’s role in the promotion of trans fats and its influence on the food industry was discussed in David Schleifer’s article, “The Perfect Solution: How Trans Fats Became the Healthy Replacement for Saturated Fats,”16 in which he noted that:

“Scholars routinely argue that corporations control US food production, with negative consequences for health … However, the transition from saturated to trans fats shows how activists can be part of spurring corporations to change.”

It wasn't until the 1990s that CSPI started reversing its position on synthetic trans fats, but the damage had already been done, and it never admitted its error. In fact, rather than openly admitting it had misled the public with erroneous claims, CSPI simply deleted sections of its previous support of trans fat from the web.17 Notice how their historical timeline18 of trans fat starts at 1993 — the year CSPI realized the jig was up and they had to support the elimination of trans fat.

CSPI then started raising money for campaigns to stop the heart disease causing substance they first promoted. How diabolical is that? Create the problem and then take money from others for the solution.

This obfuscation was noted by Mary Enig, Ph.D., in a 2003 article, in which she wrote:19

“On October 20, 1993, CSPI had the chutzpah to call a press conference in Washington, DC and lambast the major fast-food chains for doing what CSPI coerced them into doing, namely, using partially hydrogenated vegetable oils in their deep fat-fryers.

On that date, CSPI, an eager proponent of partially hydrogenated oils for many years, even when their adverse health effects were apparent, reversed its position after an onslaught of adverse medical reports linking trans fatty acids in these processed oils to coronary heart disease and cancer …

Thanks to CSPI, healthy traditional fats have almost completely disappeared from the food supply, replaced by manufactured trans fats known to cause many diseases. By 1990, most fast food chains had switched to partially hydrogenated vegetable oil …

Who benefits? Soy, or course … [and] in CSPI’s January, 1991 newsletter, Jacobson notes that ‘our effort was ultimately joined … by the American Soybean Association.’”

Even more egregious is the CSPI’s continued recommendation to eat unsaturated fats like soy and canola oils20 and avoid butter and other healthy saturated fats, saying that “changing fats doesn’t lower the risk of dying.”21

This wholly disregards the compelling evidence showing that industrial vegetable oils, omega-6 linoleic acid in particular, pose significant health risks and contribute to chronic disease. And chronic disease, in turn, impacts mortality.

CSPI Primarily Protects Big Business
This tendency to fall in line with industry science and propaganda has become a trend within CSPI. For example, it wasn’t until 2013 that CSPI finally downgraded the artificial sweetener Splenda from its former “safe” category to one of “caution.”22

In 2016, they downgraded it again, from “caution” to “avoid.”23 Despite that, CSPI continues to promote diet soda as a safer alternative to regular soda, saying it “does not promote diabetes, weight gain or heart disease in the way that full-calorie sodas do.”24

The group has also taken a strong pro-GMO stand and actively undermined the GMO labeling movement,25 which resulted in the U.S. being the only country in the world that does not have clear GMO labeling. In August 2001, the organization actually urged the FDA to take enforcement action against food companies using non-GMO labels, claiming such labels could “deceive consumers.”26

In a similar vein, the group opposes clear labeling of ultraprocessed fake meat. In a May 2018 letter to the FDA,27 CSPI urged the agency “to reject efforts by the United States Cattlemen’s Association to prohibit use of the terms ‘meat’ or ‘beef’ on plant-based and cultured proteins marketed as alternatives to traditional meat.” All in all, it appears the CSPI is completely against the idea of a well-informed public.

The CSPI has also been a promoter of the thoroughly debunked low-fat myth. In 1995, they launched a “1% or Less” campaign that urged everyone over the age of 2 to switch from whole and 2% milk to skim milk (also known as nonfat or fat-free milk) in order to reduce their saturated fat intake.28,29,30

It was another successful campaign that resulted in the doubling of skim milk sales.31 However, just like their trans fat campaign, this was equally ill advised, seeing how research32,33 shows full-fat dairy actually lowers your risk of death from diabetes and cardiovascular causes such as stroke.

CSPI Has Repeatedly Violated Its Mission Statement
Considering the suspected, and in some cases well-verified, health hazards of trans fats, artificial sweeteners, soy, GMOs, low-fat diet and fake meat, CSPI’s intent to protect and advance public health is questionable to say the least.

It seems they’re more interested in protecting profitable industries, and the CSPI’s efforts to destroy companies selling vitamins and supplements with natural antiviral effects34 is simply more evidence of that.

The fact is, they’re seeking to bring an end to Mercola.com because we are such a serious threat to their agenda and they want to eliminate as many of the truth tellers as they can.

How to Optimize Your Vitamin D
While most people would probably benefit from a vitamin D3 supplement, it’s important to get your vitamin D level tested before you start supplementing. The reason for this is because you cannot rely on blanket dosing recommendations. The crucial factor here is your blood level, not the dose, as the dose you need is dependent on several individual factors, including your baseline blood level.

Data from GrassrootsHealth’s D*Action studies suggest the optimal level for health and disease prevention is between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL, while the cutoff for sufficiency appears to be around 40 ng/mL. In Europe, the measurements you’re looking for are 150 to 200 nmol/L and 100 nmol/L respectively.

I’ve published a comprehensive vitamin D report in which I detail vitamin D’s mechanisms of action and how to ensure optimal levels. I recommend downloading and sharing that report with everyone you know. A quick summary of the key steps is as follows:

First, measure your vitamin D level — One of the easiest and most cost-effective ways of measuring your vitamin D level is to participate in the GrassrootsHealth’s personalized nutrition project, which includes a vitamin D testing kit.
Once you know what your blood level is, you can assess the dose needed to maintain or improve your level. If you cannot get enough vitamin D from the sun (you can use the DMinder app to see how much vitamin D your body can make depending on your location and other individual factors), then you’ll need an oral supplement.

Assess your individualized vitamin D dosage — To do that, you can either use the chart below, or use GrassrootsHealth’s Vitamin D*calculator. To convert ng/mL into the European measurement (nmol/L), simply multiply the ng/mL measurement by 2.5. To calculate how much vitamin D you may be getting from regular sun exposure in addition to your supplemental intake, use the DMinder app.

Retest in three to six months — Lastly, you’ll need to remeasure your vitamin D level in three to six months, to evaluate how your sun exposure and/or supplement dose is working for you.

Take Your Vitamin D With Magnesium and K2
As detailed in “Magnesium and K2 Optimize Your Vitamin D Supplementation,” it’s strongly recommended to take magnesium and K2 concomitant with oral vitamin D. Data from nearly 3,000 individuals reveal you need 244% more oral vitamin D if you’re not also taking magnesium and vitamin K2.

What this means in practical terms is that if you take all three supplements in combination, you need far less oral vitamin D in order to achieve a healthy vitamin D level."

[IMG]https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2020/June/vitamin-d-dose-response.jpg[/IMG

- Sources and References
1 Common Dreams January 7, 2019
2 Influence Watch CSPI
3 CSPI July 21, 2020
4 Illegal Claims Pertaining to Mercola Group Products (PDF)
5 CSPI July 19, 2017
6 CSPInet.org Peter Lurie Bio
7 FDA.gov Mercola.com warning letter February 18, 2021
8, 9, 10 SCPInet.org March 4, 2021
11 SUNARC.org William Grant Bio
12 MUSC Carol Wagner MD Bio
13 Nutrients 2020; 12(11): 3361
14 The Atlantic November 8, 2013
15 CSPI, The Truth About Trans Fats 1988
16 Academia.edu, The Perfect Solution: How Trans Fats Became the Healthy Replacement for Saturated Fats
17, 19 Weston A Price January 6, 2003
18 CSPI Timeline for Trans Fat
20 CSPInet.org Canola Oil
21 CSPInet.org Big Fat Myths
22 CSPInet.org June 12, 2013
23 CSPInet.org February 8, 2016
24 CSPInet.org Sugary Drinks
25 Center for Food Safety July 10, 2013
26 CSPInet.org August 14, 2001 (archived)
27 CSPInet.org May 17, 2018
28 The 1% or Less Social Marketing Campaign (PDF)
29 The 1% or Less Handbook (PDF)
30 CSPI The 1% or Less School Kit
31 The 1% or Less Social Marketing Campaign (PDF), Effectiveness Page 2
32 The Lancet September 11, 2018; 392(10161): 2288-2297
33 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition July 11, 2018; 108(3): 476-484
34 CSPInet.org June 4, 2020

**onawah** · 17th March 2021 22:27

NVIC, the Latest Victim in the War on Truth

"This organization has been around for nearly four decades, and worked with US Congress to establish the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. They make no recommendations regarding vaccines, but publish fully referenced information. Why have they been taken out?"

'Digital Anti-Hate' Group
Dr. Joseph Mercola
March 17, 2021
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1109215388

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
One of the frontrunners in the comprehensive attack on freedom of speech online is a U.K.-based group with opaque funding called the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH)
The CCDH has been one of the most vocal organizations calling for the deplatforming of anyone who might have the ability to influence public opinion about vaccines
The CCDH recently posted a hit list on Twitter, listing the “Top 10 anti-vaxxers” it wants digital platforms to eradicate, including yours truly and the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), which worked with the U.S. Congress to establish the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986
March 2, 2021, Facebook complied with CCDH’s request, removing NVIC’s account. CCDH is also calling on Facebook to eliminate NVIC from Instagram, which Facebook owns
While you wait for a decentralized, censorship-free internet, consider ditching all social media networks that erode our civil liberties, and to join those that promote freedom of speech instead

As detailed in “Spy Agencies Threaten to ‘Take Out’ Mercola,” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...ip.aspx...this website has been labeled a national security threat by British and American intelligence agencies that are collaborating to eliminate “anti-vaccine propaganda” from public discussion using sophisticated cyberwarfare tools.1,2,3

One of the public frontrunners in this comprehensive attack on my freedom of speech is a U.K.-based group with opaque funding called the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), led by Imran Ahmed, a member of the Steering Committee on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force under the British government’s Commission for Countering Extremism.

In its report, “The Anti-Vaxx Playbook,”4 the CCDH identifies me as one of the six most influential “anti-vaxxers” online that must be silenced for good. The other five are Barbara Loe Fisher, Del Bigtree, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Sherri Tenpenny and Andrew Wakefield.

The CCDH also admits tracking and spying on 425 vaccine-related Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter accounts that, together, have 59.2 million followers.5

The CCDH has been one of the most vocal organizations calling for the deplatforming of anyone who might have the ability to influence public opinion about vaccines.6 This despite the fact that public discourse and debate is a requirement not only for a well-informed public but also to protect scientific integrity and public health.

Anti-Hate Group Publishes Digital Hit List
More recently, the CCDH published an updated hit list on Twitter,7 now listing the “Top 10 anti-vaxxers” it wants digital platforms to eradicate. The list shows, by way of crossing out names, which have already been successfully deplatformed, and from which social media.

As of March 3, 2021, Kennedy Jr. has been banned from Instagram, and the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), co-founded and led by Fisher, has been removed from Facebook.

“Facebook has removed the NVIC, another page spreading vaccine misinformation run by Barbara Loe Fisher,” CCDH said in its Tweet.8 “But Facebook has allowed the NVIC to carry on spreading misinformation on Instagram, which it owns. Facebook, it’s time for action across your platforms.”

Good News: People Are Seeing Through the Propaganda
The irony of an “anti-hate” group posting a hit list — the only purpose of which is to seed public outrage and hate against those listed — did not escape unnoticed, and that’s part of the good news. More and more people are indeed starting to see the 1984-style double-think propaganda for what it is.

As pointed out by one Twitter follower: “You've posted what appears to be a digital hit list. Do you not see anything ironic about this considering your brand is ‘countering digital hate’?” “Project much?” said another. A third replied back to the CCDH saying “You should be on this list,” and a fourth said “It appears that by the word ‘hate’ you include uncomfortable truths.” Other responders wrote:

“I have personally benefited from the free TRUE loving information that at least seven on your list have given me since 2011. I have only gratitude and love for them. No regular doctor could help me back then and thanks to the info I got I didn’t die and I have helped others too.”
“’Misinformation’ … what a joke!! These people are putting their careers and livelihoods on the line to share the TRUTH, to empower us to take our health in our own hands and realize it’s the only way!! This is more a top list of who to follow!!!”
“This is nonsense at the extreme. Censorship has gone mad and needs to be heavily questioned and stopped — this is what all dictators and extremists themselves do! How ironic! The CCDH are extremist dangerous hate criminals themselves for doing this!”
“Stop the censorship! We are seeing through this failed attempt to spread valuable information from people.”
“Congratulations to every hero on that list.”
I could keep going, but you can read the comments for yourself. I encourage you to do so if you feel downtrodden, thinking the dark side is winning the information war. They’re not, but they get an “A” for effort. We, in turn, cannot let up our own efforts to spread the truth. We must be just as persistent.
NVIC — The Latest Victim in the War on Truth
NVIC, the latest victim of the CCDH’s organized attack on the U.S. First Amendment, had maintained a Facebook page since 2008. The organization itself has been around for nearly four decades, and worked with the U.S. Congress to establish the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. Facebook deleted NVIC’s account March 2, 2021.

NVIC does not make recommendations when it comes to the use of vaccines, its sole aim being to “defend the ethical principle of informed consent to medical risk taking, including vaccine risk taking.” Part of that work includes publishing fully referenced information about vaccines so that consumers can make an informed decision either way.

If NVIC had not done such a good job educating the public about vaccination and health for four decades, our Facebook page would still be up. ~ Barbara Loe Fisher
Considering few doctors, and none of the pro-vaccine front groups, are transparent about reported side effects and science raising red flags, NVIC serves a truly crucial public health service. You simply cannot make an informed decision if you’re only ever told one side of the equation — the supposed benefit side — while potential adverse effects, which may be lifelong, are hidden or denied. As reported by independent journalist Sharyl Attkisson:9

“Far from a fringe group, as propagandists try to convince the public, Fisher has provided consumers with crucial vaccine safety information for decades and served as an appointed member of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on the National Vaccine Advisory Committee as part of the Vaccine Safety Writing Group, on the agency's Vaccine Policy Analysis Collaborative, on the Blue Ribbon Panel on Vaccine Safety, and Chair of the Subcommittee on Vaccine Adverse Events.

Additionally, Fisher has served as a member of the FDA's Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. And she has been a member of the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine Vaccine Safety Forum.”

NVIC Responds to Deplatforming
In an official statement, Fisher responded to the deplatforming by Facebook saying:10

“We are not surprised that Mark Zuckerberg views the truthful information that NVIC publishes about vaccine science, policy and law as a threat to perpetuating false narratives about vaccine safety created by the pharmaceutical industry and its business partners.

The U.S Congress has encouraged the creation of public-private business partnerships between vaccine manufacturers and federal agencies for the past three decades.

In order to be part of those lucrative partnerships, Silicon Valley companies like Facebook are clearly happy to engage in censorship. If NVIC had not done such a good job educating the public about vaccination and health for four decades, our Facebook page would still be up.

NVIC encourages everyone to leave social media networks eroding civil liberties, which include freedom of thought, speech and conscience, and join those that protect freedom of speech.

To stay connected with NVIC, become a registered user of the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal and defend vaccine choices in your state; become a subscriber of our free NVIC Newsletter and free weekly journal digital newspaper, The Vaccine Reaction; and interact with our followers on MeWe, Telegram, Gab and Parler.”

Decentralized Uncensorable Web Is Part of the Answer
As more and more truth-tellers, public health watchdogs, civil rights advocates and investigative journalists are censored and deplatformed, it’s easy to get discouraged. However, there is light on the horizon. Part of the answer, apart from calling on our political representatives to take a firm stand against censorship at every turn, is the creation of a decentralized web.

I am currently working with some of the brightest minds in the tech space — cybersecurity experts and billionaire philanthropists who are very well networked. These individuals are committed to preserving your personal freedoms and liberties. We aim to redo of the entire internet by implementing a strategy proposed by Tim Berners-Lee.

For those of you who don’t know, Berners-Lee invented the world wide web graphical interface of the internet 30 years ago, and he didn’t take a penny for it. Had he licensed this technology, he surely would be the richest person in the world today.

You can read more about Berners-Lee’s plan in this February 5, 2021, article in The Conversation,11 https://theconversation.com/tim-bern...ur-data-154130
... but essentially, it focuses on maintaining data sovereignty, giving you control over your data and privacy and undoing the current system of surveillance capitalism where Big Tech profits off your personal data and uses it against you at the same time. In this Web 2.0, tech monopolies also will no longer have the ability to censor.

While you wait for a decentralized, censorship-free internet, I second Fisher’s suggestion to ditch all social media networks that erode your civil liberties, and to join those that promote freedom of speech instead.

For example, free-speech alternatives to Facebook and Twitter include Gab, MeWe, Minds and Parler. Uncensored alternatives to YouTube include Bitchute, Rumble, Brighteon, Banned.video and Thinkspot.

For content creators and alternative news sources that no longer have a social media presence due to censoring, subscribe to their newsletter if available, and/or mark their website in your favorites and check back on a regular basis.

Take Control of Your Online Presence
Beyond that, consider safeguarding your own online privacy if you haven’t done so already. To encrypt your text messages and keep them from becoming data mining fodder, download the Signal or Telegram app and/or use a virtual private network (VPN) on your desktop, laptop and mobile devices.

Telegram has grown in popularity as many who have been banned on other social media platforms have migrated there. In addition to encrypting your text messages, the app also allows you to subscribe to channels. Read-only messages (although some also have the ability to comment) are sent to your phone from any channel you subscribe to.

Lastly, if you care about privacy and free speech, stop using any and all Google products, including its search engine, browser, email service, Google docs, Google Home devices, Fitbit and Android phones. There are alternatives to all of them.

For search, check out DuckDuckGo and SwissCows. For a browser, consider Brave or Opera. From a security perspective, Opera is far superior to Google Chrome and even includes a free VPN service. For encrypted email, sign up with ProtonMail, which is based in Switzerland. As for online document sharing, Digital Trends has published an article listing a number of alternatives to Google Docs.12"

- Sources and References
1 The Times November 9, 2020
2 UK Defense Journal November 10, 2020
3 The National News November 9, 2020
4 The Anti-Vaxx Playbook (PDF)
5 The Anti-Vaxx Playbook (PDF), Page 9
6 The Anti-Vaxx Playbook (PDF), Page 43
7, 8 Twitter CCDH March 3, 2021
9, 10 Sharylattkisson.com March 8, 2021
11 The Conversation February 5, 2021
12 Digital Trends April 28, 2017

**Tintin** · 18th March 2021 10:13

Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of
Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19

Link to the paper: FLCC

**Tintin** · 19th March 2021 16:05

Some encouraging 'noise' here - let's see what actually transpires. I along with countless tens of thousands of others I expect may also have written to their MPs about this - perhaps that's bearing a little fruit here; we'll see:

Apologies folks. It seems that the embedded tweet was removed by Anna Brees, the poster, for reasons unknown. It related to the Covid Treatment Taskforce UK government group beginning to take more seriously the benefits of Ivermectin and other pharmaceutical interventions. We await any outcomes. One of the major stumbling blocks is that the usual process here is that government allocates - or not! - research funding before sanction of medical treatments such as these, which implies a lengthy process which may just not get off the ground. At least they're unable to ignore the pressure that's been brought to bear - that's some light to pierce the long-Covid dark night - Tintin @23:37 March 19th 2021

The Covid-19 Therapeutics Taskforce

Additional information that provides some more clarification on where the UK clinical trials are at: copy of a letter from MP for Gloucester to a constituent - it's helpful information I think:

**Tintin** · 26th March 2021 15:46

Although I might not agree entirely with their conclusions regarding HCQ here the case for Ivermectin continues to strengthen all around the world now.

Here's a good article from Japan. Note, it is a comprehensive analysis running to 52 pages and too large to embed here.

_____________

Global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in COVID-19

Morimasa Yagisawa, Ph.D.1,2, Patrick J. Foster, M.D.2, Hideaki Hanaki, Ph.D.1
and Satoshi Ōmura, Ph.D.1
1 Kitasato University Ōmura Satoshi Memorial Institute
2 Keio University Faculty of Pharmacy
(Received for publication March 10, 2021)

THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS

Source: http://jja-contents.wdc-jp.com/pdf/J...74-1_44-95.pdf

**Delight** · 28th March 2021 03:34

HELPFUL SUMMARY

This page has links to ALL of the key scientific articles about HCQ, Ivermectin, Vitamin D3, etc:

**Bill Ryan** · 3rd April 2021 19:05

This is the extracted conclusion of a long post I made here, presenting the article entitled

CENSORED: Dr. Peter McCullough, MD testifies How Successful Home Treatments for COVID Make Experimental Vaccines Unnecessary

The home treatment protocol mentioned by Dr. McCullough that was published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons you can download for free here.

**Alan** · 4th April 2021 11:24

A new interview with Dr. Thomas Levy by Dr. Mercola, discussing nebulized hydrogen peroxide. Includes a link to download for free Dr. Levy's new ebook on the subject.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...-peroxide.aspx

Thread: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

Thread Tools

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to Gwin Ru For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to iota For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to iota For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Gemma13 For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Journeyman For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Eva2 For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Constance For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Delight For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

Re: Covid-19 Treatment and Prevention

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Alan For This Post:

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions