Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
I have been reading up on Ivermectin, he anti-parasite drug that many doctors around the world are claiming is a miracle drug for preventing and curing COVID-19. The parallels between the media treatment of Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are too close to ignore. The arguments against the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID are the same as those used to ban HCQ as a treatment for COVID. The CDC claims the studies are too small, not sufficiently controlled, etc. to recommend Ivermectin one way or the other, yet the drug has been practically banned and many hospitals and doctors refuse to administer it even to the most desperate patients. In one case a woman had to get a court order to have the drug administered to her critical condition mother and even then most of the doctors refused to administer the drug. The woman had to get a doctor certified at the hospital just to administer the drug.
Ivermectin, like HCQ, has been administered to billions of patients as an anti-parasitic drug with minimal side effects. It is proven safe just like HCQ. Doctors that have used the drug on COVID patients have reported 81% recovery rate, and the drug has an even better success rate in preventing COVID.
The argument over efficacy is a legitimate scientific debate. There are pluses and minuses on both sides. But what is not acceptable is the big tech censorship of the debate. A scientist testified before a Senate committee n the efficacy of Ivermectin, providing case analysis and other data to senators and Youtube banned the video of his testimony. Testimony before open hearings is public record! How do you censor the public record? How does Youtube, or Twitter decide that data compiled by a group of doctors and scientists is misinformation? More importantly, why are we allowing this. If scientists cannot openly debate the questions before us, humanity is harmed.
Ivermectin, like HCQ, has been administered to billions of patients as an anti-parasitic drug with minimal side effects. It is proven safe just like HCQ. Doctors that have used the drug on COVID patients have reported 81% recovery rate, and the drug has an even better success rate in preventing COVID.
The argument over efficacy is a legitimate scientific debate. There are pluses and minuses on both sides. But what is not acceptable is the big tech censorship of the debate. A scientist testified before a Senate committee n the efficacy of Ivermectin, providing case analysis and other data to senators and Youtube banned the video of his testimony. Testimony before open hearings is public record! How do you censor the public record? How does Youtube, or Twitter decide that data compiled by a group of doctors and scientists is misinformation? More importantly, why are we allowing this. If scientists cannot openly debate the questions before us, humanity is harmed.
. It is too bad this great country of ours has to be represented in the scientific community by Dr. Fauci. He has done so much damage to the credibility of science. I wonder how long it will take to repair the damage.
