Congress Secretly Using Ivermectin

[RestoreTheJoy]

I see no reason to believe this person without any additional evidence.

Follow up by Dr. Kory:

"To all the comments asking for sources/names for the below: 1) This came from a highly credible source inside Congress who has asked to remain anonymous 2) I would never divulge the medical treatments of individual members, nor do I know them myself I fully stand by this tweet."

I did find another recognizable source here but when I click on it, "Page has been removed".

https://www.newsbreak.com › news › 2416973900487 › turns-out-congress-has-been-taking-ivermectin-lol
Turns out Congress has been taking Ivermectin,

Hmmm. If this comes out to be true later, as is frequently the case, all of them need to be booted from office for keeping quiet while helping themselves.

 

[essentialsaltes]

If this comes out to be true later, as is frequently the case

What sort of things frequently turn out to be true later? Anonymous rumors on Twitter?

 

[ViaCrucis]

I'll take Things That Are Obviously Made Up for 400.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[NxNW]

You might want to look at the post directly above what you responded to.

That post contained no such claim.

 

[whatbogsends]

That post contained no such claim.

It explicitly displayed that claim made by various entities.

 

[NxNW]

It explicitly displayed that claim made by various entities.

Post #12 is the post directly above the one I responded to. There are no such claims in post #12.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Has anyone read the statement on ivermectin for covid from Merck - the manufacturer of the drug?

February 4, 2021 11:45 am ET

KENILWORTH, N.J., Feb. 4, 2021 – Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today affirmed its position regarding use of ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Company scientists continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:

• No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies;
• No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;
• A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.
​

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

​

If the very people who make ivermectin see no benefit in using it to treat Covid-19 why would anyone else swear by it?

 

[Bradskii]

It explicitly displayed that claim made by various entities.

I think most people can differentiate between:

'This vaccine is 100% effective'

and...

'So far, this vaccine has proved to be 100% effective in trials'.

Not all. But most.

 

[Nithavela]

Has anyone read the statement on ivermectin for covid from Merck - the manufacturer of the drug?

February 4, 2021 11:45 am ET

KENILWORTH, N.J., Feb. 4, 2021 – Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today affirmed its position regarding use of ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Company scientists continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:

• No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies;
• No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;
• A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.
​

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

​

If the very people who make ivermectin see no benefit in using it to treat Covid-19 why would anyone else swear by it?

That's obviously just so that the poor don't buy up all the reserves that are needed by the secret cabal of the rich. All part of the Great Reset (tm).

 

[whatbogsends]

I think most people can differentiate between:

'This vaccine is 100% effective'

and...

'So far, this vaccine has proved to be 100% effective in trials'.

Not all. But most.

And i quoted 3 people on these forums who seemed unable to make that differentiation when presenting those claims as reasons to take the vaccine.

 

[essentialsaltes]

And i quoted 3 people on these forums who seemed unable to make that differentiation when presenting those claims as reasons to take the vaccine.

↑
The Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines have a nearly 100% prevention of hospitalization or death from covid. they have 95% success against infection, which is pretty high. Spread isn't fully known but so far results have been good, milder infections generally mean lower viral load which reduces your ability to infect others.
↑
Did you miss the point where the post you responded to stated that the vaccines "are virtually 100% effective against hospitalization and death"? So not sure why any of those vaccinated, who can still get it, would die from COVID.
↑
This vaccine and numerous others are not 100% effective, but protected all those vaccinated from hospitalization and death, 0% hospitalizations and deaths.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

Has anyone read the statement on ivermectin for covid from Merck - the manufacturer of the drug?

February 4, 2021 11:45 am ET

KENILWORTH, N.J., Feb. 4, 2021 – Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today affirmed its position regarding use of ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Company scientists continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:

• No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies;
• No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;
• A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.
​

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

​

If the very people who make ivermectin see no benefit in using it to treat Covid-19 why would anyone else swear by it?

Merck have their own reasons for not wanting Ivermectin, a cheap, out-of-patent drug, to be the answer to COVID.

Merck’s COVID-19 pill could bring in up to $7 billion in sales next year

The usual rules apply. Everyone wants a slice of the covid pie. Follow the money, and you'll find out what's really going on.

 

[7thKeeper]

Merck have their own reasons for not wanting Ivermectin, a cheap, out-of-patent drug, to be the answer to COVID.

Merck’s COVID-19 pill could bring in up to $7 billion in sales next year

The usual rules apply. Everyone wants a slice of the covid pie. Follow the money, and you'll find out what's really going on.

Because it isn't. Like they said as well, no trials have shown it to have any meaningful effect. Unless you are of course claiming that the company controls every trial there is for this.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Merck have their own reasons for not wanting Ivermectin, a cheap, out-of-patent drug, to be the answer to COVID.

Merck’s COVID-19 pill could bring in up to $7 billion in sales next year

The usual rules apply. Everyone wants a slice of the covid pie. Follow the money, and you'll find out what's really going on.

Seems like a poor decision to not put out potentially life saving drugs right away to deal with the pandemic now and then build upon that success to market a future dedicated covid treatment when it becomes available. Why wait for money you could make in the future when there’s tons of money to be made right now and lives to save, to boot?

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

What sort of things frequently turn out to be true later? Anonymous rumors on Twitter?

So many things turn out to be true: Here are just a few of them: 6 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out to Be True

 

[essentialsaltes]

So many things turn out to be true: Here are just a few of them: 6 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out to Be True

I don't think this is evidence that conspiracy theories frequently turn out to be true. Or that anonymous claims on Twitter frequently turn out to be true.

 

[rambot]

So many things turn out to be true: Here are just a few of them: 6 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out to Be True

Even with THIS strange fact you choose outliers.
How many conspiracy theories are there?
There are probably 1000 conspiracy theories...most are not true. But you do this instead.

 

[LizaMarie]

Seems like a poor decision to not put out potentially life saving drugs right away to deal with the pandemic now and then build upon that success to market a future dedicated covid treatment when it becomes available. Why wait for money you could make in the future when there’s tons of money to be made right now and lives to save, to boot?

This is exactly what I've been saying to my friends who are anti-vaxx and promote Ivermectin as a cure for Covid.