Connect with us

COVID-19

Ivermectin and Molnupiravir: How does the widely used drug compare to the new drug in treating Covid-19?

Published

2 minute read

John Campbell has been making videos to teach common people about the world of medicine for over 20 years.  After a career of teaching nurses, Campbell discovered a real need for medical information described in a way most anyone can understand.  In the nearly two years that John Campbell has been making videos explaining information about covid his viewership has exploded, commonly reaching hundreds of thousands and even millions of views.  People around the world have expressed a thirst for knowledge about the latest information around covid from a trusted source.

You can see a list of John Campbell’s videos here.

A number of weeks ago, John Campbell released this presentation.  It’s a comparison of a drug that has been widely used but also widely criticized in treating covid around the world, with a new drug which is expected to soon gain widespread approval.  Despite the success of Ivermectin, an inexplicable wave of opposition has resulted in a miserable failure by public health and politicians to adopt this extremely safe and effective treatment.  While that’s extremely frustrating, it does appear Molnupiravir is on the fast track to approval.  Molnupiravir may be slightly less effective and astronomically more expensive than Ivermectin, it should be effective enough to reduce the fear surrounding the virus that has killed so many. With the reduction of fear citizens should be able to expect restrictions around masks, and movement, and businesses to become voluntary.  A successful treatment should also allow governments to back off mandates around vaccinations in favour of a voluntary approach.  Could the end of the divisive restrictions finally be on the horizon?  This video contains some of the most exciting and promising news to come since the beginning of our covid disaster.

Here’s a look at Ivermectin compared with Molnupiravir.  Hopefully our public health officials and political decision makers are paying attention.

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

COVID-19

CDC Quietly Admits to Covid Policy Failures

Published on

From the Brownstone Institute

BY Harvey RischHARVEY RISCH 

Instead of admitting policy error that the Covid vaccines do not much control virus spread, our public health administration doubled down, attempting then to compel vaccination on as many more people as could be threatened by mandates.

In so many words—and data—CDC has quietly admitted that all of the indignities of the Covid-19 pandemic management have failed: the masks, the distancing, the lockdowns, the closures, and especially the vaccines; all of it failed to control the pandemic.

It’s not like we didn’t know that all this was going to fail, because we said so as events unfolded early on in 2020, that the public health management of this respiratory virus was almost completely opposite to principles that had been well established through the influenza period, in 2006. The spread of a new virus with replication factor R0 of about 3, with more than one million cases across the country by April 2020, with no potentially virus-sterilizing vaccine in sight for at least several months, almost certainly made this infection eventually endemic and universal.

Covid-19 starts as an annoying, intense, uncomfortable flu-like illness, and for most people, ends uneventfully 2-3 weeks later. Thus, management of the Covid-19 pandemic should not have relied upon counts of cases or infections, but on numbers of deaths, numbers of people hospitalized or with serious long-term outcomes of the infection, and of serious health, economic, and psychological damages caused by the actions and policies made in response to the pandemic, in that order of decreasing priorities.

Even though numbers of Covid cases correlate with these severe manifestations, that is not a justification for case numbers to be used as the actionable measure, because Covid-19 infection mortality is estimated to range below 0.1% in the mean across all ages, and post-infection immunity provides a public good in protecting people from severe reinfection outcomes for the great majority who do not get serious “long-Covid” on first infection.

Nevertheless, once the Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out, with a new large wave of the Delta strain spreading across the US in July-August 2021 even after eight months of the vaccines taken by half of Americans, instead of admitting policy error that the Covid vaccines do not much control virus spread, our public health administration doubled down, attempting then to compel vaccination on as many more people as could be threatened by mandates. That didn’t work out too well as seen when the large Omicron wave hit the country during December 2021-January 2022 in spite of some 10% more of the population getting vaccinated from September through December of 2021.

A typical mandate example: in September 2021, Washington Governor Jay Inslee issued Emergency Proclamation 21-14.2, requiring Covid-19 vaccination for various groups of state workers. In the proclamation, the stated goal was, “WHEREAS, COVID-19 vaccines are effective in reducing infection and serious disease, and widespread vaccination is the primary means we have as a state to protect everyone…from COVID-19 infections.” That is, the stated goal was to reduce the number of infections.

What the CDC recently reported (see chart below), however, is that by the end of 2023, cumulatively, at least 87% of Americans had anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to and thus had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, this in spite of the mammoth, protracted and booster-repeated vaccination campaign that led to about 90% of Americans taking the shots. My argument is that by making policies based on number of infections a higher priority than ones based on the more serious but less common consequences of both infections and policy damages, the proclaimed goal of the vaccine mandate to reduce spread failed in that 87% of Americans eventually became infected anyway.

In reality, neither vaccine immunity nor post-infection immunity were ever able fully to control the spread of the infection. On August 11, 2022, the CDC stated, “Receipt of a primary series alone, in the absence of being up to date with vaccination* through receipt of all recommended booster doses, provides minimal protection against infection and transmission (3,6). Being up to date with vaccination provides a transient period of increased protection against infection and transmission after the most recent dose, although protection can wane over time.” Public health pandemic measures that “wane over time” are very unlikely to be useful for control of infection spread, at least without very frequent and impractical revaccinations every few months.

Nevertheless, infection spread per se is not of consequence, because count of infections is not and should not have been the main priority of public health pandemic management. Rather, the consequences of the spread and the negative consequences of the policies invoked should have been the priorities. Our public health agencies chose to prioritize a failed policy of reducing the spread rather than reducing the mortality or the lockdown and school and business closure harms, which led to unnecessary and avoidable damage to millions of lives. We deserved better from our public health institutions.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

  • Harvey Risch

    Harvey Risch, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a physician and a Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His main research interests are in cancer etiology, prevention and early diagnosis, and in epidemiologic methods.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Japanese study shows disturbing increase in cancer related deaths during the Covid pandemic

Published on

From Cureus.com

The study is called:

Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan

During the COVID-19 pandemic, excess deaths including cancer have become a concern in Japan, which has a rapidly aging population. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate how age-adjusted mortality rates (AMRs) for different types of cancer in Japan changed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022).

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic began in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and was first detected in Japan in January 2020. In response, a range of healthcare and socio-economic restrictions were implemented to curb the spread of the disease. Since February 2021, the mRNA-lipid nanoparticle (mRNA-LNP) vaccine has been available for emergency use and is recommended for all individuals aged six months and older, especially those at high risk.

As of March 2023, 80% of the Japanese population had received their first and second doses, 68% had received their third dose, and 45% had received their fourth dose [1]. Despite these national measures, 33.8 million people had been infected, and 74,500 deaths had been attributed to COVID-19 in Japan by the end of April 2023.

Additionally, excess deaths from causes other than COVID-19 have been reported in various countries [2-6], including deaths from cancer [7-10], and Japan is no exception [11,12]. Cancer is the leading cause of death in Japan, accounting for one-fourth of all deaths. Therefore, it is essential to understand the effects of the pandemic on mortality rates of cancer from 2020 to 2022. Age adjustment is necessary for accurate evaluation, especially in diseases such as cancer that tend to occur in elderly adults.

Japan has several characteristics that make it ideal for analyzing the impact of the pandemic on cancer mortality rates, including its large population of 123 million, availability of official statistics, and the high 80% accuracy rate of death certificates according to autopsy studies [13].

Conclusions

Statistically significant increases in age-adjusted mortality rates of all cancer and some specific types of cancer, namely, ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate, lip/oral/pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers, were observed in 2022 after two-thirds of the Japanese population had received the third or later dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-LNP vaccine. These particularly marked increases in mortality rates of these ERα-sensitive cancers may be attributable to several mechanisms of the mRNA-LNP vaccination rather than COVID-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care due to the lockdown. The significance of this possibility warrants further studies.

From the YouTube channel of Dr John Campbell

Continue Reading

Trending

X