Ivermectin and Covid-19: SA drug regulator allows controlled, compassionate access

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
4,843
"The recommendation is likely to provoke fury and scepticism among the drug's social media champions.
However, its claimed benefits in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic has not been proven in major clinical trials."

:laugh:
Well, precisely. I gave up trying to point the idiots who view this as the be-all and end-all because they've had so much time on their inexperienced hands to Google all the answers.
Got flamed from all sides, left the chat. Come back every now and then to see if they're still active. They are...their non-professional narrative is still being pushed, rather than leaving it to the relevant authorities and experts (read: medically qualified people) to do the necessary ground work to approve/disprove it's efficacy.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
20,478
At last in SA, a doctor is now free to prescribe IVM, and instruct a compounding pharmacist to compound a formulation for a patient. My own doctor won't prescribe it, but I have found a doctor who will and I know where he is getting his IVM from.
So, should it become necessary, I WILL take it.
Especially, because I have also been advised NOT to get vaccinated against Covid 19 by more than one doctor.
 

TeMoeg

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
54
Lo and behold she stated taking black market (so who the **** knows what actually) ivermectin herself in Feb this year.

Black market stuff can be very dangerous to use, since who know what is in there...

Instead, while it may take a long time after the court order for the supply chain to deliver IVM tablets to pharmacies (if at all), I would rather recommend the 1% solution of IVM obtainable at farmer coops. It is clean, of high quality, packed in sealed vials and fit for human consumption IMO.

A dosage of 0.2 mg/kg body mass in tablet format, is equivalent to 1 ml/50 kg body mass in solution format. The only problem is that you will find it mostly sold out.
 

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
4,843
Black market stuff can be very dangerous to use, since who know what is in there...

Instead, while it may take a long time after the court order for the supply chain to deliver IVM tablets to pharmacies (if at all), I would rather recommend the 1% solution of IVM obtainable at farmer coops. It is clean, of high quality, packed in sealed vials and fit for human consumption IMO.

A dosage of 0.2 mg/kg body mass in tablet format, is equivalent to 1 ml/50 kg body mass in solution format. The only problem is that you will find it mostly sold out.
Are you a doctor/pharmacist who can accurately give this information out, having studied it? Or based on what others here have said?
 

TeMoeg

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
54
That is true. IVM is bad for some dogs species IF overdosed.

There are some dog species with poorly developed blood-brain barriers, and may get extreme side effects, or even brain damage, with normal doses.

Similarly, IVM is not recommended for babies and toddlers with a body mass of less than 15 kg, since their blood-brain barriers may not be fully developed yet.

Having said that, I have seen a report by a paediatrician in the USA, when faced with the life/death decision along with the family, treated a one-month-old baby with IVM. The baby pulled through and recovered completely without any side effects.
 

Markd

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,140
Are you a doctor/pharmacist who can accurately give this information out, having studied it? Or based on what others here have said?

John these guys are all blinded by their bias and have subscribed to the evidence that suits them. None of them are qualified to make an informed decision but regard themselves as quasi-researchers. They are too far gone to have a reasoned and balanced outlook on this topic.

I mean the one will take Ivermectin but not a vaccine.......
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
20,478
John these guys are all blinded by their bias and have subscribed to the evidence that suits them. None of them are qualified to make an informed decision but regard themselves as quasi-researchers. They are too far gone to have a reasoned and balanced outlook on this topic.

I mean the one will take Ivermectin but not a vaccine.......
And that same goes for you guys. You are also "blinded by your bias and have subscribed to the evidence that suits you".

You are very good at criticising but will not even bother to deliver substantiated evidence for your case. We have no problems in finding substantiated evidence in support of our case.

You are al quite happy in committing many people to suffer from severe effects of Covid 19 and death, just because you will not accept a drug that is "not approved" by regulators that have been shown to be incompetent at their task such as SAHPRA.

Where are the trials of IVM in SA? Trials will only happen anywhere if registered and allowed to proceed and get the necessary funding. Show us what has happened to the trials, I dare you! The establishment is so biased against IVM that those that want to run trials in SA face an uphill battle.

Yet that same establishment will accept any vaccine offered to it even though those very vaccines have NOT been subjected to the trial conditions that vaccines are normally subjected to.

And then you jump on to a statement from me about why I won't get the vaccine. Even when I state why not - BECAUSE more than one doctor has looked at my case and recommended I DO NOT get the vaccine!

So what am I supposed to do? Take a vaccine that I know is going to be very dangerous to me?
Or, get a treatment that is supported by plenty of evidence that it works?

Or, just lie back and die if I get infected? Come on wise guy, what would YOU do when faced with these choices?????
 

HS2000

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2020
Messages
311
And that same goes for you guys. You are also "blinded by your bias and have subscribed to the evidence that suits you".

You are very good at criticising but will not even bother to deliver substantiated evidence for your case. We have no problems in finding substantiated evidence in support of our case.

You are al quite happy in committing many people to suffer from severe effects of Covid 19 and death, just because you will not accept a drug that is "not approved" by regulators that have been shown to be incompetent at their task such as SAHPRA.

Where are the trials of IVM in SA? Trials will only happen anywhere if registered and allowed to proceed and get the necessary funding. Show us what has happened to the trials, I dare you! The establishment is so biased against IVM that those that want to run trials in SA face an uphill battle.

Yet that same establishment will accept any vaccine offered to it even though those very vaccines have NOT been subjected to the trial conditions that vaccines are normally subjected to.

And then you jump on to a statement from me about why I won't get the vaccine. Even when I state why not - BECAUSE more than one doctor has looked at my case and recommended I DO NOT get the vaccine!

So what am I supposed to do? Take a vaccine that I know is going to be very dangerous to me?
Or, get a treatment that is supported by plenty of evidence that it works?

Or, just lie back and die if I get infected? Come on wise guy, what would YOU do when faced with these choices?????
People will die before receiving the vaccine, that is the inevitable.

This just further stresses the importance on ivermectin studies or any other medication that might be beneficial in the treatment of covid.

I agree with you by the way.

Dr Tess mentions that even the tests on Chloroquine weren't handled well or was prematurely ended.

I had covid. I am high risk.

I am obese, have underlying health condition & also asthmatic.

In general it takes me a long time to get better from viral bronchitis & I had bronchitis many times.


Anyway my point is, I was on Chloroquine around the time that I was infected.

I didn't take the zinc with Chloroquine before being infected.

I added the zinc to Chloroquine after being unwell & having symptoms.

I do not have any proof but I physically felt a difference whilst taking Chloroquine & zinc.

All I am asking is the proper studies are conducted on any medication that works & hopefully it makes a difference to the death rate.

The WHO report on Ivermectin wasn't even open to peer review, Wtf?
 
Last edited:

TeMoeg

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
54
Are you a doctor/pharmacist who can accurately give this information out, having studied it? Or based on what others here have said?
I am an engineer, and take full responsibility of my own body and health. I will not allow other "experts" to take one-sided decisions on my well-being, no matter how many years of study they have wasted at university.
 

TeMoeg

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
54
Well, precisely. I gave up trying to point the idiots who view this as the be-all and end-all because they've had so much time on their inexperienced hands to Google all the answers.
Got flamed from all sides, left the chat. Come back every now and then to see if they're still active. They are...their non-professional narrative is still being pushed, rather than leaving it to the relevant authorities and experts (read: medically qualified people) to do the necessary ground work to approve/disprove it's efficacy.

Well now, you are calling us idiots. This then clearly places you in the category of "Extremely Retarded Imbecile", since you fail to grasp that the benefits of using IVM as treatment, far outweighs the risks, like us "Idiots".

I therefore recommend that you leave the chat, and not come back until you have evolved to the degree that you are able to make that distinction.
 

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
4,843
Well now, you are calling us idiots. This then clearly places you in the category of "Extremely Retarded Imbecile", since you fail to grasp that the benefits of using IVM as treatment, far outweighs the risks, like us "Idiots".

I therefore recommend that you leave the chat, and not come back until you have evolved to the degree that you are able to make that distinction.
You weren't one of them, but you are now for feeling like you were included. I am talking about 6-8 weeks back. You weren't even active then in this discussion.
I was simply on the side of: Do the necessary tests; the initial results look positive, but docs/pharmacists will defer to SAPHRA as that's their governing body...which, to others, meant I was saying this drug was the devil. Not the case, no matter how many times I said there were benefits. Hence...idiots.
I accepted their view, mine wasn't.
So next time you find the opportunity to jump up and down like an tantrum-throwing child because you feel you were referenced (again, you weren't!), make sure you get the back story before doing so.

Laters!
 

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
4,843
I am an engineer, and take full responsibility of my own body and health. I will not allow other "experts" to take one-sided decisions on my well-being, no matter how many years of study they have wasted at university.
OK, so not a qualified doctor/pharmacist who specialise in this. By all means take care of yourself, but don't go around prescribing medication you know nothing about to others based on a few searches.
If someone needs mechanical/chemical/electrical/IT/whatever engineering advice them I am sure they'll come to you.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,658
The evidence is absolutely clear to all EXCEPT the WHO, and those totally invested in believing the only solution is vaccines.
A blanket IVM program is effective in preventing serious complications, high occupancy of health facilities and reduced fatalities. It does not prevent anyone getting infected.
But,vtyhat does not suit govts, and big pharma, so everything will be done to block such a program.
You've been stating the same rhetoric for weeks if not months now. There are proper quality controlled trials underway which will be peer reviewed as with all drugs and pharmaceuticals which will conclusively provide the answers. Until then, there is a more-or-less a neutral stance which is by far not ideal under the circumstances especially since those with the means to mass-produce ivermectin are simply not doing so for precisely this reason and not some big pharma conspiracy.

That is true. IVM is bad for some dogs species IF overdosed.

But IVM in its pure form, properly compounded for human use is a SAFE, and useful preventative measure against severe effects from covid 19.
And this is what proper trials are there to determine.

At last in SA, a doctor is now free to prescribe IVM, and instruct a compounding pharmacist to compound a formulation for a patient. My own doctor won't prescribe it, but I have found a doctor who will and I know where he is getting his IVM from.
So, should it become necessary, I WILL take it.
Especially, because I have also been advised NOT to get vaccinated against Covid 19 by more than one doctor.
So basically you're now shopping doctors where you originally were hellbent on your own doctor being better positioned to make the decisions on what drugs you should be prescribed? It's apparent that you tend to side with your own biases when it comes to making these decisions.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
20,478
You've been stating the same rhetoric for weeks if not months now. There are proper quality controlled trials underway which will be peer reviewed as with all drugs and pharmaceuticals which will conclusively provide the answers. Until then, there is a more-or-less a neutral stance which is by far not ideal under the circumstances especially since those with the means to mass-produce ivermectin are simply not doing so for precisely this reason and not some big pharma conspiracy.
It is not rhetoric. It is fact, but you have to bother to read up on it and accept alternatives opinions and views. The safety rhetoric from the establishment has been shown to be wrong over and over again. (In the hands of a professional).

And maybe you want to comment on why the WHO chooses to release reports on trials that they criticise for not being peer-reviewed but fail to apply that same standard to their own "reports"?

And this is what proper trials are there to determine.
I suppose the Colombian Trial, (which is a registered trial) is an example of a properly run trial? Is this an example of the trials you are talking about?
The Colombian trial is an absolute disgrace. It is flawed on every level. That is IF you bother to read up on the reports about that trial from many sources! The whole purpose of a control group that gets a placebo is that none of the participants are supposed to be able to tell if they are getting the placebo or the real thing. Yet they did not even bother to ensure that the placebo tasted the same as IVM!

And, while you are at it, why don't you tell us about how the supposed trials in KZN, OFS and UP are going? Are you not even the slightest concerned about the deafening silence from them?

Of course, it would be better IF there was genuine movement on proper trials. No one is trying to say that trials should not take place.
So basically you're now shopping doctors where you originally were hellbent on your own doctor being better positioned to make the decisions on what drugs you should be prescribed? It's apparent that you tend to side with your own biases when it comes to making these decisions.
Again making assumptions of your own. My own doctor stated that he has chosen NOT to prescribe IVM which is his right. He then referred me to someone who is prepared to do so and also to get a second opinion on my risk profile regarding vaccinations, which was confirmed.

I am still of the opinion that doctors should be the ones driving the process instead of the current situation where many in SA are self-medicating with "compounds" not necessarily suitable for human use.

So you are wrong on all counts.

You should STOP trying to second guess others' motives.

And BTW how about an apology for those spurious attacks on me about the terms "Compound", "Compounding Chemist" etc, since all of this is now a public record and forms part of a judgement in a Court of Law in SA?
 
Last edited:

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
4,843
You've been stating the same rhetoric for weeks if not months now. There are proper quality controlled trials underway which will be peer reviewed as with all drugs and pharmaceuticals which will conclusively provide the answers. Until then, there is a more-or-less a neutral stance which is by far not ideal under the circumstances especially since those with the means to mass-produce ivermectin are simply not doing so for precisely this reason and not some big pharma conspiracy.


And this is what proper trials are there to determine.


So basically you're now shopping doctors where you originally were hellbent on your own doctor being better positioned to make the decisions on what drugs you should be prescribed? It's apparent that you tend to side with your own biases when it comes to making these decisions.
Conspiracy nuts...conspiracy nuts everywhere.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
20,478
An aside piece of info, use it or lose it as you please.

Had a discussion with the Pharmacist at Dischem today. Dischem is not registered as a " Compounding Chemist". :ROFL: :D :eek:

Apparently in PTA, Idexis is a registered Compounding Chemist.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,658
Again making assumptions of your own. My own doctor stated that he has chosen NOT to prescribe IVM which is his right. He then referred me to someone who is prepared to do so and also to get a second opinion on my risk profile regarding vaccinations, which was confirmed. I am still of the opinion that doctors should be the ones driving the process instead of the current situation where many in SA are self-medicating with "compounds" not necessarily suitable for human use.
Thanks for making my point *again* So all doctors are equal but some doctors are more equal than others... or until you get what you want in this case.
 

RonSwanson

Executive Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
5,861
An aside piece of info, use it or lose it as you please.

Had a discussion with the Pharmacist at Dischem today. Dischem is not registered as a " Compounding Chemist". :ROFL: :D :eek:

Apparently in PTA, Idexis is a registered Compounding Chemist.
Check out the list with the 4th applicant:
  • Pharma Valu Irene CC
  • Marx & Marx CC
  • JJ Strydom CC
  • Menlo Park Apteek CC
  • JJ Strydom Apteek CC
  • Pharma Valu Newlands CC
  • Strydom & Pretrius CC

You can be sure that they are spending their share of SAHPRA's 500 million on bulk orders from India
 

rambo919

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
15,315
For some reason that can only be speculated on the WHO has from day one been fixated on a vaccine and vaccine only solution.

No current vaccine stops transmission so they are effectively prophylactics and treatments..... so what purpose does it serve to restrict movement based on vaccination because containing spread clearly has nothing to do with it?

Most of the current vaccines are not actually vaccines but gene treatments being called vaccines. When you take one of these and get exposed to a wild strain your immune system effectively goes ballistic.

Ivermectin is amoung other things a antiviral that goes after all virusses and can be compared to the discovery of penicillin.... it's not only perfectly safe in the correct dose but dirt cheap to mass produce..... the vaccines are insanely expensive...... who is NOT going to make money from this situation if you force vaccines on everyone?
 
Top