How ever did we win World War II? Were we always this fearful and risk-averse? Or are we reaping the grim harvest of generations raised in padded cells by an obsessively safety-first culture?
Once, at least some of us seemed to really believe that “Who Dares, Wins”. The ruling creed nowadays is, “Who Dares Must First Undergo Comprehensive Dare Training, Fill Who Dares Forms in Triplicate, and Wear a Helmet, Safety Harness and Hi-Vis Vest at All Times”.
Except when it comes to (still experimental) Covid vaccines. In which case, it’s “Who Hesitates is a Stupid Monster”. The vaccines are the only game in town, apart from total and neverending lockdowns, and just you forget about thinking of actually treating the disease first.
It’s just a baseless conspiracy theory, I’m sure, to harbour the nagging doubt that the real point of lockdowns and vaccine mandates is control.
Overlooked by almost everyone is the possibility that the pandemic could end with an effective treatment. If there were an outbreak of plague (which still exists in parts of the US and Africa) would the Australian government lock down the country because there’s no vaccine? Let’s hope not since there’s a perfectly effective antibiotic to treat the Black Death. When HIV emerged in the 1980s, there was no vaccine to prevent it. There still isn’t. Yet Aids-related deaths have been reduced by over 60 per cent, thanks largely to effective treatment.
The first essential element in responding to any pandemic is not a vaccine, which does nothing for people already infected, it is treatment. Indeed, an effective treatment reduces the circulation of a virus reducing the chances of mutations and makes a mass vaccination program safer and more effective.
The problem has been finding an effective treatment. Many pinned early hopes on hydroxychloroquine, and some die-hards still do. Yet the evidence for its efficacy isn’t cheering.
But there is a treatment regime that offers rather more hope.
It is to Australia’s credit that one of the most effective treatments was identified at Monash University along with the Doherty Institute which showed that ivermectin kills the Sars-CoV-2 virus within 48 hours. Yet to our national shame, the researchers have been starved of resources and the discovery ignored.
With characteristic Manichean zeal, the public health troughers and their media camp stooges have dutifully squealed that not only does ivermectin not work (it may), it’s positively deadly (it absolutely is not, in prescribed doses). Besides, they sneer, “It’s a veterinary drug” (so’s penicillin: what’s your point?).
As happened with hydroxychloroquine, a hitherto perfectly normal prescription drug has, in many places, suddenly been practically outlawed.
In Australia, one of the few doctors brave enough to use the drug to treat patients and save lives, Dr Mark Hobart, was reported to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA). Thankfully, AHPRA advised that there had been no infringement. Indeed, federal Health Minister Greg Hunt wrote to one of the doctors in Australia who prescribes ivermectin confirming that he was aware that some physicians are prescribing ivermectin off-label for Covid and that they were quite within their rights as the practice of prescribing registered medicines outside of their approved indications is not regulated or controlled by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), it is at the discretion of the prescribing physician. Yet the silence persists. Ivermectin is the drug that dare not speak its name.
Risk-aversion is one reason why we don’t win wars anymore. Another is the stifling, dead hand of over-regulation.
Demonstrating the complete lack of urgency with which it treats repurposed drugs, the TGA last updated its advice on ivermectin on 1 June. It claims that there is currently insufficient evidence to support its safe and effective use. Yet since 1 June results of 15 new trials and meta-analyses of ivermectin have been published almost all showing steep declines in mortality. The question that the TGA has to answer is how is it possible to approve an experimental gene therapy vaccine with plummeting efficacy, significant short-term safety signals and unknown longterm side effects and yet not recommend a drug with an outstanding safety profile, which is supported by Nobel laureates and multiple randomised controlled trials?
Spectator Australia
Dare we say: control?
Because the hard fact is that if there really is a cheap, effective and safe treatment for Covid, the whole raison d’être of the Pandemic Dictatorships collapses. No more lockdowns and border closures. No more daily press conferences for shuck-and-jive politicians, or public health bureaucrats grasping for their fifteen minutes of fame. No Great Reset.
The jig will well and truly be up.
So ivermectin and the Borody Protocol may or may not be an effective treatment. But it’s perfectly legal, and a matter for you and your doctor.
And bugger the Covid Dictators.
Please share this article so that others can discover The BFD