2024-03-20 11:24:51
By Julien Rose/March 20, 2024/ 18 Views
Dear friend, dear friend,
First of all, let me remind you that registrations for our Stomach University on June 8 and 9 are open.
We have added the possibility for those who come on site to bring a loved one or a colleague.
For a place purchased, you will have a free place, which considerably reduces the registration fees if you share them between you.
I chose to offer this to give as many people as possible access to the exceptional doctors we have assembled.
Go here to register and see the full program for this unique event.
The PRINCIPLE study has been published
On February 29, a new study carried out at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom confirmed the benefits of ivermectin against covid 19(1,2).
The study involves a large group of patients aged 18 to 65, including:
2157 were treated with ivermectin; and 3256 received conventional treatment without ivermectin.
Initially, 11,000 patients were selected in total, but almost half of them were excluded from the study to avoid various biases.
The average age of the patients was 53 years.
Care was administered between June 23, 2021 and July 1, 2022 in the United Kingdom. The data were collected on a specific computer platform called PRINCIPLE which gave its name to the study (1,2).
An honest introduction…
In their introduction, the researchers point out that ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug that does not cost much and is overall very well tolerated by most patients(1).
They specify that this molecule has been tested numerous times against covid 19.
They add that there are different mechanisms by which this molecule could act against SARS-CoV-2.
One of the hypotheses is that ivermectin inhibits the transport of viral proteins into the heart of cells.
Viruses would have a limited action against cells thanks to ivermectin.
This mechanism would allow the cell to be more effective in its action against the virus.
The cell would be less overwhelmed by viral proteins.
The researchers point out that various studies on cells in the laboratory or on animals have shown that ivermectin significantly reduces the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-alpha, Interleukin-1 beta and Interleukin 6(1).
Ivermectin could therefore reduce the strength of the cytokine storms that have done so much harm to patients affected by covid 19.
The researchers then emphasize the fact that the results from in vitro (laboratory) or animal studies do not necessarily give the same results as human studies(1).
And that their job was precisely to see if ivermectin promoted faster healing or a shorter hospitalization time.
…for disappointing (and dubious) conclusions
The study confirms that patients who were given ivermectin were less sick and recovered sooner than those who were not.
According to the authors of the study, the patients who were given ivermectin were cured in 14 days and the others in just over 16, a gain of just over two days.
This difference of one day does not seem sufficient to them to be significant.
Likewise, when we look at how many patients were hospitalized for more than 28 days, we find 34 patients out of 2157 “ivermectin” patients, or 1.6%, compared to 144 out of 3256 in the normal group, or 4.4%(1 ).
Again, the study authors believe that the difference is not enough to make ivermectin an effective remedy.
However, when the study was launched, one of the researchers leading the project, Dr. Christophe Butler, was enthusiastic(3).
He claimed that ivermectin was a globally available drug used for many infections.
He was therefore hopeful of obtaining satisfactory results.
He hoped that with this study any doubt would be removed due to the large size of the cohort of patients studied.
Despite this, the study states in its summary that their work is not conclusive and that research must continue…
Dr Pierre Kory believes that there is a “war against ivermectin”
Dr. Kory has treated many patients affected by covid 19 with ivermectin(4,5,6).
Faced with the success of this molecule, he became one of its most ardent promoters.
He himself participated in various studies showing the benefits of this molecule.
Even his detractors recognize his competence and integrity(6).
For Pierre Kory, the PRINCIPLE study is fraudulent(4).
He believes that it is part of a line of six other publications manipulated under pressure or influence from the pharmaceutical industry.
For Pierre Kory, Big Pharma and the administration have, from the start, done everything to discredit all possible alternatives to the experimental vaccination that they wanted to impose on the entire world.
It does not call into question the data from the PRINCIPLE study, but the interpretation that was made of it(4).
His first criticism concerns the time it took to publish this data: more than three years after they were collected!
For him, this long period of time served to mask the good results of this study. He notes that just the day after the publication of this study, the entire American and English press echoed it to denigrate ivermectin(4).
I would add that these results undoubtedly needed to appear as late as possible after the compulsory vaccination campaign and the numerous side effects that it caused.
Dr. Kory’s second criticism is more troublesome.
He is surprised to see that there is a lack of data on patient mortality, particularly in those who have not taken ivermectin(4).
Finally, he cites the work of another group of experts who reach the opposite conclusion compared to the authors of the study (7,8,9).
These independent scientists believe that patients in the “ivermectin” group experienced a significant improvement in their condition (7,8).
However, these researchers note that ivermectin was administered to them late.
This same group of scientists made a list of all the studies on therapies that have shown good results against covid 19(7,8).
They listed 32! (7)
Among these good health practices or substances, we find zinc, quercetin, vitamin D, exposure to the sun, quality food, physical exercise, black cumin seeds and many chemical substances.
Doctors had a choice in the remedies to use!
And the first studies were released at the beginning of 2020! (7)
Giving power back to treating doctors and patients
This battle of experts around ivermectin shows the discomfort of a large number of caregivers in the face of medical doxa.
The covid 19 epidemic will have shown, once again, to what extent in the medical field, the dice are loaded.
And, in fact, I know many pharmacists and doctors, hospital or otherwise, who during the epidemic had kept ivermectin in reserve for themselves or their loved ones just in case.
And when they were affected by the virus, they treated themselves with ivermectin without asking any questions.
And politicians did the same.
In all countries where this substance was banned, it was sold secretly. Some patients have even resorted to doses intended for livestock. (They got sick from it!)
The technical nature of scientific studies means that publishers of scientific journals supported by the pharmaceutical industry present the data as it suits them.
For decades BIG Pharma and the administration have taken control of the health of citizens of the Western world.
Doctors must follow orders or risk being excluded from the healthcare system.
As a result, it is increasingly difficult to get proper treatment.
The only useful way out of this situation is to give prescribing power back to general practitioners.
As Dr Jean Stevens often says in his book The Pandemic of Lies and Fear, it is general practitioners during epidemics who are on the front line(10).
They are the ones who should guide scientific research.
But they were immediately excluded from scientific debates.
As soon as one of them found something, they were chased, blamed, pressured, etc.
What do you want ?
We had to sell this damn mRNA vaccine!
Naturally yours,
Augustine of Livois
1711169579
#Institute #Natural #Health #Protection #Ivermectin #endless #debate #good #reason