Kan ha funnet medisin mot korona

[Little Diva]

Spent på når denne blir obligatorisk å ta. Må si fremtiden ser lovende ut for farmasøytindustrien. 

Kommer du til å ta denne? 
 

Sitat

Farmasigiganten Merck mener de kan ha funnet en medisin som halverer risikoen for alvorlig sykdom etter smitte av koronaviruset.

https://www.nrk.no/urix/kan-ha-funnet-medisin-mot-korona-1.15673892?fbclid=IwAR3m2L_Q3pWJQaxDgSxuYxY00r-ABkxglq_iaGGjy6jWEkLEWJkBZdVntZQ
 

 

Sitat

Medisinsk fagdirektør i Legemiddelverket Steinar Madsen mener at dette er en positiv nyhet.

– Alt vi kan ha i verktøykassen for å bekjempe denne pandemien er bra. Nå skal denne medisinen bli fingransket av myndighetene, sier Madsen til NRK.

https://www.tv2.no/nyheter/14264327/

[Hedy Lamarr]

(feil)

Endret 1. oktober 2021 av Hedy Lamarr

[Justlooking]

Slett ikke umulig om jeg ville tatt den om jeg fikk corona. Ikke redd for piller 😊

[Mezzosoprena]

Obligatorisk å ta? Denne fungerer som behandling hvis man har fått covid-19 i alvorlig grad. Vil du mene at det er obligatorisk å la seg behandle med cellegift når man har kreft også?

[brainstorm]

En kjempenyhet. I hvert fall alle andre steder enn på Kvinneguiden. 

[John Galt]

Merck er den opprinnelige produsenten av Ivermectin, og produserer medisinen fremdeles. Men de ville ikke sponse en større klinisk test av Ivermectin vs. Covid19. Selv om de er enige med sin tidligere medarbeider Satoshi Ōmura, mannen bak Ivermectin, at den kan ha en god forebyggende effekt.

Satoshi Ōmura fikk nobelprisen i medisin i 2015, for sitt livslange arbeid med antibiotika og særlig Ivermectin.

Ivermectin er på WHO sin liste over de aller viktigste medisiner i verden. Mellom 250 og 350 millioner mennesker behandles med Ivermectin mot en lang rekke sykdommer hvert år.

Men det finnes ingen penger å tjene på Ivermectin, patentet er gått ut for lenge siden, slik at det er en generisk medisin alle kan produsere.

Så lenge Merck's sønn styrte var ikke penger det viktigste:

Merck received approval from French authorities in 1987 allowing human use of ivermectin. In a hitherto unprecedented gesture, immediately following registration, ivermectin (branded as Mectizan®) was donated free of charge by Merck & Co. Inc., under the direction of Roy Vagelos (Fig. 24), for the treat- ment of Onchocerciasis (River Blindness), with KI foregoing all royalties. The donation was for as long as the drug was required, in the amounts that were needed. This represented the first such large-scale drug donation initiative and it has resulted in the world’s largest, longest-running and most successful drug donation programme.

Men noen av de fattigste statene i verden er nå tilnærmet 100% Covid frie, etter omfattende bruk av Ivermectin som forebyggende medisin over lang tid.

Les og lær mer om Ivermectin-Covid19

80 sider her i THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF ANTIBIOTICS fra Mars 21

http://jja-contents.wdc-jp.com/pdf/JJA74/74-1-open/74-1_44-95.pdf

Og om Satoshi Ōmura og historien bak funnet av den organiske mikro organismen, som ledet til utviklingen av Ivermectin, i en tilfeldig jordprøve for mer enn 50 år siden .

https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/omura-lecture.pdf

Research staff and others around the world have exhaustively searched since the original discovery but no other avermectin-producing organism has ever been found. The strain that we isolated from a single soil sample collected near a golf course bordering the ocean at Kawana in Ito City in the Shizuoka region of Japan remains the only avermectin-producing organism ever found.

Noen av grunnene til at Ivermectin aldri seriøst vurdert i USA:

Kitasato University, based on the judgment that it is necessary to examine the clinical effect of ivermectin to prevent the spread of uncertain COVID-19, asked Merck & Co., Inc. to conduct clinical trials of ivermectin for COVID-19 in Japan. This company has priority to submit an application for an expansion of ivermectin’s indications, since the original approval for the manufacture and sale of ivermectin was conferred to it. However, the company said that it had no intention of conducting clinical trials. As a result, Kitasato University decided to conduct a doctor- initiated clinical trial, the decision of which was published81) on the 12th of May. Following the decision to start clinical trials in Japan, the status of clinical trials overseas was extensively inves- tigated. It was then found, somewhat surprisingly, that 14 trials were already registered on Clini- calTrials.gov by the 25th of May. Among them, except for two trials in the United States, all stud- ies were conducted in developing countries with a large number of poor patients. It was also then understood that the use of inexpensive ivermectin to treat COVID-19 could potentially yield sig-nificantly great benefits.

However, looking closely at the protocols of the trials in these developing countries, all of them are doctor-initiated. The scales of the trials are small due to a lack of funds. Even if the tar- get patients could be randomized, complete blinding would not be possible due to a shortage of manpower. There are strong tendencies not to employ methods that involve multiple expensive PCR tests. Judgements were made to utilize methods of low cost, such as changes in oxygen de- mand and the number of days required to improve symptoms. In the case of new drug develop- ment conducted by a pharmaceutical company, the cost of clinical trials can be recovered from the sales profit of the new drug after marketing. So, even if it is a costly and labor-intensive in- vestigation, it is actively adopted. However, in doctor-initiated trials it is not possible to hope for cost recovery and the trial is performed in the cheapest possible manner. Although these doctor- initiated trial results may appear at first glance to be of a poor quality and biased (to eyes familiar with the results of company-oriented clinical trials in the clinical development of traditional anti- infective agents), physicians involved in these trials are enthusiastic about avoiding bias and need to understand the attitude of seriously assessing the efficacy and safety of a study drug. It must be appreciated that they are truly striving to treat and prevent the onset of COVID-19 in patients, for non-profit motives.

As already mentioned above regarding the FDA’s view on the clinical use of dexamethasone for COVID-19, the use of existing drugs such as ivermectin for diseases other than its approved indications in clinical practice is permitted as “off-label use”.

As many clinicians are well familiar with clinical responses (real-world evidence) and un- derstand the actual possibility of off-label use, they naturally wish for approval to be granted for a given disease. However, a particular public law requiring regulators to consider measures for off- label use was enacted in the United States in 2016. In this Act82,83) named the “21st Century Cures Act”, ”Real world evidence” is stipulated in Section 3022 of Chapter 3 (“Development”) as a quasi-Chapter C “Modern Trial Design and Evidence Development” section. A provision of Sec- tion 3021 requires that a “Novel clinical design” be devised to justify real world evidence. There- after, “real world evidence” obtained from such trials can be aimed at “repurposing” existingdrugs. This stipulation warns that one should not disregard evaluations or reviews that adhere to old-fashioned evidence-based medicine (EBM) that integrates clinical experience. Unfortunately, the law was not enforced due to the change of government in the United States and it is now too late due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This would have otherwise been the most appropriate proof of its legislative significance.

 

 

[Ab_naturals]

Skjønner ikke hva du mener med at den "blir obligatorisk å ta". Det er snakk om en medisin som eventuelt hjelper dersom man har fått viruset, og ikke noe forebyggende (som en vaksine). Jeg tviler på at en som er smittet får politiet på døren, for å tvangsfòre personen med piller 😂