Courts in New York had to step in to order hospitals to administer a drug that likely saved the life of people dying of complications from COVID-19.
The drug called Ivermectin, a commonly used drug to treat parasitic infections, has been shown in 50 studies, 26 of them randomized controlled trials, to have an incredibly high rate of success in treating COVID and its inflammatory response in the immune system at all stages of the virus with no side effects.
John Swanson, 81, of Genesee County, New York, like so many elderly Americans, was given no legitimate preventive or early treatment options for this now very predictable inflammatory response to COVID-19. He wound up on a ventilator at the United Memorial Medical Center in Batavia and, according to the court affidavit, was “on death’s doorstep.” The Buffalo News reports that, according to attorney Ralph C. Lorigo, Swanson was given one dose of ivermectin and began breathing on his own, was then taken off the ventilator, and began to show great progress. However, the hospital, with no other legitimate treatment options to offer, refused to give him follow-up doses.
On April 2, state Supreme Court Justice Frederick J. Marshall ordered the hospital to administer the follow-up doses at the request of Swanson’s wife.
As of late Friday afternoon, his attorneys described Swanson as “stable.”
“I definitely think the Ivermectin is helping him,” Sandra Swanson told The Buffalo News, but she said she is upset and frustrated that hospital officials would not allow her to visit with her husband.
“They held the phone to his ear, and I read him a long list of people who are praying for him every day, about 20 people,” she said. “But I need to see him.”
There have been at least two other instances where New York judges had to force local hospitals to administer lifesaving treatment to those who appeared on their way to death.
It is shocking how 13 months into this pandemic, the medical profession has nothing to offer but a ventilator, keeping loved ones away from seeing the patient, and blocking the only known lifesaving treatments.
What is even more bewildering is the fact that the World Health Organization’s own data show that early-use ivermectin is even more effective, reducing mortality by 81%. Were every vulnerable person to use it preventively, one can only speculate that the results would be even better, because the key to fighting the inflammatory response is to pre-empt it from getting off the ground.
Despite proof showing the amazing efficacy of this cheap and safe drug, the NIH refuses to recommend its use. As late as January, health officials continued to say that “there are insufficient data to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.” But three months later, why have they not aggressively studied ivermectin to at least confirm or refute the wealth of existing studies they evidently don’t want to rely upon?
On Feb. 15, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, the head of the World Health Organization’s technical response team to COVID-19, promised that within the “next six weeks or so” they would be coming out with guidance on use of ivermectin for COVID. She hinted at the fact that they felt some of the positive studies had too small a sample size and were looking to pool and synthesize the data. At the same forum, Dr. Sylvie Briand, director of the Pandemic and Epidemic Diseases Department at the World Health Organization, admitted that ivermectin induced “broad spectrum activity” against viruses and looked promising and that studies were ongoing.
Two months later, with panic abounding about variants despite all the vaccines, why is there still radio silence? Why was there such a rush to make experimental gene therapy approved as a vaccine under emergency use for hundreds of millions of people at the same time they drag their feet on a drug that has been proven safe for years?
Dr. Fauci is telling people that it’s still not OK for vaccinated Americans to eat and drink indoors. He and his colleagues in the various health agencies keep spreading fear about variants of the virus escaping the utility of the vaccine. According to a recent YouGov poll, 54% of those vaccinated in America say they still fear getting the virus. Why wouldn’t we tell everyone the good news that there is a safe, non-invasive drug they can take at the first sign of COVID (and even preemptively) that will almost certainly ward off serious or even mild illness without any unknown long-term effects like the vaccines?
