Briefly recaps the IVER.CAR 788, the nursing home result, and a study of 350 patients that was presented in a video that's posted to the sub somehere.

As reported by the European Epidemiological Control Centers, Argentina is one of the countries with the highest number of daily deaths per million inhabitants.

As a result of the aforementioned figures, it cannot be understood then that Inhalable Sodium Ibuprofenate (IBP) is not used massively, its action in this new form of administration discovered by Dr. Dante Beltramo from Córdoba and carried out in that province as Luarprofen, which does not produce significant collateral effects and which, used early as indicated by those who have adopted it, prevents the patient from reaching the ICU and on the ventilator without abandoning the established treatment, as I have already mentioned in previous articles.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adopted a different temperament, which is always taken as a reference, authorizing the antiviral Remdesivir in May, granting now the definitive authorization despite the opinion of the WHO that maintains that it has a almost negligible impact on reducing mortality. The use of convalescent plasma was also authorized as an emergency.

In the face of so much need and in the face of such an emergency, the slowness of the official responses of the rulers of our country in authorizing the use of the PPI and, as we will see, also the Ivermectin (IVM) is inexplicable.

Let us now look at the experiences with IVM, of which I will mention a concrete example, that of Dr. Héctor Carvallo in the Province of Buenos Aires and Dr. Adriana Turchetti in the town of Zenón Pereira in the Province of Santa Fe.

The (IVM) has been used for 40 years in veterinary medicine and for 20 years in human medicine.

It is approved in Argentina, in the US by the FDA and in many other countries.

It was discovered in 1960 by the Japanese Satoshi Omura and has been used since 1981 for veterinary use discovered by the Irishman William Campbell.

Both received the 2015 Nobel Prize in Medicine for the discovery and its medicinal use in the fight against parasitic diseases.

In medicine, those who have the most experience in its use are Pediatricians who use it for the treatment of parasitosis and dermatologists for the treatment of scabies.

In Australia in January its virucidal power was tested in vitro.

Carvallo applied IVM at the clinical level in treatments and as prophylaxis, in order to preserve health personnel.

1, 195 Health Agents from different Healthcare Centers voluntarily participated as prophylaxis between June 1 and August 10. Of these, 788 received prophylactic treatment and did not become infected and 407 did not receive it, 237, that is, 58%.

Both groups were absolutely comparable working in the same places with the same protection measures, obviously except for the use of IVM. Blunt, right?

In our province, Senator Leonardo Diana presented a project for use in the Provincial Legislature, as he had already done with Sodium Ibuprofenate.

Among the considerations made by the Senator, I want to highlight the following:

"The purpose of this project is that the Executive Power, through the Ministry of Health or the corresponding body, evaluate the use in the Province of Santa Fe of the drug called Ivermectin, as a prophylactic agent in health workers and treatments in patients with COVID-19, as well as the production of said drug in the Pharmaceutical Industry Laboratory (LIF). "

It continues later: "Although the current scientific evidence for the prophylactic and treatment use of Ivermectin is scarce, as with all other available treatments, due to the recent appearance of the disease and the limited time to develop long-term investigations, The current context of health emergency and the high number of deaths caused by this disease, mainly in patients with risk factors and / or older adults, justifies evaluating the implementation of a medication with a high safety profile, highly studied in recent years. 40 years and mainly with three joint advantages over the rest of the medication that is being used, its low cost, its probable prophylactic effect in essential personnel and in patients with risk factors and older adults and that according to the currently available bibliography would not interfere with the medication being used ".

Although it is not in a strict sense, IVM is the vaccine we are looking for.

Pure speculation on my part, but IVM as vaccine might work on covid21 and vaccines developed for covid19 might not work.

When we talk about a vaccine we talk about immunization, that is, to generate immunity or resistance against the virus.

Immunity can be natural due to being sick, although it is not always achieved in these cases, or artificial due to having been vaccinated.

In individuals who acquire the disease, there is an alarmingly high percentage that do not form antibodies. Therefore, in theory, they would be in the same condition as before they got sick, which is cause for concern.

Is this known? It wasn't in the IVER.CAR 188 study, was it (whatever the small N was)?

If this happens with the most efficient immunization condition, one must be very cautious about the success of the vaccine.

Regarding its therapeutic use, let us see what happened in a state nursing home in Buenos Aires where Dr. Carvallo participated.

Two doctors and four inmates were infected, which is as if the wolf had entered the henhouse.

IVM was given to all the inmates and all the staff because they considered them close contact, which epidemiologically means that they are positive cases, with no more manifestations of the disease.

The 50 older adults were tested for IgG antibodies and it was found that 42 had antibodies, that is, that they had incorporated the virus.

It is known that when an older adult gets sick, he never goes mildly and has a high chance of ending up in hospital and dying.

The effect of the medication was raised to all provincial authorities, the city of Buenos Aires and the nation without any response.

With the use of IVM, mild and moderate cases make CRP negative in 72 hours. This is already written in the US National Library of Medicine for public access.

In the same way, in the town of Zenón Pereira, 130 km from the city of Santa Fe, Dr. Adriana Turchetti uses the IBP and IVM with marked success, given what she defines as so much need, so much emergency and slowness of the answers.

In a radio interview, he claims to have used IVM in more than 350 patients in a preventive way and in those infected with COVID-19.

Of the 35 infected treated, 4 should have been hospitalized for complications according to the statistics and in no case was it necessary.

Those who were treated preventively none contracted the virus.

There's a video presentation of this study somewhere in the sub. He said 5 was the expected number of hospitalizations, in the video.

He maintains against his success that: "those of us who are not protocolized, which means talking about something fixed that prevents us from thinking and making decisions, we oppose medicine as art, possible scientific thought, reason and common sense".

"They require us to comply with certain scientific steps that take time and in the course of this pandemic this means death, " he says very reasonably.

As an older adult, I feel obliged to fight for the health and dignity of the sector.

If the PPI and IVM do not cause harm, allow you to continue with the usual treatment, are effective and almost without cost, not using them seems like an idiot.

In the face of so much need and in the face of such an emergency, the slowness of the official responses of the rulers of our country in authorizing the use of the PPI and, as we will see, also the Ivermectin (IVM) is inexplicable.

permalink