FDA Embarrassingly Claims Ivermectin Doesn’t Work While Linking to Studies That Prove It Does
Is the FDA doing science or peddling narratives? Because it looks like the agency has been caught in one of the biggest lies of the century.
“It seems like the messaging that’s coming down to us, the American citizens, from our own Federal government, resembles the world of George Orwell’s 1984 more and more,” wrote The Epoch Times.
Case in point: over on the FDA’s website, they maintain a page called: “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19”
However, when you dig into it, you’ll find that the clinical trials that the FDA points to (the ones that are listed on that page) say the exact opposite.
As ridiculous as it sounds: the FDA claims that ivermectin does not work against COVID-19, but in order to prove that point, they link to studies that say that it does.
It all sounds too hilarious to be true, but remember, this is the same Federal agency that wrote, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
Let’s take a closer look at The Epoch Times’ bold claim, as explained by Facts Matter host Roman Balmakov.
On the FDA’s website post titled, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19,” they wrote, “Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing.”
Take note of that hyperlink, which takes you to a repository of 89 different studies. The repository lists the status of each of those studies, such as “recruiting”, “completed”, “terminated”, or “unknown”.
The Epoch Times went in and filtered that database in order to look only at the studies that have been completed and that have their results available online.
What the news site found was study after study indicating a positive outcome with the use of ivermectin, the exact opposite of what the FDA asserted to be true.
• Of the 89 studies, the ones marked as “completed” narrowed the results down to 32.
• Half of the studies (16) indicate that ivermectin effectively combats and/or prevents COVID-19.
• Another six of the studies presented mixed results, meaning that ivermectin might work against COVID.
• And then there were ten studies that found no evidence that ivermectin was effective.
This all means, in practical terms, that when you examine the completed trials to which the FDA linked, you discover that 69% of them concluded that ivermectin is or may be effective against COVID-19.
“Is this accurate, @CommunityNotes?” asked Elon Musk in response to my tweet about The Epoch Times’ ivermectin video.
What followed was a flood of testimonials that attested, yes, ivermectin works.
I elaborated and summarized a shortened explanation of what The Epoch Times purported in the video above.
Social and political commentator Catturd weighed in and said, “I don’t need a community note to tell me ivermectin works. It does.”
And Dr. Ben Marble, co-founder of myfreedoctor.com, “settled the science.” “Over 300,000 free doctor visits delivered multi-drug early treatment using ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc. yielded a 99.99% survival rate.”
Despite 2.3 million impressions from Elon Musk, there was no community notes “fact-check” to try and debunk The Epoch Times’ claim.
So, we must ask, where did the FDA’s “data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19” conclusion come from? Because when the agency links trials that indicate the exact opposite, it suggests it isn’t even reading the studies. How embarrassing.
I argue that this is not an “oops” or “we overlooked that data.” This is criminal negligence, at the very least. How many lives and taxpayer dollars could have been saved if a cheap, effective medication was readily available to the American people? And for that reason, the FDA, starting with those in leadership positions, must be held accountable.
The Greatest Crime In Human History Ever Recorded Is Now Available in Paperback Form
The damning information that Pfizer, and as such, what the FDA knew, and wanted to keep hidden for 75 years, has been thoroughly documented and compiled into a paperback book.
These important summaries, which detail astonishing ranges of deaths, disabilities, and other systematic harms to subjects, contain vastly important headlines: twenty forms of menstrual damage to women — how Pfizer covered up a flood of adverse events — PEG in breast milk — within a month of rollout, Pfizer knew the mRNA vaccines did not work.
All funds and proceeds raised go to the research project. So, please, show your support and get your (or a loved one’s) hands on this critical information in one place — by ordering your copy today.