We have been denied an effective Covid treatment through sheer bigotry.

From its outset, one of the key attributes of the Covid virus has been that not only is it highly virulent, but there is no effective antiviral treatment for those that catch it, and the only protection available is to be had from weakly-effective drugs such as Remdesivir, and from dragooning entire populations into receiving one of the ‘vaccines’ that have been so insouciantly fast-tracked. Protecting this highly contestable view, and pouring scorn on anyone who challenged it, was a favourite lockdown pastime of the unprincipled half-wits who, sadly, commanded the narrative.

Of course, the endorsement of Donald Trump did no favours to any of the ‘repurposed’ drugs that received it, such is the infantile hysteria of the world’s legion of Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferers. This, it should be noted, is a cohort which substantially overlaps the Covid catastrophist faction, for whom millenarian hysteria is as addictive a pastime as Trump-bashing. It did no favours, either, to the many people – the old, the fat and the immunocompromised, to whom Covid genuinely did pose a lethal threat, and for whom an effective treatment would have been literally life-saving. But that cohort did not overlap the Trump-hating, Covid catastrophist faction, so its interests came a distant last behind the urge to scoff at the Orange Man and revel in the thrilling, but confected, fear of Covid.

One repurposed drug whose reputed effectiveness has driven the Covid enthusiasts/Trump-haters to foam at the mouth has been Ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug whose creators won a Nobel Prize in 2015 on account of its resounding success in treating River Blindness. To the extent that they even acknowledge professional interest in Ivermectin, the repulsively complaisant legacy media, typified by the ABC’s Norman Swan , have obediently adopted the hand-waving mantra “no studies have demonstrated Ivermectin’s effectiveness” before conveniently moving on to more comfortable territory. The consequence of this has been that the useful idiots who hold sway in our own AMA and Therapeutic Goods Administration have been gulled into treating Ivermectin, a drug which has been taken by hundreds of millions of people for many years, with almost no known side-effects, as not only ineffective, but potentially harmful. Such has been their anxiety to maintain the fear of Covid, and the narrative of its untreatability, that they have forbidden GPs from prescribing Ivermectin as a Covid treatment. They have all but banned its use. So far as I can see, our GPs have accepted this pre-emption of their professional judgement with barely a whimper of protest.

Ivermectin was introduced by Merck, but is now out of patent, and laughably cheap to make. For those reasons, Merck have no interest in performing the trial work necessary to determine whether the anecdotal evidence of its efficacy as an antiviral treatment has scientific validity. Furthermore, Merck are busily trying to come up with a Covid treatment they can actually make some money out of, so they really don’t want competition from a dirt-cheap alternative they used to own.

Well, Harrumpf learns, courtesy of the ever-vigilant Dr John Campbell, that the effectiveness of Ivermectin has finally been subjected, in the US and Brazil, to the peer-reviewed scrutiny it should have received from its erstwhile makers and from any medical establishment genuinely interested in the wellbeing the population it serves. And, as you will see, the results are impressive. The US study revealed that Covid sufferers treated with (dirt cheap) Ivermectin were 70% less likely to die than those treated with (expensive, but TGA-approved). Furthermore, in the Brazil study, uninfected patients given Ivermectin as a prophylactic showed a 44% reduction in infection rate, and a 68% reduction in mortality. So, not only is Ivermectin clearly every bit as effective as a treatment as its enthusiasts have claimed, but it also seems to work extremely well as a prophylactic.

These results should make the AMA and the TGA, and indeed our entire medical establishment, who have acquiesced in the virtual banning of an effective treatment for Covid, while enthusiastically endorsing the use of ‘vaccines’ which have been fast-tracked, and whose long-term effects we can only guess at, hide their faces in shame. Don’t hold your breath, though.