https://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/575402

We respectfully disagree with Health director-general Dr Noor Hisham Abdullah when he stated on May 16, 2021, that there is no conclusive evidence for the use of Ivermectin against Covid-19.

We understand that the officials and staffs of MOH are currently overwhelmed with the rising infective and mortality rates of the disease. Our team of researchers are pleased to do the homework pointing to the numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies showing Ivermectin is effective prophylaxis and treatment for Covid-19.

Ivermectin has already been proven to be very safe as it has been used safely and successfully (to treat other tropical diseases) for over 40 years and by four billion people.

We feel that many people are dying every day and getting infected with Covid-19 so unnecessarily.

What have we got to lose in trying out a tried and tested medicine (Ivermectin), which is increasing being used in other countries against Covid-19 and its new variants, that has been proven very safe over and with many recent credible studies around the world confirming that it can reduce the risk of infection against Covid-19 by 88 percent and reduces the mortality rate by 83 percent? There is no official treatment protocol against Covid-19 at the moment.

The studies listed below are randomised controlled trials (RCT), considered the gold standard in evidence-based medicine, peer-reviewed, reproducible, using only Ivermectin and no add-on. Randomisation circumvents the problem with confounding, while the single investigative agent used without the add-on, ie, only Ivermectin, should leave no doubt that any positive result shown is specifically due to the investigative agent.

Most of the RCTs conducted on Ivermectin were of small and medium scale studies. This is not an issue if the trials were well designed and properly conducted, and the results show statistical significance.

Individual doctors who have no ulterior motive or vested interest other than altruistic intent, funded most of the studies. The above points answer the Health DG’s criticism of the Ivermectin studies.

The following RCTs show positive results of Ivermectin on Covid-19:

Babalola et al (2021) in a double-blinded RCT of 62 patients found a significant difference in viral clearance between both the low-dose and high-dose treatment groups and controls.

Chaccour et al (2021) in a small double-blind RCT, randomised 24 patients to Ivermectin and placebo, found statistically significant decreases in viral loads, patient days of anosmia, and patient days with cough.

Elgazzar et al (2020) randomised four treatment groups of 100 hospitalised patients in each group. Groups 1 and 2 were mild to moderate illness patients given either ivermectin plus standard care or hydroxychloroquine plus standard care. Groups 3 and 4 were severely ill patients, either given Ivermectin plus standard care or hydroxychloroquine plus standard care. In both the groups given Ivermectin the rate of disease progression was lower. The mortality rate for the Ivermectin groups was also significantly lower.

Niaee et al (2020) in a randomised placebo-controlled multicenter trial at five hospitals found a dramatic reduction in mortality with Ivermectin use and also improvement in several other clinical parameters.

There are also observational controlled trials (OCT), although not considered the gold standard, nevertheless contribute significantly to the body of scientific knowledge regarding Ivermectin and its therapeutic usefulness. The followings are the OCTs:

Rajter et al (2020) performed a retrospective OCT on 280 consecutively treated patients and compared those treated with Ivermectin to those without and found statistically significant lower mortality among Ivermectin-treated patients. In a subgroup of patients with severe pulmonary disease, mortality was much reduced when treated with Ivermectin.

Khan et al (2020) compared 115 patients treated with Ivermectin to a standard care cohort of 113 patients and found that those receiving Ivermectin became SARs-CoV-2 negative more quickly, fewer developed respiratory distress, and had a shorter hospital stay. There was lower mortality rate in the Ivermectin-treated patients.

Portmann-Baracco et al (2020) in a large OCT that included nearly 1,500 patients reported that in 704 hospitalised patients treated with a single dose of Ivermectin, compared with 704 controls, overall mortality was reduced. For those patients on mechanical ventilation, mortality was also reduced (7).

There are a number of studies showing Ivermectin’s ability to prevent Covid-19. The followings are the prophylaxis studies:

Elgazzar et al (2020) randomised 200 healthcare workers and households who had contact with Covid-19 patients where the intervention group of 100 was given Ivermectin and wore personal protective equipment (PPE), and control of 100 wore PPE. The study found a large and statistically significant reduction in contacts testing positive by RT-PCR when treated with Ivermectin versus control.

Shoumann et al (2021) conducted an RCT involving family members of patients PCR-positive for Covid-19. The Ivermectin group included 203 contacts, while the non-intervention group included 101 contacts. Fifteen in the Ivermectin arm developed Covid-19 compared to 59 in the non-intervention arm after a two weeks follow up. The result also showed a large and statistically significant decrease in Covid-19 symptoms among household members treated with Ivermectin.

Alam et al (2020) conducted a prospective OCT at a hospital with 118 healthcare providers evenly divided into an experimental group receiving a single dose of Ivermectin 12 mg per month for four months, and the control group. Both groups were exposed to Covid-19 positive patients. Results of the symptomatic subjects and tested positive with RT-PCR showed 73.3 percent in the control group were positive for Covid-19 compared to only 6.9 percent in the experimental group.

Hellwig and Maia (2021) studied countries with routine mass drug administration including prophylactic Ivermectin and found that these countries have a significantly lower incidence of Covid-19. This reported correlation is significant to show a possible causal connection.

A few countries in South America provided good information supporting the role of Ivermectin in Covid-19 decreasing transmission rates. Countries like Peru, Brazil and Paraguay initiated the Ivermectin distribution programme for their citizens after their countries were hard hit by the pandemic in April 2020. Some cities started the Ivermectin programme earlier than others. Large decreases in the case count for the cities soon after receiving Ivermectin in comparison to those cities that started the campaign late.

In evidence-based medicine (EBM), the systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs occupy the top hierarchy of evidence. The study of Bryant et al (2021), Ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of Covid-19 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis, included 21 RCTs involving 2,741 participants and meta-analysis conducted on 13 trials. The result showed Ivermectin reduced the risk of death compared to no Ivermectin. Ivermectin prophylaxis reduced Covid-19 infection by an average of 86 percent.

Dr Tess Lawrie (2021) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 RCTs and 6 OCTs and confirmed that Ivermectin substantially reduced the risk of a person dying from Covid-19 by 83 percent. When used as a prophylaxis among healthcare workers and contacts, Ivermectin substantially reduced Covid-19 infection by 88 percent.

The studies mentioned above are all well-designed studies, peer-reviewed, and mostly RCTs, Not ‘circumstantial hype’ as mentioned by the Health DG. There are several other studies, many of them RCTs that also include add-on therapeutic agent, case series, and poorly designed studies, studies having a certain degree of bias, and studies that did not consider for confounding factors; were omitted.

In short, the studies mentioned are all of high quality. There are also two systematic reviews and meta-analysis of RCTs. These are studies of the highest quality, the gold standard, and occupy the highest order of evidence in the evidence-based medicine.

With regards to dosage of Ivermectin, most of the studies mentioned used around 12mg in a single dose or an additional dose after a few days for the duration of the study. None used mega doses of Ivermectin, as news report quoting the Health DG had unwittingly implied.

Looking at the conclusion of the studies mentioned above, the evidence is compelling and appear conclusive that Ivermectin has prophylactic and therapeutic value.

The Health DG chose to look at two studies showing negative results on Ivermectin – Chaccour et al (2021) (2), and Lopez-Medina et al (2021) (16); of which we are happy to give counter views.

Chaccour and colleagues conducted a pilot RCT with the Ivermectin arm (a single dose of 400 mcg/kg (n=12) or placebo (n=12). All the subjects recruited had some mild symptoms of Covid-19. Although the Ivermectin group had non-statistically significant lower viral loads at day four and day seven, and also non-statistically significant lower IgG titers at day 21 post-treatment, the study results had clinical significance. Patients in the Ivermectin group recovered earlier from anosmia (loss of sense of smell), had reduced cough, lower viral loads and lower IgG titers, which are all positive signs. The reason for non-significant result is because the sample size was too small to show a large difference. Had the sample size ranged into thousands, the result would have been positive.

Lopez-Medina and colleagues conducted an RCT that included 476 patients with mild disease symptoms randomised to receive Ivermectin, 300mcg/kg of body weight per day for 5 days (n=200), or placebo (n=197). The primary outcome was time to resolution of symptoms within a 21-day period. The median time to resolution of symptoms was 10 days in the Ivermectin group compared with 12 days in the placebo group. By 21 days 82 percent in the Ivermectin group and 79 percent in the placebo group had resolved symptoms. The results showed no statistical significance.

The media had quoted the Health DG as saying “the results (of Lopez-Medina study) showed there was no significant improvement in Covid-19 symptoms resolution time”. This is incorrect. There is a big difference in the meaning of the word "significant" and "statistical significant". The proper words to use was the latter as it was a scientific study to compare one arm with the other, a relative comparison. The study also showed slightly less adverse events reported in the Ivermectin group compared to the control group – 77 percent vs 81.3 percent. For clinical purpose, the two days difference in symptoms resolution and the lesser adverse events are all significant.

Both the leading authors of the study disclosed they received grants and fees from two conglomerates that are also producing the mRNA vaccines that have been delayed in approval. From the way the trial was designed – relatively small sample size, types of outcome measure, age group of subjects, study duration; it appears the study was destined to turn negative.

Officials from our Health Ministry should look at the current scientific information pertaining to Ivermectin. Many RCTs on ivermectin and Covid-19 only got published in February and March 2021. The BMJ article, "Drug treatments for Covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis", that was mentioned in the Health DG’s statement was published in July 2020 with updated data as of April 6, 2021, as claimed.

However, in the report, there is no mention of Ivermectin trial results for mortality, adverse events leading to discontinuation, duration of hospital stay, ventilator-free days, and time to symptom resolution. Clearly there is selection bias in this BMJ report.

We have no malice in being critical of Health DG’s statements. We are saddened to see the pandemic has claimed many lives, caused so much hardship, and used up so much of human and financial resources.

We genuinely believe, and are confident that if Ivermectin is mass-distributed, the epidemic in our country will be quickly brought under control.

The above statement is endorsed by:

Captain (Rtd) Wong Ang Peng, research scientist
Prof Mustafa Ali Mohd, senior pharmacologist & toxicologist
Dr Saifuzzaman Yusoff, medical doctor
Dr Zawawi Abdullah, medical doctor
Dr Durairajoo Govindarajoo, medical doctor
Nadzim Johan, chairperson, Coalition on Integrity of Vaccines & Drugs Against Covid-19 (Civdac)
Brig Gen (Rtd) Mohd Arshad Raji, Persatuan Patriot Kebangsaan (Patriot)
Abd Kadir Warsi Mohamad, Persatuan Pengguna Islam Malaysia (PPIM)
Police Commissioner (Rtd) Shabudin Abdul Wahab, Covid Research Centre (AHM Group)
Tunku Azwil Tunku Abd Razak, Gabungan NGO Islam (GNI)



This post has been edited by cranx: May 29 2021, 12:21 PM

Ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19

With reference to the open letter to Health DG by our ten esteemed colleagues, MAAFIM and its members supported by many other doctors in Malaysia would like to establish that Ivermectin has been in use in many countries with good results in the treatment of COVID-19, especially in prophylaxis.

Ivermectin is a medication that is included in the Malaysian drug formulary as an antihelminthic and yet there is resistance to allow the drug for use for its intended purpose or for emergency use for COVID-19 disease.There is an abundance of research to show its safety, as the drug has been in use for decades. And now many countries or states are adopting Ivermectin despite the advice of world bodies simply because people's lives matter more.

MAAFIM has perused the published data, and additionally kept in close communication with many doctors around the world who have used Ivermectin in the management of COVID-19. The informal feedback has been overwhelmingly positive.Hence, there is sufficient evidence to add Ivermectin to the arsenal against COVID-19 disease.

If there is a drug that can be used to avoid the COVID-19 disease prophylactically or improve the outcome in treatment with minimal side-effects, and it is cheap to obtain and distribute, then it behoves the appropriate governments including the Malaysian government to expeditiously implement a drug that can thwart the negative outcome of the current pandemic.Ongoing clinical studies can be done for pharmaceutical approval but in the meantime Ivermectin can be released as under "Emergency Use Authorization", since there is sufficient data coming from other nations and it could be lifesaving or reduce the morbidity of COVID-19 disease for the Malaysian rakyat.

(EXCO, Malaysian Association for the Advancement of Functional and Interdisciplinary Medicine (MAAFIM), signed by 136 doctors from MAAFIM and other concerned doctors.)

Dr A.Rani a/p A.Arokiasamy
Dr Abdul Aziz bin Abdul Hamid Ahmad
Dr Abdul Majid Abdullah
Dr Abdul Rasid mohamed Ali
Dr Abdul Wahab Khalid Osman
Dr Abiram A/L T S Ramalingam
Dr Adlina Suleiman
Dr Ahmad Azuwar bin Mohd Adib
Dr Ahmad Hassan Bin Masduki
Dr Ahmad Khalis bin Mohamed Munawar
Dr Aina Othman
Dr Ameen Shaik Bin Sehu Mohamed
Dr Aminah Kassim
Dr Amir Shahmi Bin Md Ali
Dr Anura Gnanasothi Kandasamy
Dr Arifah
Dr Ashok Kumar Vikyomal
Dr Aziz Alsafi
Dr Azlina Ishak
Dr Badrulleasham Ismail
Dr Balachandran A/L sKrishnan
Dr Balasundram Palany
Dr Balbinder Singh
Dr Baljit Singh
Dr Balkis Hanoom
Dr Balwant Singh a/l Partap Singh
Dr Benjamin George
Dr Chia Hong Soong
Dr Chuah Teong Chye
Dr Dalina Abdul Majid
Dr Denesh Sinnathamby
Dr Durairajoo Govindarajoo
Dr Edwin Chang Yoke Poi
Dr Elina binti Mohtar Rasali
Dr Emilia Kasturi
Dr Erman Syah Abdul Hamid
Dr Farhat Afroze binti Ayaz
Dr Fatma Hidayati Bt Zakaria
Dr Fauzanah Binti Ishak
Dr Fouziah Hamzah
Dr Gurdial Singh
Dr Gurdial Singh
Dr Hanif Zuhdi Bin Mahmud Pathi
Dr Haridas a/l NarayananSreedharan
Dr Hisham Harun
Dr Husna Binti Hashim
Dr Jasveer Kaur Sidhu
Dr Jeyaseelan Nachiappan
Dr Joann Wen Law
Dr Kamesah binti Omar
Dr Kenny Yong YeanSirn
Dr Khor Ying kim
Dr Krishen kumar Devaser
Dr Kuan Tuck Wah
Dr L Ganesh Loganathan
Dr Lee Cheng Lok
Dr Lee Yoke Kwan
Dr Lily Abu Bakar
Dr Lim Ching Chiet
Dr Lim Wu Yee
Dr Loriot Kenson
Dr M A Salaam Jemain
Dr Mahathir bin Mohamed
Dr Maizurah Omar
Dr Majezan Yaacob
Dr Marisa Amilia binti Ismail
Dr Misnah Binti Ponamin
Dr Mohamad Haniki Nik Mohamed
Dr Mohamed Farook bin Raj Mohamed
Dr Mohd Anuar Osman
Dr Mohd Arbaai Shawal
Dr Mohd Jamil Hamid
Dr Mohd Saifulhaziq Noorman
Dr Mustafa Ali mohd
Dr Nadzri Mokhtar
Dr Narjit Singh
Dr Navdeep Kaur
Dr Nicholas Lim Jeng Cherng
Dr Nila Ratna Binti Suien
Dr Noordin Darus
Dr Nor Aisham B Mohd Nor
Dr Nor Amalina Ismail
Dr Norasiah binti Mohd Mansor
Dr Norhaslinda
Dr Norizah Amiruldin
Dr Nurhayati Mokhtar
Dr Nurulhuda Mohammed Zabidi
Dr Mohd Zahlulazham Bin Adam
Dr Molly Cheah
Dr Paramjit Kaur
Dr Paul vijayaratnam stephens
Dr Perminder Kaur Dhillon
Dr Peter Chan Teck Hock
Dr Prem Kumar Gopakumaran Nair
Dr Pushpa Devi
Dr Rosmawati Mohamed
Dr Rosnah
Dr Rozimah Binti Osman
Dr Radha Krishna
Dr Rajasvari
Dr Ramanathan a/l Annamslai Chettiar
Dr Redzuan Abdullah
Dr Revin
Dr Richard Chai
Dr Roland Victor Amerruddin
Dr Salim Ismail
Dr Sani Ashari
Dr Sanjeev
Dr Selva Kumar S
Dr Selva Kumaran
Dr Selvam Rengasamy
Dr Selvarani M.Shelladurai
Dr Sendhil Kumar
Dr Sevellaraja Supermaniam
Dr Shah Reza
Dr Shahrol Khairudzi Bin Abdul Rahim
Dr Shaiful Hazmeer bin Jakariah
Dr Sharan Jeet Kaur A/P Karam Singh
Dr Sharifa Shahreen Bt Syed Sultan Ahmed
Dr Sharifuddin M Zain
Dr Siti Aniza Basir
Dr Siti Zariah Jali
Dr Suresh Mahendra
Dr Suriaty Abdull Rauf
Dr Swesh Kaur
Dr Syed Alif Fikri bin Syed
Dr Tay Ju Lee
Dr Vatsala Devi Nagalingam
Dr Vijaendreh Subramaniam
Dr Wan Rosiah Ab Rashid
Dr Yee Teck Ji
Dr Zarihah Mohd Zain
Dr Zawawi Abdullah
Dr Zazali Othman
Dr Zulkafperi Bin Hanapi (Dato)

https://www.sinchew.com.my/content/content_2482977.html

are we killing covid-19 patients unknowingly, using a wrong treatment SOP all along?



https://www.facebook.com/DGHisham/posts/ive...26030730754118/



https://www.bitchute.com/video/IqAEWua56eRF/

DR COLE'S CREDENTIALS
EDUCATION:
Mayo Clinic School of Medicine
Board Certified Anatomic and Clinical Pathologist, Anatomic and Clinical Pathology Fellowship (1997 – 2002)

Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine
Doctor of Medicine (MD), Medical student
(1993 – 1997)

LICENCES & CERTIFICATIONS
Board Certified Anatomic and Clinical Pathologist
The American Board of Pathology (ABPath)

EXPERIENCE:
Dermatopathologist CEO/Lab Director
Cole Diagnostics - Full Time (Jul 2004 – Present)

Dermatopathology Consultant
St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center Full-time (Jun 2003 – Jun 2004)

Chief Fellow, MD
Ackerman Academy, NY (Jul 2002 – Jun 2003)

This post has been edited by cranx: Jun 25 2021, 10:06 AM

lol kena challenge liao DG

Kemaluan besar and u-turn inkambing

Dg sampah, what to expect. 1 of the bn macai forever a macai

How come here say ivermectin is horse punya medicine

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-upda...revent-covid-19

https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/f...itic-political/

This post has been edited by ZeaXG: May 21 2021, 11:10 AM

long list of FDA related scandals

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_..._Administration

As long as it works.

Like Viagra if not mistaken was meant for heart
Manatau side effect is Didi keras so now everyone consume it for the side effect

oh well, who knows?

never heard of civdac

what are patriot, ppim and gni doing in covid research?

current treatment method

this is so sad

this medication is intended for ANIMALS.

are they stupid or what?!

3.43 mil people have died globally. everyone of them is either a parent, sibling, child or friend to someone

and u won't know if the next one is you

So many researchers vs dg himself..of course U-turn.

stay safe

Need more to die to free up ICU beds.

Don't forget to check Ur liver ya

Nanti badan jadi kuning baru check.
Liver failure

Mainstream news will never endorse the use of Imermectin against covid19. This goes against the plan to vaccinate the entire planet.

Ivermectin for Covid-19: a cheap drug with a remarkable effect

Numerous clinical trials with ivermectin in Covid-19 have shown consistent, large improvements in clinical outcomes. It must be authorised for use in the UK, argues Dr Christine Clark.

Ivermectin has been widely used to treat a variety of human parasites since its introduction in 1981. The drug also has antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. It is estimated that some 4 billion doses have been taken over the past 40 years and it has a good safety record with minimal toxic effects.

Ivermectin is included in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines as a 3mg tablet.

A recent independent meta-analysis of 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational controlled trials shows that ivermectin is remarkably effective both for prophylaxis and treatment of Covid-19.1

When used prophylactically – for example, taken by healthcare workers or relatives of confirmed cases – it was shown that ivermectin reduces the risk of transmission by 88 per cent compared to control.

When used to treat Covid-19 infection, ivermectin reduces the risk of death by 83 per cent compared to ‘no ivermectin’. It also reduces the risk of deterioration by about 50 per cent. Almost 4,000 patients were included in the trials used in the meta-analysis. The British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) Group has now recommended the immediate roll-out of ivermectin for prevention and treatment of Covid-19.

More than 20 countries, including Greece, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic in the EU, have now included ivermectin in their Covid-19 management strategies. Several South American countries have seen Covid-19 infections fall sharply following the introduction of mass treatment with ivermectin.

In the US a group of intensivists – the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance – has called for the rapid introduction of ivermectin to stem the tide of infections.2

In Belgium, a plan has been put forward to eradicate Covid-19 in six weeks by using ivermectin.3 Similar results could be expected in other countries if the same protocol was followed.

Dose regimens vary but prophylactic treatment can be given with two doses of 0.2mg/kg, 48 hours apart, once a month. For early out-patient treatment, a daily dose of 0.2mg/kg for a maximum of five days is recommended.2
Why is ivermectin not being used more widely?

Some regulators have said that more trials are needed to determine the drug’s effectiveness. Dr Tess Lawrie, systematic reviewer and director of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy, and other reviewers, argue that all the trials included in meta-analyses show positive results and the only question is exactly how large the positive effect is.

This is hardly a reason to block the use of a life-saving drug. They also point out that several other drugs, such as remdesivir, have been authorised on the basis of far less evidence. In some countries ivermectin can be purchased OTC in pharmacies.

In others ‘Covid treatment kits’ have been issued with instructions to start treatment after contact with an infected person or when symptoms develop. The kits typically contain ivermectin tablets, vitamin C, vitamin D, zinc and sometimes azithromycin or doxycycline.

In the UK, the best way forward would be for the MHRA to authorise use of ivermectin for prophylaxis and treatment of Covid-19 on the basis of the published evidence to date. Next, the drug could be made available through community pharmacies either using a PGD or by making ivermectin a P medicine.

Ivermectin would then help to save lives and reduce suffering until the majority of the population can be vaccinated. Failure to use a cheap, safe drug that reduces the severity and duration of infection as well as the risks of death and transmission seems incomprehensible.

https://www.pharmacymagazine.co.uk/ivermect...markable-effect