A Continuation of a Timeline of Ivermectin-Related Events in the COVID-19 Pandemic [June 30, 2021]
Turkia,
A Continuation of a Timeline of Ivermectin-Related Events in the COVID-19 Pandemic [June 30, 2021],
, M., ResearchGate, doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16973.36326 (Review) (Preprint)
An extension of the ivermectin timeline covering April - June 2021, including WHO's role and funding, Gavi, COVAX, Trusted News Initiative, International Fact-Checking Network, the role of private philantrophy, Frontiers, comparison to the H1N1 pandemic, new treatment protocols, and causal modeling.
Turkia et al., 30 Jun 2021, preprint, 1 author.
Abstract: A continuation of a timeline of ivermectin-related events in the
COVID-19 pandemic
Mika Turkia
M.Sc., mika.turkia@alumni.helsinki.fi, June 30, 2021
Abstract
This review presents a continuation of a previous timeline that described ivermectin-related events in
the COVID-19 pandemic from April 2020 to the end of March 2021. The new timeline covers a period
from the beginning of April 2021 to the end of June 2021.
In April 2021, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a new, large clinical trial including
ivermectin, with an estimated study completion date in March 2023. A large national trial was also
announced in the Philippines, a 1,160-patient trial in the US, and another trial in Ireland.
Trial results published in the period resembled those of previous trials, not producing clinically meaningful
changes to the results of existing meta-analyses. Mainstream press of the high-income countries mostly
repeated the same arguments as in the previous period, including the warnings against ivermectin by the
European Medicine Agency (EMA) and the World Health Organization (WHO). The sparse and onesided coverage of ivermectin in the press appeared to result from a program called Trusted News Initiative
(TNI). The censorship practices of the social media companies, with policies disallowing expression of
views differing from the guidelines of the WHO, continued unchanged, apparently organized under a
program called International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN).
In contrast to the previous period – during which groups such as the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care
Alliance (FLCCC) and the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) group attempted
to influence the decisions of government agencies – in this period these groups began to bypass the
agencies and turn directly to clinicians and the public. FLCCC also published two new protocols, IMASS for mass immunization, and I-RECOVER for long haul COVID-19 syndrome (LHCS), and a
review article which by the end of the period had reached a position in the top 120 of 18 million articles
tracked by Altmetric. The BIRD group organized two online conferences on ivermectin and published a
meta-analysis which had reached a position in the top 60, respectively.
One of the authors of the in vitro study that initiated the international interest in ivermectin explained
that due to, for example, lack of adaptive immune responses in the cell model, their study was unsuitable
for making conclusions about in vivo dosing in humans. A review described 20 mechanisms of action of
ivermectin in COVID-19.
The parties against and in favor of ivermectin remained in deeply conflicting positions, presenting opposite conclusions on the existing research. The WHO, along with regulatory agencies and national
governments of high-income countries, appeared to aim at preserving the value of existing investments
in vaccine and investigational therapeutics development, as well as questioning the efficacy and safety of
repurposed medicines.
Criticism towards excessive influence of Bill Gates in the WHO emerged during the period, as the
largest funder of the WHO appeared to be a group of vaccine promotion and intellectual property
rights enforcement oriented organizations founded by Gates. There was a noticeable centralization of
power, with the pandemic response largely directed by a few public-private partnerships working on
commercializable technologies.
Keywords: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, WHO,..
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. Vaccines and
treatments are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should
be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment, vaccine, or intervention
is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not
provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified
physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and
benefits based on your medical history and situation.
FLCCC and
WCH
provide treatment protocols.
Submit