ER Editor: Ivermectin has been shown to be something of a wonder drug against Covid. Dr. Pierre Kory has been leading the charge on this.
So much so that WHO scientists are conducting serious review of it (see WHO-Sponsored Preliminary Review Indicates IVERMECTIN Effectiveness [VIDEO]).
SO MUCH SO THAT INDIA IS GIVING IVERMECTIN-BASED HOME TREATMENT KITS TO ITS CITIZENS at a mere cost of two bucks each.
Merck has decided to abandon development of its own vaccine (two of them, in fact) for a drug-based approach that is NOT Ivermectin. That is another, more expensive drug (two of them, in fact) from which greater revenues can be derived. See Merck First US Pharma Giant To Abandon COVID Vaccine Efforts. Of note:
The company stated that instead it will focus on research into therapeutic drugs labeled as MK-7110 and MK-4482.
The drugs aim to protect patients from the damage of an overactive immune response to the virus.
“Interim results from a Phase 3 study showed a greater than 50 percent reduction in the risk of death or respiratory failure in patients hospitalized with moderate to severe COVID-19,” the company’s statement noted of the MK-7110 drug.
Merck is to receive around $356 million from the US government to fast-track production of the potential treatments under Operation Warp Speed.
Chief Marketing Officer Michael Nally recently told Bloomberg that Merck is aiming to produce some 20 million courses of the MK-4482 drug, an oral antiviral which patients will take twice a day for five days.
So what is the logical step for Merck to take with respect to its own wonder drug Ivermectin? Why, to trash it, of course, using particular mouthpieces. Here is Merck’s statement on its own cheap and highly effective product, linked to in a tweet below:
Black is white …
Merck Statement Against Ivermectin Exposing ‘Big Pharma’ Lobbyists
SWISS POLICY RESEARCH
All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A positive aspect of the recent anti-ivermectin statement by Merck is that dozens of ‘big pharma’ lobbyists who immediately shared the statement on Twitter are now getting exposed, among them many journalists, a US NIH representative, some industry-linked professors, and one of the most influential German government ‘covid science communicators’.
Keep in mind that Merck provided no evidence, whatsoever, for any of its claims, did not refute any of the existing evidence, studies and meta-studies, and falsely claimed ‘unproven safety’. The entire statement is a desperate appeal to (supposed) authority, and anyone pushing it is simply exposing themselves as a lobbyist not interested in actual evidence-based medicine.
What Merck could have done, but didn’t do, since April 2020, is running and publishing its own ivermectin trial. What Merck also could have done, but didn’t do, is disclosing in its statement that it recently signed a $356 million deal to supply the US with a much more expensive, newly developed experimental anti-covid drug.
But doing this may not have been in Merck’s interest, of course.
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.