Imgflip Logo Icon

Money money money

Money money money | IVERMECTIN HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS BENEFICIAL TO TREATING AND PREVENTING COVID 19 SINCE APRIL 2020; THE OWNERS, MERCK & CO DECLINED TO SUBMIT FOR CLINICAL TRIALS; WHY? BECAUSE MERCK WAS ALREADY DEVELOPING A DRUG TO TREAT COVID 19; A DEAL WAS MADE WITH THE GOVERNMENT TO BUY 1.7 MILLION COURSES ONCE  EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION IS RECEIVED; THERE'S NO MONEY TO BE MADE IN AN ALREADY EXISTING CHEAP DRUG | image tagged in big pharma,washington dc swamp,covid-19,ivermectin,biden | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
889 views 31 upvotes Made by JAWILLI 3 years ago in politics
65 Comments
[deleted]
4 ups, 3y
Wait, are you saying that gov and big pharma aren’t really looking to bring affordable healthcare? Mind blowing!
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Here's another drug that has just been approved for treatment of COVID-19. Monoclonal antibody therapy. It is what Trump took last year to kick the virus so fast. And for that reason alone the left is going to avoid it like the plague, even if it literally kills them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/covid-monoclonal-abbott/2021/08/19/a39a0b5e-0029-11ec-a664-4f6de3e17ff0_story.html

https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/therapeutics-distribution

Eventually even Joe Biden is going to have to get behind this drug and stop hiding from it because Trump is associated with it.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Monoclonal antibodies were also among the various treatments Joe Rogan threw at covid when he got it.

As far as Biden eventually getting behind it........ President Biden put $150 million into increasing access to monoclonal antibody treatment in America 6 months ago...... seems to me like he's already on board(?)
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-highly-effective-covid-treatment-joe-biden-wont-tell-you-about?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro&fbclid=IwAR27Y-jQ_4M2Jij_p39KJMSHIBuoiGNzh6jtatu2ti1xqq5Trh2VkXNSDvM

Of course that is an opinion article and I don't follow every word Biden says so I cannot speak to it one way or another.

I just know that if Trump said getting a saline solution inject was 100% effective in curing everyone of COVID-19 and everyone that had a saline injection got better in about 10 seconds, the left would say it is a joke just because Trump mentioned it.

If Trump said the sky is blue, Stephan Colbert would blather on and on in his opening monologue for the next month making fun of Trump. He would report that the sky is actually green. And Jimmy Kimmel, Conan O'Brian and Seth Meyers would also do the same thing. Jimmy Fallon might mention it in passing but he mostly stays away from politics.

Democrats tune in to late night talk shows to be told how to think about the current events.
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Ok you have brought up trump (again).... I'm allowed to respond right? Lol

When trump talked about monoclonal antibodies he said it "cured" him... Or he said "I'd call it a cure". Which sounds good but as far as I know.... it's not a cure. It's a treatment. And it does seem to be effective so President Biden put a bunch of money behind it. That's part of why he was elected... To get the vaccines and treatments and whatnot out there and stop with the BS.

As far as late night talk shows... Eh. I quit watching those more or less when Colbert and Stewart left Comedy Central. Now I don't know how to think about current events..
:(
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Like you need my permission to respond. 😁

I don't know everything Biden has done but I hadn't heard that he did anything like that until you said the. If he did then that make 1 good thing to 23,554,433,457,655.03 bad things.

Trump said a lot of things that were not accurate. It had the effect of curing him and so he got excited about it and misspoke. There again, if what you are saying is true. I never heard Trump talk about Monoclonal antibodies, at least I don't remember. I do remember that he got COVID but I don't remember him saying what drug did it. That is my fault.

Colbert and Stewart were the best thing to happen to Comedy Central. Stewart was wrong on a lot of things but he was a thinker and not just scmoo repeating what he was told to say. There was a lot of that also. I remembered way back when John Kerry was running for president, Stewart never joked about him. I thought, what a was of comedy gold. Kerry was born to be made fun of and Stewart wasted his opportunity. Probably because the network told him not to.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
made w/ Imgflip meme maker
^ from 5 months ago.

Lol wow that seems like a lot of bad Biden things.... allegedly. Source: imgflip?
;P

As far as trump's "cure" I don't think he specifically mentioned monoclonal antibodies....he mentioned Regeneron which made the monoclonal antibody product he took.

Colbert and Stewart would be among my top 5 best things to happen to comedy central but idk... Chappelle's show was only on for a couple seasons and that sh*t was legendary.. South Park would also definitely be in there.

From what I remember, John Kerry seemed kinda... Eh. Boring. Found an old clip of Stewart regarding Kerry and although he seems to have roasted Whoopi Goldberg pretty hard than anyone, he does seem to be at least poking fun at Kerry.

https://www.cc.com/video/qzekl7/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-indecision-2004-kerry-and-edwards
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Well I can think of between 15,000 and 35,000 stranded Americans left and 83 Billion dollars worth of military hardware all left to some of worst, most violent terrorists in the world. This alone makes Biden the worst president we've ever had. That's actually worse than FDR locking up hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese, Italian and German Americans during WWII. Especially when you find out that Biden actually blocked rescue efforts of private parties.

Plus we're having the worst inflation since Carter. And Biden, according to John Kerry, is 100% committed to the Great Reset.

Kerry was/is boring but so was Bob Dole and the left was able to find a whole lot to make fun of with Dole.

I first watched The Daily Show when Craig Kilburn was the host. It was funny then and funny in the early days of Jon Stewart because no one was watching it. They made fun of everything, including the left. Then someone noticed the audience size was getting large. That's when the lock down happened. No more jokes about Democrats. Period. They all had to be about Republicans and the occasional Libertarian.

It became unwatchable because I saw opportunity after opportunity get ignored all because they were forbidden.

Now with Noah Trevor it's now unwatchable and unfunny. The show is nothing but leftist propaganda.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
35,000? I've heard zero figures that high as far as Americans still there. Where'd you get that?

Lol No... $83 Billion worth of military hardware was not left in Afghanistan.

As far as inflation.. prices go up, prices go down. Lumber prices for example have came way back down from where there were. The increase as well as the decrease had nothing to do with President Joe Biden.

I literally just sent you a link of him making fun of John Kerry and you're claiming they didn't make fun of dems....
Eh Trevor Noah has his moments but Stewart was just better imo.
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
At a minimum there were 15,000 American citizens abandoned by Biden. The 35,000 I heard on Blaze TV as a possible estimate, not a hard fact. I do know that every employee of the United States who worked in the US Embassy was abandoned.

And absolutely yes, about the military hardware. I may be a little off on the number because I think it was actually $85 billion not $83 billion. I'll have to look it up. Better yet YOU look it up. You're the one who is denying it. If you find the correct number then you will have to deal with the facts all by yourself.

Yes, prices go up and go down. Generally speaking prices go up when the Democrats are in control and prices sometimes go down with Republicans are in office.

But this time is different. This time it is part of a plan. Do some research on the Great Reset and you'll understand why Biden chose as his campaign slogan, "Build Back Better".

And I literally saw that link but I haven't watched it yet. But one or two shows where they said one thing funny about Kerry is nothing compared to the non-stop drum beat against any Republican. They don't even have to be a conservative Republican, like the Bush's. They just have to be Republican. I tried to watch Trevor Noah and he was just too much of a disappointment. Stewart knows how to be funny on his own, he's a naturally funny guy. Noah needs writers.

Part of it is bias but the bigger picture is that it is all part of the game the two parties play to stay in power. It is the "if you don't vote for X then you will be stuck with Y" game. The problem is X equals Y. Both candidates will end up doing pretty much the same thing and it will always be to the advantage of the left. They may throw a bone or two to their constituents to keep up appearances but for the most part the right never reverses anything the left does and the left always reverses what the right does so that the march towards socialism, down the road to serfdom, just keeps on going.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Yeah because Trumps warp speed and pushing treatments was BS.
0 ups, 3y
If by pushing treatments, you mean calling them cures, then yes.. that would be BS.

As far as warp speed..... Like many other (all?) developed countries, the donald threw govt $ at vaccine development.. Then when we got one, he ended up taking it while hiding in a closet somewhere. Good job Donald. Way to be a leader.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Treat what? It’s a hoax, right?
Oh wait. It’s a cold. No- It’s the flu.
You have an immune system.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Just load up on ivermectin. Wait. Why bother?

You’ll be fine.
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
So no worthwhile dialog from you then? OK. Why don't you Google and read: global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in covid-19
2 ups, 3y,
3 replies
Anecdotally speaking I know a guy who had Covid and was in the hospital for three weeks and at one point he was given ivermectin and two other drugs which he didn’t tell me. He likes to think that the ivermectin was actually effective when that’s like saying you have a headache in the morning when you wake up and drink one glass of water you take one Advil and you eat some bacon. And then you say the bacon is what cured you.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
1 up, 3y
:P
1 up, 3y
1 up, 3y
Interesting
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
So what do you think of the vaccine that the government will soon be demanding that all Americans take. The vaccine, apparently, isn't as effective as it was promoted.

So when people say they have good look with hydroxychloroquine, ivermection or monoclonal antibody treatments are up around 70% to 75% effective, then to ridicule them, like a good little leftist, is not just misguided by dangerous.

I know if I get COVID I will be trying any or all of the above or anything else to get rid of the infection. I'm not going to let politics influence my decision. And I pity those who let their hatred of Trump stop them from taking a treatment that could save their life just as much as I pity those who lay dying on their death beds from COVID and still refuse to believe that the virus is real.

I've been vaccinated but there is still no guarantee that I won't get the virus. Especially seeing that the Delta variant doesn't seem to care if you've been vaccinated or not. Mainly because the vaccine was written for the original strain and not some mutated variant.
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
People that think they have closed good luck“ with ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine have no proof to validate that feeling of good luck. There are no medical or clinical or scientific studies that would indicate that these things are very helpful at all. But what is helpful because the vaccine. It’s proven to be very effective in protecting people from getting sick and dying and shedding a lot of virus and being more contagious and without it. So the best course of action is to not get the disease at all by wearing masks distancingAnd being vaccinated. After the fact if you do get infected Regeneron antibody therapy has been shown to help. However that usually reserved for patients that are extremely high risk..
0 ups, 3y
Except of course all the studies and the fact that ivermectin is effective against all viruses because it disabled the viruses ability to replicate.
0 ups, 3y
Sorry was using speech to text while driving. Hope you can decipher the message.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
There’s better data on vaccine efficacy. Why risk getting it. Ivermectin is for parasites like ringworm and lice. Not viruses. Any actual effectiveness will take a long time to research. Which even on the surface is looking pretty ineffective. However given in small doses I’m sure ivermectin isn’t harmful necessarily. The problem is while it’s not harmful in small doses it can be in large doses which many people are doing because they don’t know what the hell they’re doing. So on one hand you have ivermectin being questionably effective at all and on the other hand it may be harmful. The risk reward doesn’t add up when we have vaccines that work just fine.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
There are a few large trials going on with ivermectin. There are have been smaller trials where it shows it has reduced hospitalizations and deaths. Yes, these trials take a long time. Merck could have supported a trial that was large and controlled and would have had notable and recognized results whether good or bad but they decided to not and go with a brand new pill that does the same as ivermectin supposedly does. MK-4482 I believe. So they are spending the time on a new trial anyway. But hey, there is more money and government deals to be had. Gotta love Big Pharma.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
MK-4482 is an antiviral. It’s literally nothing like Ivermectin. I’m very familiar with the differences of antiparasitics and antivirals.

This is a good paper on MK-4482:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00835-2
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
New medicine advancement is always great but scientists find new ways to use existing medicine. Since the 1970s ivermectin has been used in many different fashions. If taken properly, we already know it won't hurt you and know the results of decades of use. So if the current trials show effective then there should be no reason for anyone to not accept it.

As for MK-4482, I hope all is good with the results. Sure will keep the money train rolling though
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Also- I am ALL for looking into what works. If it's ivermectin, great! But we know what works RIGHT NOW: the vaccines. Why would someone risk getting COVID at all to even need to try Ivermectin?
1 up, 3y
Except the vaccine doesn't work. You need to look at the statistics out of Israel. More deaths from the vaccine than the unvacinated.
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
Ivermectin is safe and approved for use as an anti-parasitic. And it works great as such.
I have not seen ANY widespread clinical data relating to Ivermectin being effective as a covid treatment. One "study" I saw was pulled off the web by the group that touted it as a success when it was torn apart (easily) by actual scientists. I guess it was so terribly "performed" even the group posting it knew it. The group is FLCCC Alliance, a group of fringe "doctors" and others. There are plenty of doctors/scientists out there that are wrong. If you go to 99 doctors that all say you have cancer then find 1 that says "Nope. CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!" This FLCCC is a bunch of those 1 doctors gathered together.
1 up, 3y
I'm with ya. The global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in covid-19 publication outlines some positives. Hopefully it will get somewhere
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
You do know that ivermectin bonds to the parts of the viruses RNA that tells the cell to duplicate it right? This means the virus can't replicate.
0 ups, 3y
the parts of Flaviviruses, yes (not a coronavirus). Read the LAST part of the below excerpt:

"VM has also shown promise in the treatment of certain viral pathogens. Consistent with the inhibition of RNA helicase DDX23 referred to above, IVM inhibits viral replication of several flaviviruses by blocking a viral helicase [3]. Susceptible flaviviruses include those causing yellow fever, dengue, West Nile virus and tick borne encephalitis, and a patent application has been submitted for off-label antiflavivirus therapy in humans (patent application EP2010/065880). Encouragingly, serial passage of yellow fever virus with increasing concentrations of IVM did not appear to select for viral resistance, even after more than 30 passages over 6 months, leading the authors to conclude that adaptive mutations in the helicase domain may not be viable. In that study, no antiviral effect was detected in other genera of viruses" |

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471492217300624#bib0015

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavivirus
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
There's been no such identification. It's an anti-parasitic. It's incredibly toxic when you take it more than twice but the idea is that it's even more toxic to creepy-crawlies that live inside you and make you sick.

A virus is not a creepy crawly and it lives inside your cell. Ivermectin doesn't do anything to a virus unless it first poisons the whole cell, which basically means doing more harm to you than to the virus.

Stop trying to cure COVID by guesswork! Medicine does not operate by guesswork!
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Oh so where did you learn about Ivermectin?
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
3 replies
Here, this will get you started off. Should take you an afternoon or two depending on how experienced you are at reading journal publications. Then you can go from there.
3 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Expected. Would you like to read two publications I read? One from 2011 detailing the history of it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/
quoted as a "wonder drug" and "Indeed, it is such a safe drug, with minimal side effects, that it can be administered by non-medical staff and even illiterate individuals in remote rural communities, provided that they have had some very basic, appropriate training"

Here is another from I think March of this year. It is a pdf so here is what to search in google: global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in covid-19
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Well, obviously I'm not going to read a 2011 paper as a way of overriding 2021 papers that found no antiviral effect on COVID.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
It's HISTORY. Most you skip through but there was interesting facts.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Well, with all due respect, you don't get cured by something interesting in history. You get cured by a physical medicine inside your physical body and if THAT doesn't do anything, the virus doesn't go "oh, but ten years ago they had a really neat thing going where it might have been interesting so I'd better scram".

The 2021 papers were our current attempt to test what actually happens. And that showed that nothing happens. A speculation from ten years ago is only relevant to ten years ago.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
You tried to get me to read a whole page of Googled info. You read the history to get an unbiased view. But fine. Don't read the history of how well used the drug is.

You must not have read any of the 52 page 2021 publication or else you wouldn't have said "nothing happens"
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
It's well used AGAINST PARASITES.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Yes. Yes it is. Being a cheap drug and easy to prescribe and minister, it has done wonders in poor and impoverished countries.

But go on, read the 2021 publication
0 ups, 3y
No ones debating the effectiveness of ivermectin as designed (anti parasitic.) the issue is The effectiveness of it to use as an antiviral or in the treatment of Covid specifically. And looking into that possibility is wonderful and should be researched however that takes a lot of time to get accurate data. What we do have accurate data on right now is the vaccines that definitely help. So in reality why not just go with what is known to work right now and wait down the road to treat people with something that may or may not work now….we have no idea.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y
...I... I did. I sent you a bunch, remember?
3 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Completely unbiased, pre-Covid research demonstrates ivermectin has antiviral properties.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Why are you reading pre-Covid material to assess its treatment potential of COVID?
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Anything pre-Covid is 100% unbiased. While the study may not involve Covid directly, looking at the bio chemistry involved will show whether it has a relation to Covid.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Anything pre-COVID is 100% NOT ABOUT COVID!!! Like, why is this not obvious?
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Ivermectin has been shown to have antiviral properties. If the antiviral mechanism involves bio chemistry that is the same between Covid and the virus it was studied against, that would indicate it has potential against Covid.
0 ups, 3y
It’s not though. Totally different types of viruses. Flavivirus vs coronavirus.
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Please link to the “pre covid, unbiased” publications that show antiviral effects. I’m interested to see who do it, how and if they have been properly peer reviewed and reproduced. In vitro, bleach has antiviral effects. I wouldn’t suggest swallowing it to fight off covid.
0 ups, 3y
2012
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22535622/

Also this review, at the end of the PDF are 45 references, most of which pre-date covid
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z.pdf
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
https://c19ivermectin.com/

Before you get those bulging veins on your forehead throbbing like a pinata in the microwave again, I'm not exactly signing up to volunteer as a test subject for this week's apothecary roullette, and this source ain't exactly JAMA, buuuuuuuuuuuuut it my be worth a looksee, even if just to shoot holes in it *pew*🔫 *pew*🔫
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
I like how the person who wrote this made sure to include the p-values but, not knowing what a p-value is, had no idea which studies to take out of the pool as insignificant.

The graphic is trying to run a meta-analysis on all these studies but, again, doesn't know what a meta-analysis is and it shows.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Such a shame for them blokes that you've chosen to bless us with your patented misinformation instead of them, eh?

People don't "write" graphs, btw.

Oh, and your non-rebuttal was so (deliberately?) lame that you've managed to lend the air of validity to its findings since laziness is not an excuse. Congrats.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
It's an air of validity that they did it completely wrong?
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Exactly.
You made no attempt to dispute it other than flash some cutesy statistician terms that would be sure to impress the reading audience because it really is that special. But you keep stuffing that turkey with styrofoam, because that is what is expected of you.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
...I mean, is that your way of asking me to take you through statistical theory? No. Get your own education. You're not my responsibility.
0 ups, 3y
btw, you brought it up, it's on you to get off your anchored butt and make your case, not for others to do your homework for you. Laziness makes for a poor cover for deceitfulness.
1 up, 3y
So awesome you took what I said and reversed it on me! Kudos, you're like a Simon Cowell meets Monty Python if Prince Charles was trying to imitate the whole lot simultaneously whilst passing out from downing one too many pints!
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Ahh, so this the medication you claimed I was doubling down on and whatever other strawmaning you flopped your arms around in like a circus monkey trying to make a good case for getting tossed a banana?
Good to know!

At least you're not saying viruses are not parasitic anymore, so you've learned something.

Q: What about Ivermectin's use for treating Rosacea? Is that a "creepy crawly" also and what about that list of dead post two day treatment patients you've surely come across while perusing your scintilating pile of medical journals?
0 ups, 3y
Ivermectin topical treatment for rosacea is from anti inflammatory effects of ivermectin. Depending on how this effect is triggered or delivered, this anti inflammatory effect may or may not be helpful internally. My guess is probably not. You wouldn’t swallow anti itch cream to stop cytokine storm. You want specific antibodies and or antagonists to inflammatory cytokines like IL-6.
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 2
  • big pharma
  • Big pharma
  • Washington DC swamp
  • IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
    IVERMECTIN HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS BENEFICIAL TO TREATING AND PREVENTING COVID 19 SINCE APRIL 2020; THE OWNERS, MERCK & CO DECLINED TO SUBMIT FOR CLINICAL TRIALS; WHY? BECAUSE MERCK WAS ALREADY DEVELOPING A DRUG TO TREAT COVID 19; A DEAL WAS MADE WITH THE GOVERNMENT TO BUY 1.7 MILLION COURSES ONCE EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION IS RECEIVED; THERE'S NO MONEY TO BE MADE IN AN ALREADY EXISTING CHEAP DRUG