[Editor’s note: The numbering in this article is for reference points when speaking with or communicating with government officials.]
1. The Subject URL provides access to a 20201106 article from the Australian newspaper named THE AGE.
2. This is one of the very few articles out of Australian mainstream media that I’ve seen & that not only uses the “heinous” word IVERMECTIN, but it actually discusses this medication without totally condemning it outright. Admittedly, the text is spattered with warnings such as:
2.1. Victoria’s health minister was warning people not to take the drug.
2.2. “The evidence we have seen so far certainly does not support its use in current practice,” says Professor Andrew McLachlan, the University of Sydney’s dean of pharmacy.
2.3. To get to the levels in Dr Wagstaff’s initial study, a person would need to take a dose 10 to 30 times higher than ever studied in humans, Professor Sullivan says.
2.4. Australia’s national COVID-19 clinical evidence taskforce says the drug should not be used outside clinical trials, as the benefits are unknown.
3. However, for all these warnings that paint this incredibly benign & efficacious pill as if it ranks with the World’s worst poisons, the article does at least provide some remarks that are slightly positive about IVERMECTIN, such as:
3.1. “Dr Wagstaff supports Australian authorities waiting for robust evidence. She is wary of patients self-medicating. But she defends the rights of doctors to prescribe the drug off-label for COVID-19.
3.2. “Dr Wagstaff (says) ‘We don’t have the definitive answers yet as to whether it works or not. But I haven’t seen any good evidence that it does not work.’ ”
4. Dr Wagstaff may well say “…. I haven’t seen any good evidence that it does not work”, but I assume this has been said without much awareness of what goes on outside of her sacred Clinical Test environment. There, she & her cohorts tinker with their “double-blind tests” & “placebos”, full of confidence that what they are doing has been established & condoned by the Old Testament according to the almighty Universities of the World. In this way, Dr Wagstaff & associates are shielded from & are oblivious to the Covid-19-infected sinners who are dying in their thousands because of no IVERMECTIN!
WHAT A TRAVESTY!
5. Dr Wagstaff also says that “…. she defends the rights of doctors to prescribe the drug off-label for COVID-19….”, but it appears that she has done nothing to make the AuGov aware of this attitude as their legislation continues to restrict it in a draconian fashion. In some ways, you can’t blame the AuGov for this extremely negative response about IVERMECTIN because it was Dr Wagstaff’s initial study that stated, “…. a person would need to take a dose 10 to 30 times higher than ever studied in humans …. (for it to be successful).”
6. This is one of the most extremely negative reports that’s ever been published about IVERMECTIN. To make matters worse, this negativity is backed by the names of two auspicious authorities: Monash University & The Doherty Institute. Detractors of IVERMECTIN love quoting this report because of its extreme condemnation & its high-level credentials. Yet it is so erroneous that it’s embarrassing & aggravating to anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of IVERMECTIN.
7. For all that, Dr Wagstaff has never offered a retraction or an amendment to this extremely damaging report. As a result, I take her pleasantries about IVERMECTIN that are quoted above as being without any real conviction.
8. Well before this article in The Age was printed, I realised the damage that Dr Wagstaff’s misleading findings were doing to the valuable properties of IVERMECTIN. As a result, I sent an email on 06/10/2020 to Dr Wagstaff, challenging her to explain why the following two contrasting statements exist in her report or about the report:
8.1. Dr Wagstaff reported “…. ivermectin could be a useful antiviral to limit SARS-CoV-2 ….”
8.2. Associate Professor Tong has concerns that “The initial studies seem to suggest you need a very high level of ivermectin to be able to reduce replication of the virus, and those levels in those initial studies are very difficult or impossible to achieve in a person….”
9. My email is presented below. Just over a month has passed since it was sent, but I have received no answer to my query. Embarrassment may be one explanation to this no response, but I suspect it is more likely to be associated with money!
10. Professor David Jans, Dr Wagstaff’s co-author, has hit the nail on the head when he says in The Age article:
10.2. “He believes his ivermectin work is attracting criticism because “Big Pharma hates the idea of a cheap drug that might work”.
11. The Age also states:
11.1. Monash University has received federal government and philanthropic funding to do further work on the drug.
12. Like Big Pharma, the Australian federal government doesn’t want their Au$billions of investment in their Long-Way-Off vaccine to be threatened by that Cheap-But-Very-Safe-&-Efficacious IVERMECTIN. I don’t know how much funding the Australian federal government provides to Monash University, but I bet it’s a mere token compared to the bonanza given to the vaccine developers. Even though it’s a splash in the ocean, I imagine that Monash University don’t want to lose it, so I guess that they’re dutifully following instructions not to report any findings in favour of IVERMECTIN!
13. While on the subject of COVID-19 cures, there are many sceptics who understandably have doubts about the “magical properties” of numerous medications that are touted on the web. The internet is the modern version of the Snake-Oil Salesmen in this regard! I was sceptical too until I made a cold phone call to a doctor (Dr Mickey) in her clinic in USA. I happened to see her name mentioned in a nondescript article online. It mentioned that she was using IVERMECTIN in off-label applications to cure COVID19.
14. The phone number that I called was genuinely her clinic. It was answered by her nurse / secretary. She was able to grab Dr Mickey between patients. I arranged a more convenient time to call, & managed to have a couple of long conversations with the good doctor & with her nurse. They happily recounted their 100% success rate using IVERMECTIN, & that it was totally genuine. Dr Mickey has no agenda to push, & according to her nurse, she’s a very committed individual who does enormous amounts of study with the intention of helping her patients. She has a radical streak, & doesn’t care that her off-label use of IVERMECTIN is receiving criticism from her more conservative contemporaries, because “…. damn their claims that it should be properly tested first, when it’s already been proven to be safe by many years of use as an antiparasitic, & it just happens to work extremely well with COVID-19!” The alternative is to let the patients die without it, while Clinical Trials fiddle around trying to prove it’s safe!
15. Check out more about Dr Mickey in the following URL: https://gumshoenews.com/2020/09/01….(etc). It’s one of the URLs that I’ve listed below. Most of those URLs provide access to documents that I have written & which relate to IVERMECTIN.
- A video lecture dated 28 October 2020, is by Dr. Paul Marik, a professor of medicine and Chief, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School. The link to this video is:
17. This is the best promotion of IVERMECTIN that I have seen to date. It contains a considerable amount of technical terms associated with physiology etc, which I found interesting & slightly baffling, but which other viewers might find annoying. If so, at least watch the last 5 minutes to hear the main message of the amazing attributes of IVERMECTIN!
18. The final conclusion is that IVERMECTIN is the ONLY medication out of seven others (Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir, Interferon etc), that functions positively & efficaciously to cure any patient in any of the 3 phases (Incubation, Symptomatic & Pulmonary) of COVID-19’s attack on the human body. (See attached chart “IvmSuccess20201101.jpg” ) It is indeed a panacea cure for COVID-19.
19. Over the last few months, in an attempt to have IVERMECTIN made more readily available to the Australian population, & most especially to doctors allowing them to prescribe IVERMECTIN to patients infected with COVID-19, I have sent NUMEROUS emails & Tweets to various Australian Government MPs & other authorities. Unfortunately, they are so arrogant, dogmatic & lacking in common courtesy that they have not responded once, not even a “Thanks for your submission, but ……” For copies of my emails, see the URLs below. For my Tweets, see my Twitter Account (@RhodusRod).
20. This denial of access to IVERMECTIN to Australian patients who are infected with COVID-19, & who also correctly believe that it will cure them of their infection, is a total travesty of proper Therapeutic Goods Administration, not to mention a denial of human rights for an infected individual to take all reasonable steps that are necessary & available to survive & recover from COVID-19 infection.
21. As my numerous emails & Tweets don’t seem to be having any effect, my next step is to start a petition to the Australian Federal Government, & possibly the State Governments as well.
22. You may feel less threatened by the Coronavirus because of recent announcements that a vaccination MAY be available as early as Xmas 2020. Regardless of the credibility of this statement & the efficacy of the vaccine, it will be a considerable time before every Australian individual will be vaccinated. In addition, there’s no guarantee that it will be effective on every Australian. As a result, there will be Australians who will become infected with COVID-19 & who will need IVERMECTIN to help them to recover, regardless of whether a vaccination is available or not. The vaccine does NOT cure people who are already infected with COVID-19, IVERMECTIN DOES CURE infected patients!
23. I urge everyone to support my petition, once it’s initiated.
NOTE: URLs listed below & which are presented as:
provide access to documents authored by yours truly (UserName: RWA). Those presented as:
are authored by other individuals.