Therapeutics: Can Ivermectin be far behind?

Vincent J. Curtis

16 Jan 22

The Spectator had a few horse laughs at the expense of Albertans for some of them taking Ivermectin against COVID-19.  “It’s a horse dewormer!” they cried.  “Cowboys are taking horse dewormer to ward off COVID!  How stupid is that?”

Ivermectin fell under the “not invented here” ban.  Because U.S. officialdom didn’t think of using Ivermectin as a therapeutic against COVID-19, its use had to be condemned.  The fact the Ivermectin costs pennies to make, and its maker, Merck, had a $720 per treatment anti-viral pill in the offing (Mulnupiravir) had nothing to do with the condemnation of Ivermectin by U.S. officials, we’re told and expected to believe.

Well, Ivermectin is also used on humans, which is why human sized doses of the drug were available at the local pharmacy.  Ivermectin was the subject of a slew of patents in 2015 for its property of reducing swelling and inflammation, conditions that exacerbate the COVID-19 infection, and occur when the auto-immune systems is driven into hyperdrive.

Now the WHO is “strongly recommending” a drug called Baricitinib for people with severe or critical COVID-19 for use with cortico-steroids.  Baricitinib suppresses the overstimulation of the immune system, with consequences similar to the anti-swelling effect of Ivermectin.

There may be enough institutional bias (and personal reputations at stake) against Ivermectin that new and expensive drugs will be recommended over older, proven inexpensive drugs.  But the latest announcement from the WHO proves the cowboys were on to something.  If you keep the swelling under control, a COVID infection may not turn into a crisis.

-30-