It would be reasonable to assume no lock down would have meant larger case numbers and subsequent demand on the NHS and even more missed diagnoses and treatments. Hence lockdown will have saved lives, short term and long term.
So what is your justification?
The single biggest correlation with positive health outcome all diseases is earlier detection and diagnosis. The earlier the detection the more successful the final results. For most diseases early detection has been single most important variable in improving survival rates and successful treatment rates over the last few generations.
They find the cancer early, you live. The find it later, you die. Therapeutic treatments have not improved that much since the 1970's, the big revolution was the previous 30 years, but early detection of diseases has improved in leaps and bounds mainly due to improvements in technology bringing down costs (and processing speeds) of very sophisticated test equipment.
So for the last 18 months or so almost all early detection, screening, and in the first six months, early stage treatments, were stopped for pretty much all medical conditions. So in other words all the medical measures than increased survival rates so much over the last 50 years were set aside for an extended period of time. So survival rates and severity rates naturally quickly declined to the levels of 50 years ago.
The history and impact of early detection and treatment on successful final outcome rates is well document in the published literature.
Its a 100% probability that when the final pandemic numbers are analysed and broken down that the true excess deaths (not substitute cause deaths) from probable SARs Cov 2 viral pneumonia will be far less than the excess deaths caused by the collapse in survival rates from all other disease post March 2020 due to lack of early detection and treatment. The only number that has to be discover is just how great the multiple is. I would not be surprised if its at least an order of magnitude . 10x. And 20x is quiet plausible too. Not many excess people died from SARs 2 viral pneumonia but very large numbers of people would have died from deferred detection and treatments.
The history and impact of early detection and treatment on successful final outcome rates is well document in the published literature.
And this is why ivermectin should be available immediately. It is so effective with early detection and as a prophylactic. It saves lives and keeps people out of hospital. It is an effective treatment for so-called 'long covid' and to some extent can alleviate some of the effects of the jabs (not the permanent damage, of course). It has been shown to be safe over many years and had an astounding impact on cases and deaths in India. And it is cheap!
There should be no hesitation with its availability. The recently-announced investigation by Oxford University is too late - possibly just a token gesture - and there is no need to wait for its outcome. We now have a treatment: end of 'emergency' and all its nonsensical measures.
And this is why ivermectin should be available immediately. It is so effective with early detection and as a prophylactic.
It's still too soon to say if it is any good, Oxford is trialling it now, so we should know soon enough one wayt or rhe other, since nobody/very few are dying of covid now we can afford to wait.
It saves lives and keeps people out of hospital. It is an effective treatment for so-called 'long covid' and to some extent can alleviate some of the effects of the jabs (not the permanent damage, of course). It has been shown to be safe over many years and had an astounding impact on cases and deaths in India. And it is cheap!
We still do not know that fore sure, you'll just have to shut up and wait, there are several serious trial and studies presently underway with ivermectin....
And this is why ivermectin should be available immediately. It is so effective with early detection and as a prophylactic.
It's still too soon to say if it is any good, Oxford is trialling it now, so we should know soon enough one wayt or rhe other, since nobody/very few are dying of covid now we can afford to wait.
"... we can afford to wait" I don't think so! Apart from the direct benefit of using it, the non-recognition of a treatment for covid enables the health emergency to be prolonged, with all its associated restrictions and damage to health and life.
It saves lives and keeps people out of hospital. It is an effective treatment for so-called 'long covid' and to some extent can alleviate some of the effects of the jabs (not the permanent damage, of course). It has been shown to be safe over many years and had an astounding impact on cases and deaths in India. And it is cheap!
We still do not know that fore sure, you'll just have to shut up and wait, there are several serious trial and studies presently underway with ivermectin....
Dr Tess Lawrie is concerned that the trials are not going to be performed properly. A bogus investigation of HCQ used dangerously high doses. Ivermectin has been demonstrated to work best in combinations - not part of the proposed trials. Where doctors have been able to do this - at no risk due to its proven safety - lives have been saved. This is in spite of governing agencies not authorising it.
On a precautionary principle, it should be allowed immediately.
Apart from the direct benefit of using it, the non-recognition of a treatment for covid enables the health emergency to be prolonged, with all its associated restrictions and damage to health and life.
It is still too soon to know if there is any direct benefit of using it. In my opinion, various people have become enmeshed in a battle over ivermectin, to promote it, on one side and to curb the enthusiasm on the other. Only time will tell who is right.
You are not the only person to be inconvenienced by the global health emergency , it is not possible to conclude Oxford's trial in time to end the present health emergency before July 19th, it will either end then or it will not. The covid19 epidemic here appears to be coming under control using vaccines. It is quite wrong to speak ill of Oxford's trial before it has even started.
So you'll just have to calm down a bit, perhaps you got carried away by the remote chance that ivermectin might actually be a wonder drug. I have high hopes for this trial, the interview with Dr. Edward Mills, the principal investigator in the TOGETHER Trial is very level headed, it is due to report now, you won't like it since the study is funded in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation!!!
https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/whats-the-deal-with-ivermectin-and-covid/
The same trial has already concluded that patients given hydroxychloroquine were not significantly different compared with those who received placebo.
You are basing your ideas on faith. You have no idea if ivermectin is useful or not. We will know soon one way or the other. It is best to be patient.
