New Pfizer COVID-19 pill reduces hospital

glamphotographer

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2011
17,355
17,628
113
Canada
Catch covid and pay $$$$$ for this pill, this is where Pfizer makes it's profits. The vaccine is free to prevent you from getting sick. Pfizer will make record profits from anti-vaxers. LOL!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: GameBoy27

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
22,288
17,400
113
Catch covid and pay $$$$$ for this pill, this is where Pfizer makes it's profits. The vaccine is free to prevent you from getting sick. Pfizer will make record profits from anti-vaxers. LOL!
YES they will which means indirectly, Drakery, Oracle, JC, K.Douglas, Seagerbuzzard, CM and a few others all contribute to my bottom line in my stock portfolio. AHHHHHHH, life is good. LMAO
 

The LoLRus

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2009
2,269
136
63
This pill will end the pandemic by the spring I predict (assuming its approved in Canada of course)
 

The Oracle

Pronouns: Who/Cares
Mar 8, 2004
27,627
55,207
113
On the slopes of Mount Parnassus, Greece
''Pfizer’s drug is part of a decades-old family of antiviral drugs known as protease inhibitors, which revolutionized the treatment of HIV and hepatitis C. The drugs block a key enzyme which viruses need to multiply in the human body.''

LOL a protease inhibitor eh?........This is exactly what Ivermectin is.

It was speculated on the Joe Rogan podcast that this would happen. They would manipulate the chemical composition by a molecule or two and come up with a new drug which they could patent which basically did the same thing as what they already had. But the patent had expired so it now could be sold for dirt cheap.

Shocking I say......Just shocking.
 

The LoLRus

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2009
2,269
136
63
''Pfizer’s drug is part of a decades-old family of antiviral drugs known as protease inhibitors, which revolutionized the treatment of HIV and hepatitis C. The drugs block a key enzyme which viruses need to multiply in the human body.''

LOL a protease inhibitor eh?........This is exactly what Ivermectin is.

It was speculated on the Joe Rogan podcast that this would happen. They would manipulate the chemical composition by a molecule or two and come up with a new drug which they could patent which basically did the same thing as what they already had. But the patent had expired so it now could be sold for dirt cheap.

Shocking I say......Just shocking
The reason why the mainstream media (which is largely controlled by large corporations including Big Pharma) keeps mocking Ivermectin is because the patent for it has expired, so there's very little money to be made in it
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Oracle

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113
''Pfizer’s drug is part of a decades-old family of antiviral drugs known as protease inhibitors, which revolutionized the treatment of HIV and hepatitis C. The drugs block a key enzyme which viruses need to multiply in the human body.''

LOL a protease inhibitor eh?........This is exactly what Ivermectin is.

It was speculated on the Joe Rogan podcast that this would happen. They would manipulate the chemical composition by a molecule or two and come up with a new drug which they could patent which basically did the same thing as what they already had. But the patent had expired so it now could be sold for dirt cheap.

Shocking I say......Just shocking.
So, if all they had to do was to take Ivermectin and alter the molecular composition slightly, why didn't Pfizer and Moderna simply do this back in summer 2020 and end the pandemic within a month or two? They would have made a shitload of $$$$$ and it was so very, very, very, very simple that even Joe Rogan could figure it out.

With the amount of public scrutiny on Pharma with the pandemic, how could Pfizer survive being found out that they simply let the pandemic flourish for a year just to make $$$ from selling vaxxes at the cost of people's lives?

And if it's so simple, why didn't Pharma companies who didn't get vaxxes patented quickly enough just take ivermectin and alter the chemical compound an iota to beat up on the vaxx-selling pharma companies? And how could Pfizer take the risk that the other non-vaxx Pharma companies wouldn't just do this? And wouldn't this have made Pfizer develop and market the pill last year, just to beat the other companies.

And if all they are doing is just taking ivermectin and altering the chemical composition a fraction with a non essential component, how could this possibly qualify for a patent?
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113
The reason why the mainstream media (which is largely controlled by large corporations including Big Pharma) keeps mocking Ivermectin is because the patent for it has expired, so there's very little money to be made in it
Interested in knowing what your qualifications as a research chemist are, Lol?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SchlongConery

The LoLRus

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2009
2,269
136
63
So, if all they had to do was to take Ivermectin and alter the molecular composition slightly, why didn't Pfizer and Moderna simply do this back in summer 2020 and end the pandemic within a month or two? They would have made a shitload of $$$$$ and it was so very, very, very, very simple that even Joe Rogan could figure it out
See my post above.

Once a patent expires any generic company can make and sell Ivermectin.
Probably a few dozen companies would, and that would greatly cut into everyone's profit margins.
Think of it as sharing a pizza. Great if you have just 4 family members, but what if you ordered a large pizza and had to share that with 12 family members??
You'd be left with just a tiny slice per person
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Oracle

The Oracle

Pronouns: Who/Cares
Mar 8, 2004
27,627
55,207
113
On the slopes of Mount Parnassus, Greece
See my post above.

Once a patent expires any generic company can make and sell Ivermectin.
Probably a few dozen companies would, and that would greatly cut into everyoone's profit margins.
Think of it as sharing a pizza. Great if you have just 4 family members, but what if you ordered a large pizza and had to share that with 24 family members??
You'd be left with just a tiny slice per person
Yes my understanding is that it goes for about 30 cents a dose at present.

Of course this Pfizer copycat will be patented and sold at quite a bit more.

Of course the good news is that it will work as a prophylaxis and as a early treatment......

But it just exemplifies how Big Pharma has manipulated the system for their own benefit at the expense of the general public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The LoLRus

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113
See my post above.

Once a patent expires any generic company can make and sell Ivermectin.
Probably a few dozen companies would, and that would greatly cut into everyone's profit margins.
Think of it as sharing a pizza. Great if you have just 4 family members, but what if you ordered a large pizza and had to share that with 12 family members??
You'd be left with just a tiny slice per person
You miss all my points.

You run Joe Shitwank Pharma Company. Pfizer and Moderna beat you out in perfecting and patenting a vaxx. But it doesn't matter, does it?

You just take the chemical formula for ivermectin, add a little fruit juice or colouring to make it "different", patent it and then you've beaten Pfizer. Right?

It's not a likely scenario, but it's the scenario that Oracle's post leaves perfectly open.

You're proceeding on the assumption that all "protease inhibitors" are chemically similar and that ivermectin is a generic protease inhibitor that can be adapted to all enzymes, whether they are bacterial or viral. I know fa about chemistry, but I'm having trouble with this proposition.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113

There you go. There are at least 2 existing types - the Hep C family and the AIDS family. They are probably totally different chemically and there are numerous sub varieties in each family group. Add in ivermectin which is a bacterial pi and not a viral pi. I am guessing that "protease inhibitor" is in fact just a generic name - like "anti psychotic".

But don't let me interrupt your little moment of triumph. Enjoy it. For the next little while, you will have "pwned the libtards", at least in your own minds.
 

The LoLRus

Well-known member
Mar 30, 2009
2,269
136
63
You run Joe Shitwank Pharma Company. Pfizer and Moderna beat you out in perfecting and patenting a vaxx. But it doesn't matter, does it?

You just take the chemical formula for ivermectin, add a little fruit juice or colouring to make it "different", patent it and then you've beaten Pfizer. Right?
SMFH
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jenesis

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113

Okay, Mr SMFH. We're going to go through some more scientific articles. Let's start with the Wiki article on Ivermectin. Your bud Oracle says that Ivermectin is a protease inhibitor. That's not what the wiki article says. Let's read it together, shall we?

Pharmacology



Ivermectin (IVM) bound to a C. elegans GluClR. IVM molecules interact with a binding pocket formed by the transmembrane domains of adjacent GluClR subunits, "locking" the receptor in an activated (open) conformation that allows unrestricted passage of chloride (Cl−) ions into the cell. (The plasma membrane is represented as a blue–pink gradient.) From PDB: 3RHW.
Mechanism of action

Ivermectin and its related drugs act by interfering with the nerve and muscle functions of helminths and insects.[61] The drug binds to glutamate-gated chloride channels common to invertebrate nerve and muscle cells.[62] The binding pushes the channels open, which increases the flow of chloride ions and hyper-polarizes the cell membranes,[61] paralyzing and killing the invertebrate.[62] Ivermectin is safe for mammals (at the normal therapeutic doses used to cure parasite infections) because mammalian glutamate-gated chloride channels only occur in the brain and spinal cord: the causative avermectins usually do not cross the blood–brain barrier, and are unlikely to bind to other mammalian ligand-gated channels.[62]

I'm not reading "protease inhibitor" there. I'm reading that it paralyzes little crawly fuckers. You want to tell me where you get "protease inhibitor", I'm happy to read it. But I can't find it anywhere in the Wiki article.



Here is more Wiki:


COVID-19 misinformation

Further information: COVID-19 misinformation § Ivermectin

Ivermectin has been pushed by right-wing politicians and activists promoting it as a supposed COVID treatment.[83][84][85] Misinformation about ivermectin's efficacy spread widely on social media, fueled by publications that have since been retracted,[86][87] misleading "meta-analysis" websites with substandard methods,[88][89] and conspiracy theories about efforts by governments and scientists to "suppress the evidence."[90][91]

In response to widespread misuse, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Centers for Disease Control, World Health Organization, American Medical Association, American Pharmacists Association, and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists issued statements in 2021 warning that ivermectin is not approved or authorized for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19, and advised against its use for that purpose outside of clinical trials.[60][22][92]

On September 1, 2021, health experts from the United States expressed concerns from reports of sharp increases in outpatient prescribing and dispensing of ivermectin with respect to levels before the pandemic.[93] These experts explain that the CDC has not authorized or approved ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. The American Association of Poison Control Centers has reported 1,440 cases of ivermectin poisoning through September 20, 2021, a three-fold increase compared to similar time periods in 2019 and 2020.[94]



Here is another chunk of Wiki for you:


Ivermectin

Further information: COVID-19 drug repurposing research § Ivermectin

The antiparasitic drug ivermectin became a cause célèbre for right-wing figures promoting it as a supposed COVID treatment.[401] Misinformation about ivermectin's efficacy spread widely on social media, fueled by publications that have since been retracted,[402][403] misleading "meta-analysis" websites with substandard methods,[404][405] and conspiracy theories about efforts by governments and scientists to "suppress the evidence."[406][407]

In October 2021 a large network of companies selling hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin has been disclosed in the US, targeting primarily right-wing and vaccine hesitant groups through social media and conspiracy videos by anti-vaccine activists such as Simone Gold. The network had 72,000 customers who collectively paid $15 million for consultations and medications.[408]

Regulatory status and off-label use

Ivermectin is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in treating any viral illness and is not authorized for use to treat COVID-19 within the European Union.[409] After reviewing the evidence on ivermectin, the EMA said that "the available data do not support its use for COVID-19 outside well-designed clinical trials".[409] The WHO also said that ivermectin should not be used to treat COVID-19 except in a clinical trial.[410] The Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency, Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases, and Brazilian Thoracic Society issued position statements advising against the use of ivermectin for prevention or treatment of early-stage COVID-19.[411][412][413]

Misinformation, lower degrees of trust, and a sense of despair over increasing case and death counts has led to an increase in ivermectin's use in Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America,[414][415] and South Africa. A black market has also developed in many of these countries where official approval has not been granted.[416]

Several Latin American government health organizations recommended ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment based, in part, on preprints and anecdotal evidence; these recommendations were later denounced by the Pan American Health Organization.[402][417]

The viral social media misinformation about ivermectin has gained particular attention in South Africa where an anti-vaccination group called "South Africa Has A Right To Ivermectin" has been lobbying for the drug to be made available for prescription.[418] Another group, the "Ivermectin Interest Group" launched a court case against the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA), and as a result a compassionate use exemption was granted. SAPHRA stated in April 2021 that "At present, there are no approved treatments for COVID-19 infections."[418]

Despite the absence of high-quality evidence to suggest any efficacy and advice to the contrary, some governments have allowed its off-label use for prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Countries that have granted such official approval for ivermectin include the Czech Republic,[416] Slovakia,[416] Mexico,[419] Peru (later rescinded),[420][421] India[422][423] (later rescinded),[424] the Philippines,[425] and the Colombian city of Cali.[426]

In Washington County, Arkansas, Dr. Robert Karas was criticized for prescribing ivermectin for COVID-19 prevention against FDA guidance, for himself, for his family, and for prison employees and inmates at the Washington County Detention Center in Fayetteville, Arkansas. His company, Karas Correctional Health, prescribed at least one corrections officer vitamins and ivermectin after a negative COVID-19 test.[427]

High-profile retractions and misleading websites

Several high-profile publications purporting to demonstrate reduced mortality in COVID-19 patients were later retracted due to suspected data falsification.[428][429] This only added to confusion among the media and lay public,[402] as these publications had been widely cited by ivermectin supporters and included in meta-analyses.[403][401][430]

During the pandemic, a number of misleading websites appeared purporting to show meta-analyses of clinical evidence in favor of ivermectin's use in treating COVID-19.[404][405] The sites in question had anonymous owners, multiple domains which redirected to the same content, and used many colorful, but misleading, graphics to communicate their point.[431][404] The web servers used for these sites are the same as those previously used to spread misinformation about hydroxychloroquine.[432]

While these sites gained traction among many non-scientists on social media, they also violated many of the basic norms of meta-analysis methodology. Notably, many of these sites included studies with widely different dosages of the treatment, an open-label design (in which experimenters and participants both know who is in the control group), poor-quality control groups (such as another untested treatment which may worsen outcomes), or no control group at all.[405] Another issue is the inclusion of multiple ad-hoc un-published trials which did not undergo peer-review, and which had different incompatible outcome measures.[433] Such methodological problems are known to distort the findings of meta-analyses and cause spurious or false findings.[434] The misinformation communicated by these sites created confusion among the public and policy makers.[404]

Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC)



Holy shit, LolRus! I'm not reading anything about Ivermectin being a "protease inhibitor" on THAT wiki either. You want to tell me where you got the "protease inhibitor" info. You show me, I'll read it.

In fact - from my brief little amble through a couple of Wiki pages - Ivermectin appears to have nothing to do with "protease inhibitor" stuff and the Pfizer research appears to be brand new. Which kinda makes sense in a way that your and Oracle's theory really doesn't - for all the reasons I listed above when you did your little "SMFH" shtick at me.

Looking forward to either you or Oracle responding to this. I'd like to see you cite some scientific articles at me - even basic shit like Wiki. You and I have some talking to do.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,115
98,947
113
Here you go, Mr SMFH. More articles for you to read:



Fact Check-Pfizer's trial COVID-19 drug is not the same as ivermectin
By Reuters Fact Check
6 Min Read

An article shared hundreds of times on social media claims a new COVID-19 preventative drug being trialed by Pfizer is “suspiciously similar” to ivermectin, an anti-parasitic medication that the World Health Organization (WHO), European and United States regulators have not recommended for treating the disease. However, Pfizer and an independent virologist told Reuters the two drugs function differently.

Social media users have shared the Sept. 28 article, published by financial market website Zero Hedge here), hundreds of times (here, here, here).




Some suggested Pfizer planned to launch a rebranded ivermectin: “It's official now - Pfizer will launch unpacked #ivermectin for of course significantly higher amounts than the medicine has been available so far,” (translated, here).

Pfizer announced on Sept. 27 the start of phase 2/3 trials of its new antiviral medicine, known as PF-07321332, for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (here).

The following day, Zero Hedge published its article comparing PF-07321332 to ivermectin, claiming the two drugs share “at least one mechanism of action”. It referenced ivermectin’s qualities as a “protease inhibitor” and Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a “potent protease inhibitor”.


The widely shared article adds: “That’s exactly what ivermectin, the prophylactic used for a number of reasons in both humans and animals, does”.

Including a screenshot of Pfizer’s March 23 press release on phase 1 of the drug’s trial (here), Zero Hedge then compares the language in a report about ivermectin in the Future Virology Journal (here). It highlights Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a "protease inhibitor" with journal’s description of ivermectin as a "blocker of viral replicase, protease and human TMPRSS2".

However, this comparison lacks context, according to experts who spoke to Reuters.

“Pfizer’s drug has protease inhibitor activity like ivermectin, but they are a very different kettle of fish on a variety of levels,” said Dr Cheryl Walter, a virologist at the University of Hull.

Ivermectin formulations have been approved in the U.S. for use as an anti-parasitic in animals, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (here). It adds that for humans, specific ivermectin doses are approved to treat some parasitic worms, while topical formulations can be used for external parasitic conditions, such as headlice.

Despite the article’s claims Ivermectin has saved “thousands” of COVID-19 patients’ lives, an FDA consumer update says (here “Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing."

Dr Walter explained that PF-07321332 is a “direct acting antiviral drug”, while ivermectin “has multiple mechanisms of action on animal and human cells as well as some serendipitous antiviral activity”.


This means ivermectin likely has a range of “off-target effects on animal/human proteins,” Dr Walter said, adding: “We know it has multiple mechanisms of action and some of these actions could have unwanted, even dangerous side effects.

“What Pfizer have done is create a drug with a single job - stop the SARS-CoV-2 protease.”

A Pfizer spokesperson also denied the connection between the drugs, telling Reuters in an email: “Pfizer’s protease inhibitor is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism.”

They added: “For COVID-19, protease inhibitors are designed to block the activity of the SARS-CoV-2 protease, which is an enzyme the virus needs to multiply and replicate itself in the body, and as a result, stop symptoms from worsening.

“Applying this powerful and potent mechanism of action to COVID-19 could alter the course of the pandemic.”

VERDICT
Missing context. The two drugs are different and do not use the same mechanism.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here .

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,243
2,737
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Here you go, Mr SMFH. More articles for you to read:



Fact Check-Pfizer's trial COVID-19 drug is not the same as ivermectin
By Reuters Fact Check
6 Min Read

An article shared hundreds of times on social media claims a new COVID-19 preventative drug being trialed by Pfizer is “suspiciously similar” to ivermectin, an anti-parasitic medication that the World Health Organization (WHO), European and United States regulators have not recommended for treating the disease. However, Pfizer and an independent virologist told Reuters the two drugs function differently.

Social media users have shared the Sept. 28 article, published by financial market website Zero Hedge here), hundreds of times (here, here, here).




Some suggested Pfizer planned to launch a rebranded ivermectin: “It's official now - Pfizer will launch unpacked #ivermectin for of course significantly higher amounts than the medicine has been available so far,” (translated, here).

Pfizer announced on Sept. 27 the start of phase 2/3 trials of its new antiviral medicine, known as PF-07321332, for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (here).

The following day, Zero Hedge published its article comparing PF-07321332 to ivermectin, claiming the two drugs share “at least one mechanism of action”. It referenced ivermectin’s qualities as a “protease inhibitor” and Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a “potent protease inhibitor”.


The widely shared article adds: “That’s exactly what ivermectin, the prophylactic used for a number of reasons in both humans and animals, does”.

Including a screenshot of Pfizer’s March 23 press release on phase 1 of the drug’s trial (here), Zero Hedge then compares the language in a report about ivermectin in the Future Virology Journal (here). It highlights Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a "protease inhibitor" with journal’s description of ivermectin as a "blocker of viral replicase, protease and human TMPRSS2".

However, this comparison lacks context, according to experts who spoke to Reuters.

“Pfizer’s drug has protease inhibitor activity like ivermectin, but they are a very different kettle of fish on a variety of levels,” said Dr Cheryl Walter, a virologist at the University of Hull.

Ivermectin formulations have been approved in the U.S. for use as an anti-parasitic in animals, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (here). It adds that for humans, specific ivermectin doses are approved to treat some parasitic worms, while topical formulations can be used for external parasitic conditions, such as headlice.

Despite the article’s claims Ivermectin has saved “thousands” of COVID-19 patients’ lives, an FDA consumer update says (here “Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing."

Dr Walter explained that PF-07321332 is a “direct acting antiviral drug”, while ivermectin “has multiple mechanisms of action on animal and human cells as well as some serendipitous antiviral activity”.


This means ivermectin likely has a range of “off-target effects on animal/human proteins,” Dr Walter said, adding: “We know it has multiple mechanisms of action and some of these actions could have unwanted, even dangerous side effects.

“What Pfizer have done is create a drug with a single job - stop the SARS-CoV-2 protease.”

A Pfizer spokesperson also denied the connection between the drugs, telling Reuters in an email: “Pfizer’s protease inhibitor is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism.”

They added: “For COVID-19, protease inhibitors are designed to block the activity of the SARS-CoV-2 protease, which is an enzyme the virus needs to multiply and replicate itself in the body, and as a result, stop symptoms from worsening.

“Applying this powerful and potent mechanism of action to COVID-19 could alter the course of the pandemic.”

VERDICT
Missing context. The two drugs are different and do not use the same mechanism.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here .

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

The CEO/Chairman of Reuters sits on the board of Pfizer







Conflict of Interest: Reuters ‘Fact Checks’ COVID-Related Social Media Posts, But Fails to Disclose Ties to Pfizer, World Economic Forum


Conflict of Interest: Reuters ‘Fact Checks’ COVID-Related Social Media Posts, But Fails to Disclose Ties to Pfizer, World Economic Forum • Children's Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts