WE ARE FACING A TRUE TIME OF CRISIS. ONE EXAMPLE IS THE OVERWHELMED HOSPITAL SYSTEM. THE STORIES WE ARE TOLD SUGGEST THAT THERE ARE SO MANY SICK PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY WITH COVID, THAT THE HOSPITALS CAN’T KEEP UP. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE HERE IN YAKIMA.

IT IS OUR GOAL AT WILKINSON WELLNESS TO ASSIST INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS, THE COMMUNITY, AND THE HOSPITALS IN OUR AREA BY HELPING TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM NEEDING HOSPITALIZATION. WE HAVE SEEN THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO USE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO US TO ACTUALLY HELP PEOPLE AT THE EARLY STAGES OF COVID TO TURN THE ILLNESS AROUND, AND THEN FOR THEM TO GET BETTER. ONE OF OUR TOOLS IS IVERMECTIN.

FOR SOME REASON THAT WE DON’T FULLY COMPREHEND, THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ANTAGONISM TOWARDS THE USE OF IVERMECTIN AND OTHER MODALITIES THAT CAN AID IN HEALING SICK PEOPLE. WE WANT TO TAKE THE MOST CHARITABLE PERSPECTIVE AND ASSUME THAT THE REASON FOR THE OPPOSITION IS THAT THE CRITICS ARE SIMPLY NOT AWARE THAT THERE IS A VAST AMOUNT OF SCIENCE THAT, AT MINIMUM, SUGGESTS THAT A VERY SAFE MEDICATION MIGHT BE HELPFUL IN KEEPING PEOPLE FROM GETTING SO SICK THAT THEY ARE FORCED TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL.

IN THIS NEWSLETTER WE AIM TO DEMONSTRATE SOME OF THE NEWS AND SCIENCE BEHIND THE USE OF IVERMECTIN IN PARTICULAR. WE HOPE THAT THOSE PROFESSIONALS WHO HAVE STOOD IN OPPOSITION TO THE USE OF IVERMECTIN WILL UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE VERY LEGITIMATE SCIENTIFIC REASONS FOR THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

IF ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL READS THIS LETTER AND FINDS WHAT I AM SAYING TO BE PROBLEMATIC, PLEASE ACT LIKE RATIONAL SCIENTISTS AND ADULTS AND OFFER TO DISCUSS THESE ISSUES IN AN OPEN FORUM. SHOW ME WHERE I AM WRONG. THIS, HISTORICALLY, IS THE METHOD OF SCIENCE.

PLEASE KNOW: I WOULD LOVE TO DISCUSS THESE ISSUES IN A PUBLIC SETTING WITH THOSE WHO PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AS BEING IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY AND/OR KNOWLEDGE AND WHO DISAGREE WITH MY VIEWS. SHOW ME WHERE I AM WRONG AND I WILL OPENLY ACKNOWLEDGE MY CHANGE IN UNDERSTANDING.

We live in a mysterious age.

The story runs that we live in the most advanced scientific time ever. And yet it appears that there is nothing that can be done to help the body fight covid except possibly some expensive or dangerous treatments. And people are often sent home from seeing a doctor at emergency rooms, urgent care centers, and offices after being told to return when things get worse - but absolutely no treatment is offered for the early manifestations of covid.

But what do I do now? Wait until it’s worse. (That has changed a bit with the availability of monoclonal antibodies.)

The Sydney Daily Telegraph ran a story on this perplexing conundrum. It’s a tabloid newspaper. Thus, full disclosure. But even tabloids can sometimes provide important data. In this article written by Miranda Devine, she outlines the challenge that one of the most important doctors of modern times has been facing.

The doctor is Thomas Borody.

If you go back a few years, people with stomach ulcers were considered to worry too much. That was assumed to be the reason for their ulcers. Stress! Another Australian doctor by the name of Barry Marshall didn’t believe the accepted science of the time and argued that there was a bacteria that was causing the problem. Barry decided to prove the case using himself as the subject. His stomach was fine. He then isolated some of the bugs known as H pylori, swallowed some of these bugs, and on repeat testing was shown to have stomach ulcers.

He received the Nobel prize for his work.

However, Barry Marshall didn’t have a great treatment for the problem as H pylori is a challenging little bug.

Enter - Thomas Borody. Dr. Borody is a gastroenterologist (a gut doctor). He’s the one who developed the famous Triple Therapy for H pylori stomach ulcers. And for some time it was pretty much the gold standard for treating those issues. It is considered that he has saved many many thousands of lives (perhaps more) due to his understanding of pharmacology and biology.

For quite some time he has been promoting another Triple Therapy for the treatment of covid. He has begged the Australian state and the powers that be to pay attention. Please Listen!

But they don’t.

Just to underscore the situation a bit. Here is a doctor who has done far more than most doctors to bless this world. He’s bright! He understands! He’s continually looking for answers to problems and dilemmas. And he’s come up with what he believes is a terrific answer to the covid challenge.

But nobody pays attention.

Why?

It could be that the Triple Therapy which he is proposing includes ivermectin. His triple therapy for covid is composed of the following three items:

Ivermectin.
Zinc.
Doxycycline.

Nobody in the governments of Australia, either federal or local, gets back to him when he calls or writes, he says.

Let me quote a little from the article:

“Imagine if a renowned Australian gastroenterologist invented an effective, cheap, and readily available treatment for COVID-19 and his own country ignored him.

“That’s what has happened to Professor Thomas Borody, who is famous for inventing a cure for the bacterial infection which causes peptic ulcers, saving millions of lives around the world…

“He points out Ivermectin is on the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines and has been safely used since 1975…

“But despite the drug’s proven safety record and promising results on COVID-19, ‘the government in Australia - and the US - does not have a curative plan’. It’s all about lockdowns and vaccines.”

Clearly, there’s a back story that is going on. In some parts of the world, ivermectin is dramatically helpful. But in other parts of the world, such as the US, Australia, and England, ivermectin is somehow considered to be horrible. And it’s difficult for me to understand why. Especially when we have so many articles suggesting strongly that there’s a benefit.

And I personally have had patient after patient who believes ivermectin has had life-saving benefits for them. And I can’t recall anyone who has had anything beyond very mild side effects from the medicine. Far and away the majority have noted zero side effects.

So, why do I believe the science shows ivermectin to be a very helpful treatment?

Well, let’s take a look at the science. In this article, it’s going to be pretty simple. We’ll show an article from a scientific source and then provide a brief summary of that article. Then we’ll proceed to the next, etc. The point of this article is so that you can all see with your own eyes that there is article after article that demonstrates that ivermectin has scientific support for use as part of a treatment protocol for covid.

If you wish to explore any particular article in more depth, you will have enough information that you should easily be able to find the original via Google or other search engines.

Here’s The Science

Article #1:

We’re including screenshots of these articles as they may be important to the research of some.

This is from a respected science journal. This is not from some rumor mill in a dark basement somewhere. This is from a source that epitomizes modern science.

Are these articles always correct? Not at all.

But here we have evidence that in the lab ivermectin is very effective against the virus that causes the symptoms of Covid-19.

Highlights of the article:

Ivermectin is an inhibitor of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro.
A single treatment of ivermectin was able to effect a 5000-fold reduction in the virus after 48 hours in a cell culture.
Ivermectin is FDA-approved for parasitic infections and therefore has a potential for repurposing (meaning that doctors can use a medicine approved for one thing to help other problems).
Ivermectin is widely available, due to its inclusion on the WHO model list of essential medicines.

Logically, if we have something that is effective against the covid virus in the laboratory, it makes sense to consider its use in treating the disease caused by the virus.

We know that the drug is extremely safe. Thus if it works in the lab and if it is a safe treatment, why should it not be given to patients requesting the therapy - especially when they know of people who have had dramatic benefit from the use of ivermectin?

And we know that doctors all over the world have found ivermectin as part of a therapeutic protocol to be effective.

So the mystery to me is: Why are various government agencies so negative regarding the use of ivermectin for people fighting Covid-19.

If we assume that the opposition is due to ignorance, the presentation of data demonstrating evidence of effectiveness and safety should change that opposition.

If the opposition is due to my misinterpretation of data, then I am genuinely requesting those opposing my use of ivermectin to clearly show me where I am wrong. I sincerely want to help people fighting Covid-19 and if ivermectin is truly not helpful and is potentially a seriously dangerous therapy, please show me the data.

If the antagonism is not due to ignorance on the part of those working in government agencies and is not due to a sincere misinterpretation of data, and if those opposing the use of ivermectin will not sit down with those of us with sincere interest and clearly show us the source of our error, what is one to do?

This is the reason that we continue treating people with covid by using ivermectin as a component of a broader protocol.

Article #2

The article we mentioned above was done in a laboratory using, so to speak, Petri dishes.

This article is using ivermectin with sick covid patients. And it works.

Again, it’s published in a significant science journal. And are we not often told, “to follow the science”? Folks - that’s exactly what we are trying to do.

Read it yourself…

This article was published in June of 2020.

“Conclusions: Ivermectin as an adjunct reduces the rate of mortality, time of low O2 saturation, and duration of hospitalization in adult COVID-19 patients. The improvement of other clinical parameters shows that ivermectin, with a wide margin of safety, had a high therapeutic effect on COVID-19.”

In the article, the authors note the challenges posed by covid. They point out that there are many drugs that have been tested for their benefit against covid including hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and ivermectin along with several others. They note that some studies do show that remdesivir has no clear influence on covid and that there are some significant adverse effects. Then the article argues that ivermectin is safe, that it has clear antiviral effects in the laboratory, and that it is very inexpensive.

They also claim that ivermectin shows antiviral effects against these viruses: Zika, Dengue, Yellow Fever, West Nile, Avian influenza A and HIV-1, among several others. They discuss three different mechanisms by which ivermectin may fight covid.

They describe a study that they did using ivermectin as part of their treatment protocol.

The conclusion is quoted above. For some, it might be more understandable if I attempt to translate the data into something closer to our usual speech.

Ivermectin reduces the number of people dying.

One challenge with covid is the shortness of breath that many experiences. Those on ivermectin spent less time experiencing shortness of breath. They were able to achieve safe oxygen levels much sooner than those not taking ivermectin.

The amount of time spent in the hospital in the group using ivermectin was shorter. From a patient standpoint, certainly, that is an important plus.

They point out that ivermectin is very safe. And that it was very helpful in returning sick people back to health.

As I have pointed out in previous articles, ivermectin is very safe. Suppose that ivermectin really wasn’t very effective. Since it is so safe, there seems to be little harm in at least trying it to see if it might be helpful.

In my view, ivermectin is more effective than remdesivir, and it is far safer and much more affordable than remdesivir.

Article #3

Note: This article is not about using ivermectin for covid-19. Rather, it is a broad ranging review article that suggests in 2017 that ivermectin could well be beneficial for disease processes like covid-19.

On a page following we find that there are reasons, according to this science article, that this medication, ivermectin. could be helpful for seizures, other neurological diseases, as an antibacterial including the possibility of benefit for TB, and there are arguments suggesting benefit for cancer. But in our current exploration, the fact that it can be beneficial for viral diseases including dengue and viral encephalitis make us wonder if it isn’t reasonable to consider that it could very possibly have benefit for covid-19.

Article #4

This article is one of the many that you can find which describes scientifically what actually happens when doctors treat hospitalized patients using ivermectin.

The conclusion: “There were no severe adverse drug events recorded in this study. A 5-day course of ivermectin was found to be safe and effective in treating adult patients with mild Covid-19. Larger trials will be needed to confirm these preliminary findings.”

As is usually done, the language is cautious. They realize that this is not a large study. And the patients are described as having mild covid symptoms, not severe symptoms. Based on this information alone, one can’t argue that ivermectin is going to be great for everybody including the severely ill. So they are careful in their claims - and good for them.

But, they did find that ivermectin treatment was helpful. And safe.

If we attempt to translate this information into our world, consider that until recently with the availability of monoclonal antibodies, there was no early treatment for covid at all. Time and time again, people were told in urgent care centers and at the emergency department in hospitals that they do have covid but there’s nothing to do except to go home and see if they get worse. And if they get worse, then they should return to the hospital.

Unfortunately, there has been zero early treatment offered to sick but non-critical patients.

It’s far better to attempt early treatment rather than wait until the person is extremely sick.

In this study, those with mild covid were helped.

That being the science, why would anybody fight against the use of something that is clearly safe and potentially very helpful for early covid?

Article #5

This article is of an important type in science. In this article they do not do what the previous article did. The above article had sick people in the hospital and they gave them ivermectin to see what would happen. And they reported that there was good benefit.

This article approaches things quite differently. Instead, these authors look at many studies that could be quite similar to the previous article. They then try to make sense of a great deal of information. This article is the summation of what a group of scientists found when they analyzed many articles.

Their summary (which I shall translate): Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin. Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86%.

High certainty evidence would be something like this entirely hypothetical study: 1000 people got the flu shot and a control group of 1000 people did not get the flu shot. None of the 1000 people getting the flu shot get the flu and almost everyone not getting the vaccine became sick with the flu. (PLEASE NOTE: There’s never been a study showing anything like this. And I am not arguing in favor of the flu shot here at all. This is only to describe, theoretically, what high certainly evidence might look like.)

The evidence that these researchers have found is what they describe as “low certainty” evidence. In other words, it does not “prove” that ivermectin helps, but they conclude that they are pretty sure that it does after examining many studies.

In fact their numbers suggest that you are 38% as likely to die of covid if you take ivermectin compared to your risk if you don’t take ivermectin. To explain: You have two groups of equal size. One is treated with ivermectin and the other group is not. In the group without ivermectin, the death rate will be 2.5x greater than the group being treated with ivermectin.

Is this article absolute proof that ivermectin works to prevent death? No. But in the context of having little in the way of options for early treatment, ivermectin is something that should be seriously considered as a treatment, according to the authors.

Not only does ivermectin reduce the risk of death quite significantly, it also decreases the risk of getting sick with covid by 86% when you take it preventively.

If the article in the American Journal of Therapeutics is correct in their analysis, the enormously safe medication, ivermectin, should be recommended by the powers-that-be rather than opposed. At least that is my view. And legitimate contrary information would be appreciated. And I will share legitimate contrary information with my patients and other readers.

Article #6

This is an important science article dealing with the use of ivermectin for covid. Following are quotes (or near quotes) from this article:

“The oral antiparasitic agent ivermectin exhibits numerous antiviral and anti-inflammatory mechanisms with trial (scientific studies) results reporting significant outcome benefits (for covid).”

“A large majority of randomized and observational controlled trials (scientific studies) of ivermectin are reporting repeated large magnitude improvements in clinical outcomes (regarding covid). Numerous prophylaxis trials demonstrate that regular ivermectin use leads to large reductions in transmission.”

“Ivermectin has antiviral properties against an increasing number of RNA viruses (the type of virus that SARS-CoV-2 is), including influenza, Zika, HIV, Dengue, and more importantly, SARS-CoV-2 itself.”

This article discussed how ivermectin works. One method is by binding to the spike protein. By attaching to the spike protein on the outside of the virus, it could prevent entry of the virus into the cell. And there are mechanisms by which it could inhibit viral replication. In other words, ivermectin may make it so that no more viruses could be made.

“SARS-Cov-2 leads to a high mortality and morbidity (death and sickness) in Covid-19 through the provocation of an overwhelming and injurious inflammatory response.” In other words, a significant reason for the sickness and death with covid is the provocation of a lot of inflammation. Thus, “it seems that the increasingly well-described… properties of ivermectin as an inhibitor of inflammation are far more clinically potent than previously recognized.” Thus, a big reason for the sickness and death from covid is the inflammatory response when exposed to the virus. And a likely reason for the benefit from ivermectin is that it has a pretty dramatic anti-inflammatory effect in the body.

Long Covid: They also discuss this serious problem for some. They quote from studies showing benefit for those with the post viral syndrome referred to as “long covid”.

The conclusion is a tad technical. I’m going to basically quote their conclusion with slight modifications - but without changing the intent of what they say. “In summary, based on the totality of the studies and the epidemiologic evidence presented in this article along with some other important input, IVERMECTIN SHOULD BE GLOBALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY DEPLOYED IN THE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF COVID-19.” (all caps supplied - not in original)

Article #7

This study used nasal sprays of ivermectin for people with mild covid.

Conclusion: The use of ivermectin as a nose spray is safe and effective. There is a rapid clearance of viruses. And the typical loss of smell associated with covid did not last as long as it did with people not treated with ivermectin.

Article #8

This study was done “in silico”. It means that this study was done via computer - no one was actually treated.

They concluded, based on their findings, that ivermectin was likely to be beneficial.

High points:

“Since 1987, this drug has been used to treat more than 3.7 billion onchocerciasis (a worm that likes to mess people up) patients.” (Please note: this is not a “horse paste” in spite of the derogatory references. It’s been used for literally billions of people according to this article.)

“A major advantage of using this FDA-approved drug is its relatively benign nature at treatment doses in humans.”

“Recently, ivermectin has been reported for antiviral activity toward SARS-Cov-2 in vitro.”

The article notes that ivermectin works as well as remdesivir as an antiviral. But I would note that the safety of ivermectin appears to be dramatically greater than remdesivir - which has a nasty habit of destroying peoples’ kidneys.

Article #9

This is a journal that’s been around since 1935. It’s a respected journal dealing with most any issue that concerns the chest. Certainly a big impact of covid is harming parts of the chest including the lungs and the heart.

This study suggests that using ivermectin decreased the likelihood of dying from covid by almost 50%. Pretty good numbers it seems to me. Does ivermectin cure 100%of people with covid? No! But it appears to be helpful when used appropriately.

Their conclusion or interpretation of the data: Ivermectin treatment was associated with lower mortality during treatment of Covid-19, especially in patients with severe pulmonary involvement.

The good news: not as many people died when they were using ivermectin - by a lot.

Should we be using ivermectin? If we have the interest of the patient in mind, it seems to me that it would be a good idea.

Article #10

High points:

6 out of 7 studies using the more reliable Randomized Controlled Trials found notable reductions in Covid-19 fatalities, with an average risk of death being 31% of the controls. To say that another way, if 100 people died in the group receiving no ivermectin, only 31 of the same sized group taking ivermectin died. That’s huge! In those 6 studies the people being treated with ivermectin had less than ⅓ the risk of death compared with those not taking ivermectin.

This paper reviews in some detail the work others have done using ivermectin and summarizes that material

In my understanding, the science is very supportive of the view that ivermectin is helpful in treating covid.

Article #11

“In this douple-blind, randomized trial with mild Covid-19 patients, ivermectin significantly reduced the time of viral shedding.” In other words, there is less time of being infectious to other people for those taking ivermectin when sick with covid.

That should be a big deal. Suppose that it does nothing to help me get better, but that it does make it so that I can’t make other people sick due to my shedding of viruses. That should be a pretty big deal, right?

“In conclusion, our study strongly supports the notion that ivermectin has anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. If used at the early stage of disease onset, it may shorten the isolation time and reduce transmission.”

Article #12

The abstract on this article is quite readable, I believe, and needs no clarification.

One point of interest: The Dr. Borody mentioned in the first part of this article I’m writing is one of the authors of this study.

Article #13

This is a great article covering the abundant evidence that ivermectin does have significant antiviral effects against some really bad viruses. Although this article does not demonstrate proof that ivermectin actually works against specifically covid, it does argue that since ivermectin is very effective against many similar viruses, it’s very probable that it will also be effective in treating covid.

Article #14

This study is in a preliminary stage, preparing for official publication.

Note that ivermectin does the following:

Reduced inflammatory markers such as CRP and others.
Faster viral clearance - you get rid of the viruses creating problems much faster.
Those who received ivermectin did not require being in the hospital as long as those who did not receive ivermectin.
There was a 75% reduction in deaths in patients taking ivermectin compared to those that did not take ivermectin.

Article #15

The conclusions or implications of this study published in a significant scientific journal are above. I’m going to slightly translate the conclusions as follows:

Patients symptomatic with covid were given a single dose of ivermectin. This medication was well tolerated - or one could say it was very safe. With that single dose of ivermectin their shortness of breath improved, their cough got better, and a typical laboratory finding of very few white blood cells improved.

Then they suggest that the input from these patients is that ivermectin appears to have some good clinical benefit and there should be more testing done to discover if that is true.

—-------------

CONCLUSION: There has been no “approved” early treatment until monoclonal antibody treatments were recently introduced. There is good data supporting the use of these treatments. However, not everyone has access and not everyone wants that quite expensive treatment. Treating early with ivermectin has been scientifically shown to be safe. And we certainly have good evidence showing that ivermectin may well be effective.

Our goal at the clinic is to treat people with safe and effective treatments.

Since the media and others have tried repeatedly to make it appear that ivermectin is dangerous and ineffective, I wanted you to have some of the scientific data supporting its use.

Part 4: Final Thoughts and Research