News and notes from around the interweb:
- I already reported on the opening of United’s new Washington Dulles Polaris business class lounge. The Newark, Chicago and Houston lounges will re-open this year as well, and LAX and San Francisco early next year. Presented as a scoop, this is largely what Live and Let’s Fly reported in August.
United Polaris Lounge Newark Dining Room - United CEO Scott Kirby ‘hopes American keeps doing what it’s doing’ because that makes them a weak competitor. Unmentioned is that they’re largely following the course he charted when he was American’s President. I wish there was some narrative around what happen to make the ‘new Scott Kirby’ because he was a cost cutter day one at United, but now is handing out $1000 employee bonuses and installing seat back tv screens in narrowbody aircraft.
I asked Scott Kirby if he still talks to his old boss Doug Parker (he does) and what advice he’d give him. Exclusive tidbit from the TPG Aviation newsletter, which you can sign up for here: https://t.co/W1IYBjWOmk pic.twitter.com/CrlrSZ4kZH
— David S. Pumpkins 🎃 (@David_Slotnick) October 13, 2021
- Tourists from 19 countries can visit Bali with visa in advance, but this does not include the United States.
- United is adding Washington Dulles – Amman, Jordan service (!) as well as Neward – Ponta Delgada in the Azores (Boeing 737 MAX 8); Newark – Bergen, Norway; Tenerife Spain; and Palma de Mallorca.
The big 2022 international route reveal is here! RT if you solved any of the clues in the video.
Where are you flying first? ⤵️ https://t.co/jhqKwGBSiV pic.twitter.com/ImwYzZqiEI
— United Airlines (@united) October 14, 2021
- Delta acquires more used Airbus A350s
- The abusive anti-mask Alaska state senator banned from Alaska Airlines caught Covid but don’t worry because she’s using Ivermectin.
What most people miss was that early very small studies suggested Ivermectin really would help, it was a very promising treatment, but larger and better-designed studies suggest otherwise (while leading to hope around fluvoxamine).
Was PAN AM the last US carrier to serve the infamous Tenerife
@Gary Leff
“What most people miss was that early very small studies suggested Ivermectin really would help, it was a very promising treatment, but larger and better-designed studies suggest otherwise (while leading to hope around fluvoxamine).”
Big Pharma sponsored derogatory “studies” that *falsely* indicted field-proven safe and effective Hydroxychloroquine + Azythromycin + Zinc in the early days of COVID-19 to try and protect their turf by perpetrating their “Vaccines Only” agenda for obvious reasons … then their sponsored indictments ultimately got totally *discredited* and *debunked* and their published reports had to be withdrawn from the likes of Lancet. So now they’re back at it again, but targeting Ivermectin instead … I wonder why? [ Hint — estimated cost of vaccine jabs is around US$30 while Ivermectin might cost less than US$1 ]
The key question for everyone is — which source is more trustworthy? Sponsored studies by Big Pharma with self-serving agendas, or real-world proven track records on the efficacy of treatments and lives saved among hundreds of millions of patients worldwide?
Remember India? Some months ago the daily news were abuzz about how their situations with infections and deaths were about to get totally out-of-control and could even “sink” the country … yet no one today hears a peep about India, anymore … why? India subsequently mass-deployed a *proven* and *cheap* treatment for its populace of 1.4 billion — IVERMECTIN … with the result that infections and deaths there are now *totally under control* as a result — recall that the much-feared Delta Variant originated from India, but they’ve conquered it with Ivermectin! Other countries are now also following suit, including Indonesia, Philippines, Central America, South America, Africa, etc.
Recently published on June 21, 2021, we now even have this report from the NIH in USA —
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/
It’s time to *stop* denigrating therapeutics just to prop up Big Pharma’s self-serving agenda of “Vaccines Only” — notice that even Pfizer and Merck have now pivoted towards therapeutics to be used either alone, or in conjunction with vaccines! All-of-the-Above approaches against COVID-19 will *always* beat out a singular “Vaccines Only” approach!
@StrictlyFacts – the Together Trials weren’t funded by ‘Big Pharma’
@Greg – I couldn’t say with absolute certainty but I think so. Pan Am and TWA would really have been the only candidates until quite recently.
@StrictlyFacts, as the antivax crowd likes to point out, Covid does not send a huge percentage to the hospital, and kills fewer. It’s hard to determine the effectiveness of a drug for an illness which doesn’t doesn’t kill most of it’s victims. This is why trials with large number of participants who get and don’t get a drug are needed to get a statistically valid result. They tried to do studies in South America, but couldn’t find enough control subjects who did not take Ivermectin, but there’s still a lot of hospitalizations and death there. It’s hard to know if Covid just burned through it’s victims, especially the older ones in places like India until it ran out of suitable hosts, but it’s even harder to give credit to Ivermectin. Vaccines are still extremely effective at preventing death, but not as effective at preventing severe infection. You want to see how ineffective Ivermectin is? Look at Reddit r/HermanCainAward, it’s full of people using Ivermectin and other nonconventional medicine and dying of Covid. The comments are not polite, but just look at the pictures at the top of each post, from someone’s Facebook denying the value of the vaccine, eventually catching Covid and still denying they have it, to asking for prayer warriors, to setting up a GoFundMe for the survivors.
If that’s not enough, look at r/nursing about how the nurses are being burned out by treating Covid patients, largely unvaccinated, who are poorly treated by antivaxers and their relatives, but who still come to the hospital when they can’t breathe.
@Gary Leff
“the Together Trials weren’t funded by ‘Big Pharma’”
As far as I know, there are two major funding sources for clinical trials in USA — NIH and “Big Pharma” companies (which I use loosely to refer to pharmaceutical companies no matter their size). As previously pointed out by many others, the NIH is essentially in bed with “Big Pharma” so they both represent the same interests. These sources will front their funding through other research organizations such as universities, so it’s often difficult to pin down *which* funders sponsored which clinical trials, but they’re most often funded from such “original” sources.
It turns out that one of the Senior Investigators at the Together Trials collaboration group had worked before at Roche and CSL-Behring, both Pharma companies. This, in of itself, is not an indictment against his involvement, but can we be assured that he is not inclined to bias his trials to fulfill a commonly held “Big Pharma” agenda? That’s really difficult to assess, one way or the other, so let’s just look briefly at their clinical trial protocol with respect to Ivermectin — they used 0.4-mg/kg for people up to 90 kg at once a day for only 3 days, while the more typical protocol uses from 0.2-mg/kg to 1.0-mg/kg, depending on the infection severity and time of initiation of treatment, at once a day for 5 days (instead of only 3). This discrepancy alone warrants further investigations as to end efficacy impacts. Additionally, when Ivermectin is prescribed as part of a treatment, it includes many *other* components that work *together* to collectively beat down COVID-19 — no one uses Ivermectin all by itself as the entire treatment —
https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/FLCCC-Protocols-%E2%80%93-A-Guide-to-the-Management-of-COVID-19.pdf
Note that Fluvoxamine is also included within the suite of treatment protocols in the treatments document referenced above.
This “sole component” focus is where legacy clinical trials can fail in attempts to be “scientific” by trying to be “controlled” in experiments and thereby focusing on just one component *without* the *other* components that will *together* make the treatment regimen much more effective. The “medical establishment” previously resorted to this very same flawed tactic to denigrate HCQ, with their clinical trials that focused on using only HCQ, when successfully used treatment protocols worldwide stipulated that HCQ needed to be used *in conjunction* with Azythromycin and Zinc.
So, to my observations, clinical trials can be conducted in biased ways to denigrate successfully working treatments by applying grossly misleading and improper methodologies within those trials. Besides … it’s really difficult to argue against the successes that India has had in using the Ivermectin treatment to beat down their own Delta Variant!
The A350 is much nicer than B787 to fly in as a passenger — Delta is truly solidifying its leadership as the most premium US3 carrier. Nice to see.
@John H
“They tried to do studies in South America, but couldn’t find enough control subjects who did not take Ivermectin, but there’s still a lot of hospitalizations and death there.”
———-
As I indicated in my reply to Gary Leff, above, this issue of control subjects will often be the downfall of clinical trials, since they want to pin “causation” for success or failures of a drug upon only that one compound without regards to proper treatment protocols that also inject other complementary compounds into the mix! So even if they could have found enough control subjects, those trials would *not* necessarily have been conducted in meaningful ways, anyway!
————————————
“Vaccines are still extremely effective at preventing death, but not as effective at preventing severe infection.”
“If that’s not enough, look at r/nursing about how the nurses are being burned out by treating Covid patients, largely unvaccinated,”
———-
You’re partially correct … however, with the Delta Variant, new data (that is being desperately hidden from the public) are starting to show that significant *current* hospitalizations and deaths are now occurring among those who have gotten fully vaccinated, instead of predominantly among the unvaccinated, as *previously* experienced! The problem with these current COVID-19 vaccines is that they, unlike prior generations of vaccines, are *not* neutralizing (ie, they do *not* kill off SARS-CoV-2), so they, in effect, allow SARS-CoV-2 to self-mutate in order to bypass the vaccine effects that target its spikes. This is why we’re seeing all those different Variants crop up from such diverse locations worldwide. So, ironically, the more we vaccinate, the more likely new self-mutated Variants will get created; furthermore, they’re now discovering that after-effects of those vaccines are causing people’s Natural Immunity functions to degrade, thus creating a new phenomenon where there are now significant numbers of fully vaccinated patients who are getting hospitalized and dying, as compared to those who are unvaccinated … this is absolutely *not* the way it was “supposed” to be!
————————————
“You want to see how ineffective Ivermectin is? Look at Reddit r/HermanCainAward, it’s full of people using Ivermectin and other nonconventional medicine and dying of Covid.”
———-
Once again, it makes a *huge* difference in *how* they claimed to be using Ivermectin! I’m willing to bet that most of them did *not* follow proper start of treatment timings as well as treatment protocols (as referenced in my reply to Gary Leff above), so they were actually being improperly “treated” — especially if they were blindly self-medicating! So such anecdotal cases of mass deaths do *not* disprove the efficacy of *properly* administered *treatment* protocols that do *not* use Ivermectin as just a singular compound!!
Pan Am didn’t serve Tenerife, the B747 ended up there because of a bomb scare at Gran Canaria which caused it to divert. to TFS.
@Strictly(Q)Facts
Sighhhh. It is getting so tiresome to wath the anti-vax/conspiracy crowd create big messes and the consequent and real public health problems they cause.
Ivermectin has NOT been shown to ‘cure’ Covid-19 or to prevent its spread. The properly designed clinical trials so far completed have found NO significant effect on disease progression. In addition, it has negative side effects, some serious, and it is easy to overdose on it, which can lead to death.
The claim that it helped India overcome its Covid surge earlier this year is NOT true. The Indian Council of Medical Research explicitly does not recommend its use in Covid-19 treatment.
It is a huge conspiratorial fraud. And, yes, I am a practicing scientist and I do know the research.
Of course, it is not possible to change the mind of the Q-crowd with anything that is reported in news outlets that they have branded as part of the global cabal, but for the rest of y’all, here is a recent article from the BBC that explains the ‘horse dewormer’ phenomenon.
Ivermectin: How false science created a Covid ‘miracle’ drug
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58170809
Key quote: “Dr Kyle Sheldrick, one of the group investigating the studies, said they had not found “a single clinical trial” claiming to show that ivermectin prevented Covid deaths that did not contain “either obvious signs of fabrication or errors so critical they invalidate the study”.
Sorry to burst your bubble, Strictly(Q)Facts. By the way, all of the above is also true for HCQ.
@StrictlyFacts – “as far as you know” ding ding ding, you’re taking an (in this case, incorrect) assumption and applying it to a specific study without any facts.
There’s this theory that ‘big pharma doesn’t want a cheap solution’ but the Together Trial found… that another cheap solution, fluvoxamine,, appears to be effective…
Scotch Kirby and Chug Parker…hmmm who knew!!!
The best way to get revenge on a former employer is to think big like New York City and start a side hustle. No former employer wants to know a former employer became a secret online millionaire. Agree?
Joe Rogen would like to have you on his pod cast to talk about that medication studies say doesn’t work or is harmful. Look at how Embarrassing fake dr Sanjay Gupta was.
@JohnnyBoy
“The properly designed clinical trials so far completed have found NO significant effect on disease progression. In addition, it has negative side effects, some serious, and it is easy to overdose on it, which can lead to death.”
———
Your claims about Ivermectin in the quote above are actually *incorrect*! You’ve done what those establishment defenders of Big Pharma always do — create *Fake* narratives against Ivermectin to perpetrate Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (F.U.D.) upon our public — Ivermectin has been around for 40 years (as of this year) and has had an exemplary safety and efficacy record based upon use by many millions worldwide during those decades, *when properly used* (ie, *not* self-medicating)! It’s application against SARS-CoV-2 is very recent, and there *is* controversy around it, just as with HCQ, because it *does* threaten the Establishment’s “Vaccines Only” agenda.
————————————
“The claim that it helped India overcome its Covid surge earlier this year is NOT true. The Indian Council of Medical Research explicitly does not recommend its use in Covid-19 treatment.”
———
Just because a therapeutic is *not* recommended by an agency that is beholden to Big Pharma does *not*, therefore, mean that that therapeutic is *not* safe and effective! In fact, the W.H.O. also refuses to acknowledge the safety and efficacy of Ivermectin treatments and had discouraged its use worldwide … but guess what happened? [Ignore some initial commentary in the report below that might be considered “strong” and just focus on the report’s body contents.]
https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/indian-bar-association-sues-who-scientist-for-the-murder-of-indian-citizens-by-misleading-them-about-ivermectin/
If you actually look at the data from India, you will notice how every state that adopted widespread use of Ivermectin treatment (handed out as “kits” by their central government) had experienced huge declines in #cases/#deaths while one state that followed the *Flawed* W.H.O. position continued to see soaring #cases/#deaths. Actual Field Data *do* matter on such issues! Also notice how we used to get daily reports about the dire COVID-19 situation in India, many months back, but now no one mentions COVID-19 in India, anymore?
————————————
“… I am a practicing scientist and I do know the research.”
———
Did you recall my statement about this in a prior reply? There *are* scientists that will toe the “Vaccine Only” agenda in order to preserve and/or advance their careers and aspirations with NIH/CDC/FDA and Big Pharma interests. An *unbiased* scientist will look at *all* of the research that does *not* comport with his/her preferred personal agenda and be objective about assessing which ones report more plausible results! In general, I’m more inclined to trust real-life reports from front line workers (nurses and doctors) who actually *treat* real COVID-19 patients, on a *daily* basis, than some academic scientists that spout *hypothetical issues* from their ivory towers by publishing often questionable “studies”!
————————————
“… here is a recent article from the BBC that explains the ‘horse dewormer’ phenomenon.”
———
As a scientist, are you actually supportive of that already *debunked* “horse dewormer” propaganda against Ivermectin? Do you actually believe their claim that Ivermectin is used *primarily* for “deworming” animals such as horses? What was Ivermectin’s *original* therapeutic purpose? Can a drug *not* be used to treat ailments suffered by *both* humans and animals? As such, are the use dosages the same for *both* humans and animals? Ivermectin *Deniers* need to *Stop* conflating the two separate uses! Horses eat oats for food, as do humans (for breakfast) — so are humans thereby consuming horse feed by eating breakfast?
This said, the BBC report is rife with misrepresentations — they *totally ignore* history, where the very same reporting flaws had also been exposed earlier on, with studies” that purportedly “debunked” HCQ and ended up having to get *retracted* from the likes of Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine! How many Ivermectin studies have had to be retracted from such “prestigious” publications? You *do* recall, also from a prior reply above, what I had stated about how “controlled” clinical trials often “miss the point” by trying to be “scientific” in testing with only one compound, while the actual efficacy and benefits arise from using a mix of complementary compounds that interact together? Furthermore, their claims of dangers from using Ivermectin have (as usual) originated with those who had self-medicated *improperly* and did *not* use the therapeutic protocols referenced in a prior reply above! I could go on and on, but you should get the idea, by now …
————————————
“Key quote: “Dr Kyle Sheldrick, one of the group investigating the studies, said they had not found “a single clinical trial” claiming to show that ivermectin prevented Covid deaths that did not contain “either obvious signs of fabrication or errors so critical they invalidate the study”.”
———
Dr Sheldrick is entitled to his own opinions, but he still can *not* deny the plethora of *Credible Facts* that *also exist* to contradict his personal opinions — how do we know whether he did, or did not, engage in totally “selective reviews”? How do we know that he is *not* on the *dole* for NIH/CDC/FDA and/or Big Pharma?
————————————
Finally —>>> “Of course, it is not possible to change the mind of the Q-crowd …”
———
What is “the Q-crowd” and what does that have to do with what we’re talking about?
@Gary Leff
““as far as you know” ding ding ding, you’re taking an (in this case, incorrect) assumption and applying it to a specific study without any facts.”
———
If you’re referring to funding sources for clinical trial studies, I’ve already said that such funding trails may be difficult to back trace, based on non-direct funding paths. But I *did* point out that the dosage and start-of-treatment timing parameters of the Together Trial with Ivermectin *does* differ from recommended Ivermectin treatment protocols, so that brings into question the “absolute” validity of those trial results when used to confirm or deny Ivermectin’s safety and efficacy status as compared to recommended treatment protocols that are used in real life situations.
————————————
“There’s this theory that ‘big pharma doesn’t want a cheap solution’ but the Together Trial found… that another cheap solution, fluvoxamine,, appears to be effective…”
———
Yes … I’m *not* denying, at all, that such trials *can* uncover off-label applications of existing cheap drugs that are safe and effective, as also demonstrated with HCQ and Ivermectin; but notice how Big Pharma does *not* make $$$ off of such older formulations, so let’s wait and see whether FDA will actually “approve” the use of fluvoxamine, unlike what it’s doing against HCQ and Ivermectin. Recall that use of fluvoxamine had already been included within the recommended Ivermectin treatment protocol document.
Let’s look at another case — Remdesivir, which costs some US$3000 per treatment … so now there are reports that it’s actually “effective,” but there have also been reports that suggest the fatality rate from using Remdesivir is around 25% … so what’s up with *that*?
Also … Merck is a producer of Ivermectin tablets, but it has now come out with a new therapeutic called molnupiravir that will be sold for 40X what it costs to manufacture — makes one wonder whether Merck merely “tweaked” the underlying functioning mechanism of Ivermectin and then re-introduced it to hike up their profits (notice where funding to develop molnupiravir came from) —
https://theintercept.com/2021/10/05/covid-pill-drug-pricing-merck-ridgeback/
Interesting to also note that Merck has *not* been one of the “players” in coming out with a COVID-19 “vaccine” …
The Q-crowd are those who think there is a big conspiracy to hide effective treatment because big pharma once gave a doctor a pen at a conference, so they are in their pockets. No amount of data will convince the Q-crowd differently because any such data has been manipulated to meet big pharma’s demands. No matter how many trials are done, or how many external reasons for regional differences, are ever enough to convince the Q-crowd, or others who think much in this world is the result of a conspiracy. If I believed in conspiracy theories, I’d be saying your posts are coming from a Russian troll farm, and you are getting paid when I respond. Even if that was true, I don’t have the evidence to back it up.
@John H
LOL! I see … thanks for clarifying! 🙂