None of this is true for the level of ivermectin …

Comment on Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories by Sean Pitman.

None of this is true for the level of ivermectin that can actually be tolerated by humans. Also, the best double-blinded placebo-controlled scientific studies haven’t been able to detect any benefit for ivermectin against COVID-19 – much less “100% cure rates”. That’s just plain wrong. Any time someone claims 100% perfection, you need to be very very suspicious of that claim.

Associate Professor Tong says he is aware of a study performed in Bangladesh involving ivermectin. “But it was pretty poor quality, as far as I understand,” he said.

If it were a real effect with such a dramatic result, you would think that much larger double-blinded placebo-controlled trials would have been able to detect the benefit.

Another ivermectin study based in Argentina suggested the deworming pill might’ve prevented 100% of COVID-19 cases. That is, until a recent BuzzFeed News investigation (Link) revealed that at least some of the hospitals named in that study never participated.

“This would be an absolutely unheard-of level of efficacy,” Brown said, discussing the literature the FLCCC used to promote ivermectin. He pointed out that if the data to support ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment were really as good as suggested by the touted studies, it’d be “better than antibiotics on bacteria.” (Link)

Again, none of the larger more controlled and sophisticated trials of ivermectin are finding evidence that the drug helps COVID-19 patients much… which is a problem when it comes to claiming good scientific support, rational support of any kind, for promoting ivermectin as a COVID-19 miracle drug at this point. It just isn’t. The evidence just isn’t there…

Sean Pitman Also Commented

Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
Fetal cell lines, originally produced decades ago, were used in the testing of the mRNA vaccines – as they were in the testing of Tylenol, Motrin, Robitussin, Aspirin, Sudafed, Tums, Lidocaine, and a host of other modern medications that most people use on a semiregular basis (Link).


Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
I see no evidence that the published ingredient lists for the mRNA vaccines are not transparent and factual. There just is no credible evidence for “graphene” in these vaccines and fetal cell lines simply aren’t necessary to produce these types of vaccines.


Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
The hospitalization/death rate is far less for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated (Link). Note, in this line, that those states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest death rates per capita:

As far as natural immunity gain via a prior COVID-19 infection, it can actually be superior to the immunity gained via full vaccination. However, natural immunity is less predictable. Up to a third of people who were previously infected by COVID-19 don’t develop antibodies against it (Link). However, if one can demonstrate an adequate level of antibodies against COVID-19 it seems reasonable to me that such people should be considered to have adequate immunity.

As far as the immunity generated by vaccination, the type of immunity generated would not be so effective at preventing a mucosal nasopharyngeal infection since the types of antibodies produced (IgG and IgM) would preferentially be blood-based rather than tissue-based (IgA) type of immunity (Link). Because of this, naturally derived immunity might have an additional advantage in this regard as well.


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!


The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…


The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?


Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.