I repost here two recent interviews of Dr. Jody Dalmacion, retired faculty member of UP College of Medicine (UPCM). Then her recent fb posts. Brave lady, bow.
IVERMECTIN IS A REPURPOSE DRUG - DR. JODY DALMACION
Aug 10, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8-j0RAsw9s
CDC Ph Weekly
Huddle: Prof Jody Dalmacion on Vaccine Efficacy 08 14 21
Published August 16, 2021
https://rumble.com/vl7zbk-cdc-ph-weekly-huddle-prof-jody-dalmacion-on-vaccine-efficacy-08-14-21.html
------------
July 23, 2021
Microbiology 101 and Ethics of Medical Communication 101
Ever wondered why there is no vaccine for HIV, a RNA
virus like SARS Cov2? Vaccines will
not likely work for RNA viruses like HIV
and SARS CoV2 because these viruses can mutate very rapidly and render any vaccine
useless sooner than you can come up with another one. To quote Dr.
McCullough known Texas cardiologist, researcher and prescriber of
ivermectin and other drugs for covid 19
- “By pushing mass vaccination, governments have created evolutionary pressure
on sars cov 2 (to mutate more rapidly to new variants). Without vaccines,
mutation by RNA viruses occur following a more natural rate and
maybe to less virulent strains.
Case in point, in Israel - “nearly
40% of new covid patients were vaccinated- compared to just 1% who had
been infected previously”.
At present, HIV is
successfully controlled with multi drug therapy (HAART) and Covid
19 can likewise be controlled by the use
of drugs. Cases of covid 19 have
recovered from treatment with ivermectin, O2 inhalation, antibiotics, vit D3,
ascorbic acid, steroid, or fluovoxamine even remdesivir if given at the right
time and patients accept risk of acute
renal failure or septic shock from it. Proof? Go ask the survivors. For long
haulers, fluvoxamine, IVM, statin and H1
blockers have been used.
Doctors who are responsible and patient-centered should spend less time posting misinformation and one sided findings against ivermectin or any drugs. Please do the Filipinos and other doctors a favor, post correct information or data, NOT OPINIONS. Post data and findings on the benefit versus harm of the Covid 19 vaccines instead of parroting self serving news from drug companies. Much better, push or conduct more researches on drugs or interventions to curb the repeated surges of covid 19 cases from new variants. Help look for strategies to decrease viral transmission aside from imposing lockdowns that are more harmful to the health of people, the environment and socioeconomic conditions of the country. The local Specialists in Infectious Diseases are not by default experts on covid 19 but they should be experts on infections like TB, dengue, HIV, leptospirosis, hepatitis which are currently being neglected in our country during the pandemic. About 74 Filipinos die every day of TB and reporting of cases has gone down significantly during the pandemic. For those interested in treating covid 19, be humble and open your minds to more possibilities through researches and stop acting as self declared experts of covid 19. Even one of the developers of the mrna vaccines, Dr. Robert Malone said that real scientists work on hypothesis NOT Truth. The majority of experts now agree that the direction for controlling SARS CoV2 more effectively seem to be by multidrug therapy, the same way it is being done for HIV.
July 26
Dr. Salvana posted a patient with negative RT PCR for clearance but since noted sniffling, he ordered a covid ag test which turned positive. First- you cant compare a test done 3 days ago to a different type of test you did today, RT PCR is based on NAAT while covid antigen test is immunoassay; NAAT is still the gold standard for the DIAGNOSIS of covid because it is more sensitive and specific than covid ag; CDC has interim guidance for Covid Ag for screening in congregation but not recommended for screening asymptomatics thus accompanying questionnaire on symptoms is advised by CDC, the covid Ag positive predictive value may be 81.4% which is the probability that the patient really has the disease thus 18% can be false positive, if patient has flu and flu is commonly cause by coronaviruses, is there a cross reactivity with sars cov2 that can give false postive result with covid Ag test? and lastly I ask the good doctor, what is your diagnosis?
August 3
What is the legal and moral basis for doctors of PGH and other hospitals asking for waiver from patients who want to use IVM?? Can someone please enlighten me?
August 5
To the DOH, the
Philippine Pediatric Society and all pediatricians before you decide on
vaccinating the Filipino children - please
remember the Dengvaxia disaster. May I share my commentary on Dengvaxia
with concepts on NNH and NNT published
in the Journal of Tropical Diseases - “Should hospitalization
be an outcome for vaccine research?
“Unlike others, I never give an opinion on something I just read in
google. Paging PPS, PSMID, FDA, Policy Bureau
of DOH, PCHRD etc to share your own studies or at least systematic
review of mrna vaccines for covid 19 in children. PLEASE do not merely cite
fo reign studies or WHO, consider
the reality of the Phil Health care
system, sociodemographics, cost effectiveness (opportunity cost) and the
dismal economic status of the country. I may have missed RCTs on the efficacy and safety of anti covid
vaccine for children that you have the privilege to have.Do tell. What is the
evidence or data?
August 13
My reply to the UPCM Pharmacology was canceled because it allegedly goes against community standards. This is a cowardly act of silencing the opinions of others. I am challenging even the Director general of the FDA to a debate on what vaccine adverse reaction reporting means, risk: benefit ratio assessment and methodologies of causality determination. I am also accusing FB of abuse of discretion and tyranny. You shd be ashamed of calling yourself as following “standards” when you are actually just goons. But the truth will always prevail. Cheers.
August 13
Dear FB “ community standards” maraming maraming Salamat
for confirming that I am making an
impact with my statements on the vaccine by removing my post. It is a badge of
honor. Salamat po ulit . I am honored 😉
August 20
Is UP PGH anti vaxxer? The covid admissions in PGH of 265
covid of which 187 were un vaxxed and 79
vaxxed looks unfavorable
for the covid vaccines.
Why?
In a population that’s 11% vaccinated, if the vaccines
have no efficacy whatsoever - meaning the vaccinated have the same risk of
being hospitalized as the unvaccinated - you would expect only 11% of the 265
hospitalized covid to be vaccinated which
is 29 but 53 completely vaccinated got hospitalized!! (O ayan hindi ko na isinama partial. ) Based
on the pfizer trial , only 5% of the vaccinated runs the risk of being
hospitalized. So only 5% of the 11% of the 265 or 1.45 vaxxed persons should be in the PGH hospitalized cohort. Why 53?
Which also means that the unvaccinated are doing much
better since 89% or 235 or 209 but there are only 187 unvaxxed!!!
Of the assumed
severe hospitalized covid and progressed
to the ICU, 9/187 or 4.8% were unvaxxed
while 2/53 or 3.8% were vaccinated. So the vaccinated had only a 1%
advantage over the unvaxxed. As for intubation unvaccinated 6/7 or 67%;
vaccinated, 1/2 or 50%, the latter having a 17% advantage.
This is not surprising if they only understood the pfizer trial. But hey, they
also misinterpreted Lopez Medina IVM
trial as of good quality. The attributable risk reduction in the pfizer
trial with vaccine is less than 1% and the numbers needed to vaccinated is about
135 . Relative risk reduction from the pfizer study (95%)is only used to describe results in a
clinical trial ie risk of covid ,8/21k or 0.038% in relation to the placebo or
background risk of covid which is only
162/21K or about 0.77% . But for public health interventions, ARR and NNV are
more meaningful because it gives you the probable effect of the intervention in the population.
Back to PGH data - The sample size is is too small and so many other factors weigh in. Thus warning on the possible overgeneralization. But PGH is actually conveying a very bad message about Vaccine 😩😩 .
Dr. Dalmacion’s Rejoinder to the UP Manila statement Re: Safety of Covid-19 Vaccines
August 18, 2021
https://romeoquijanomd.net/2021/08/18/dr-dalmacions-rejoinder-to-the-up-manila-statement-re-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/
Godofreda V. Dalmacion MD, epidemiologist, Retired Professor, Dept. of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila (published with her permission)
Apologies to my former colleagues at the Dept. of Pharmacology and Toxicology but in the interest of fairness and truth – I really have to react to your very bold statement that the benefit of the COVID-19 vaccines outweigh their risk. It was said so confidently that it gives me the creeps without seeing any estimates.
The safety of the vaccines especially with the new platform remains uncertain and contentious (1). Adverse event (AE) is a function of number and duration of exposure. Why? Because toxicities can occur after a latent period and the effects of epigenetics play a role such as in male infertility, autoimmune disorders, cancers and other mutagenic effects. With the COVID-19 vaccines, AEs vary based on age, e.g. clotting more in young females and myocarditis and pericarditis among young men 14-24 years old. Please refer to VAERS.
Secondly, vaccine-related toxicities are questions of excess risks, for example the background incidence of pericarditis is almost 0 in the normal young, so even 1 case after vaccination is significant and morally unacceptable.
Third, ALL the COVID-19 vaccines are under EUA and still under Phase 3 and thus incompletely studied. The Sample size of RCTs i.e. Pfizer are underpowered to determine efficacy, more so safety. Multi-country studies such as Pfizer’s vaccine trials are methodologically flawed because the risk for COVID-19 across different countries are different.
Fourth, Pfizer study published in NEJM has only 18556 / 21720 evaluable cases under the vaccine arm because 100 withdrew, 304 did not receive dose 2 , 62 were lost to follow-up, 28 had AEs, 2 withdrew and 1 died etc etc– all unfavorable information.
Fifth. The attributable risk reduction from vaccination based on the Pfizer study is only 0.733%. Epidemiologists planning on a public health intervention do not use RRR (relative risk reduction) but ARR (attributable risk reduction) and NNV (number needed to vaccinate). It is self-serving and misleading to use 95% relative risk reduction to describe the efficacy of the vaccine. RRR only compares the reduction of risk of one who got the vaccine relative to the CONTROL IN THE STUDY, NOT the population.
Lastly, DOH data itself shows a Case Fatality Rate of 1.74 % and cases that are mild and asymptomatic account for 96.5% of cases . Good Lord, maski hindi ka mag-vaccine ang baba ng risk for severe disease and hospitalizations mo from the infections! Thus the threshold for AE from the vaccines should be very, very low and the clotting, neurologic, cardiovascular and hematologic adverse effects are theoretically unacceptable. Meantime, where are the cases overwhelming the hospital capacity coming from if only 4.5% of cases based on the DOH tracker is essentially severe? Maybe the Department of Pharmacology can explain the metrics and release a full discussion of their benefit:risk ratio calculation.
To all PLEASE do not reduce discussion of alternative opinions TO AN ANTI-VAXXER ISSUE because it is cowardly and unprofessional. Thanks .
1) Jiang, S. Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees. Nature. (16 March 2020)
------------
See also:
Covid 51, CDC Ph 5-points agenda, Dr. Eva Roxas lecture, August 07, 2021
Covid 52, PLOS paper in 2015, Joe Rogan, and more stories on vax injuries, August 08, 2021
Covid 53, More scientific studies on vax safety/non-safety, August 26, 2021
No comments:
Post a Comment