• Excess mortality
  • Trending

BNR: "Even Merck discourages ivermectin". Marianne Zwagerman wrongly corrected

by Anton Theunissen | 9 Feb 2022, 16:02

← Keijzer, Walk & Meester lopen stemmen mis tegen de coronapas. Kijk wat jij eraan kunt doen! Dutch Safety Board ignores quality of information RIVM: Wrong Intel →
reading time

BNR, NOS, OMT, Volkskrant, NRC, yes even the state attorney uses this argument because even in court top doctors and doctors beg to lift the ban on ivermectin – and always in vain, see for example here. Hardcore anti-quacks vote against ivermectin because evidence really has to come from the pharmaceutical companies, otherwise it can't be trusted. And those pharmaceutical companies, in turn, say 'No, we are not going to invest in that'. Even producer Merck doesn't want that. Why not? Again topical, because of the fuss about the column by Marianne Zwagerman. She had to adapt at the insistence of the BNR editors.

[update of article by Dec '21]

BNR radio did not want to post the column because of the phrase that 'Ivermectin does indeed work against corona' according to an article by Reuters.Source Reutersweakened the head to 'Ivermectin has an antiviral effect'. BNR wanted to have formulated that as well. In retrospect, I think Marianne would have been better off mentioning another source than changing the headline. Read on.

In their accountability for this editorial intervention, BNR writes:

"This is what is known so far about Ivermectin. A Japanese company, which did not yet share its research results, showed 'an antiviral effect'. Dozens of studies have been done on the effectiveness of Ivermectin for corona patients. Oneextensive scientific analysisof all studies show that there is no proven effect of Ivermectin. There is also no evidence that it does not work. Butmanufacturer Merckand theEuropean Medicines Agencydo not recommend use, because if there is already an effect of using the agent, it only occurs at high doses."

BNR claims to know what is known about ivermectin. I would like to supplement that with a selection of what else is known.

"A Japanese company"

Ōmura Satoshi, inventor of the free drug ivermectin distributed in Africa, has urged large pharmaceutical companies to investigate the effectiveness of ivermectin with an RCT (Randomized Controlled Trial, a widely accepted form of research that only large parties with deep pockets can pay for and execute). However, the 86-year-old Nobel Prize winner got the stocking on the head everywhere, including at Merck, which has had the patent on ivermectin. Unfortunately, they were not interested. See also this message from biznews.com.)

"that his research results did not yet share"

The investigation is ongoing. After all the controversies, no one benefits from spreading rumors too early, no matter how panting the press is chasing. Incidentally, a lot has already been previously demonstrated that ivermectin showed an anti-viral effect in the lab, so that's a bit old news.

"Dozens of studies have been done..."

Dozens? There are now 148 studies of which 98 peer-reviewed, including 78 with results comparing treatment and control groups. Below are two websites that keep overviews of almost all ivermectin studies.

https://ivmmeta.com/ (the 78 peer reviewed placebo studies)

https://c19ivermectin.com/ (broader overview)

"Aextensive scientific analysisof all studies"

“Eén” analyse. 1. De bedoelde Duitse analyse behandelt onderzoeken tot Mei 2021. Er is toen al veel over gezegd. We zijn intussen negen maanden verder met veel ontplofte kennis, voortgeschreden inzichten, teruggetrokken studies, censuur en allerlei controverses. Het is wel een beetje gemakkelijk om daar zo overheen te stappen. Desondanks levert deze studie een “onbeslist”, na afwijzing van het grootste deel van alle bestaande studies.

So here is the overriding argument:

"Butmanufacturer Merckand theEuropean Medicines Agencydo not recommend use"

EMA, like rivm, adopts the weighty (even decisive) argument from the FDA: "the manufacturer Merck advises against it itself". Among other things, for safety reasons. That's strange for a drug that has already been prescribed billions of times (I don't count people, horses and small pets). Then we would like to know how, why and in what context.

Something about Merck and the pharma business

Merck is a healthy company and it's their responsibility to keep it that way. If a producer like Merck sees the opportunity to become a co-producer of a vaccine to be rolled out worldwide (semi)annually, then it would be bad entrepreneurship to promote a pill instead whose patent has long since expired. The management would be replaced immediately.

A patent-free drug means competition and therefore suboptimal profit margins. That is not the business model of pharmaceutical companies. They invest large parts of their research budget in developing new versions of a drug that deviates enough to apply for a new patent and is good enough to replace the old one. It is all about the unique patent ownership because that gives the exclusive right and so interesting margins can be realized in negotiations with governments, insurers and healthcare institutions.

Merck itself also worked on a Covid vaccine, but that apparently did not go smoothly. They dropped that development when they could become a co-producer of the Janssen vaccine.
Het ging bij Covid-19 om ‘noodvaccins’ die onder zeer strikte voorwaarden vanwege de noodsituatie tijdelijk toegelaten zou worden (EUA). De ontwikkelingstijd was immers absurd kort. Dat was dankzij voorkennis en een procédé waarmee al ervaring was om uitgezaaide kanker in de laatste fase te bestrijden. Daar kon Merck niet tegenop.

Nu wordt een EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) moeilijk tot onmogelijk als er al andere medicatie beschikbaar is. Ivermectine zou dus roet in het eten kunnen gooien. Aandeelhouders zouden vragen stellen. Zo was Janssen ook op het idee gekomen om Merck aan boord te halen zodat ze hun ivermectine niet zouden gaan promoten. Zie hieronder de ontwikkeling in officiële persberichten van ivermectine-producent Merck.

Merck discourages Ivermectin – timeline. Pay attention to the dates 👇

I have cited these Merck press releases several times. Given the current events, thanks to the BNR report, the NOS news and ongoing court cases, I repeat them here:

January 25, 2021 6:45 am ETKENILWORTH, NJ – (BUSINESS WIRE) – Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside of the United States and Canada, today announced that the company is halting development of its SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 vaccine candidates.

Feb. 4, 2021 11:45 a.m. ETKENILWORTH, NJ – Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside of the United States and Canada, today confirmed its position regarding the use of ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. We continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that our analysis to date has shown:

  • No scientific basis for a possible therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from preclinical studies;
  • No meaningful evidence of clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;
  • A worrying lack of safety data in most studies.

2 March 2021 – Merck/MSD gaat helpen bij de productie van het ‘Leidse vaccin’ van Janssen. Op 2 maart 2021 kondigden we onze samenwerking met Johnson & Johnson (het moederbedrijf van Janssen) aan, waarbij we in de VS productiecapaciteit ter beschikking stellen.

They can be found at https://www.merck.com/media/news

Merck's objections to ivermectin can be questioned:

  • There is indeed scientific basis for a possible effect against Covid-19. Sufficient to justify a large-scale investigation. See for example this very recent study with 28,000 subjects, or this with 223,128 subjects, both from January 2021. Much earlier, even at the time, there was already an overwhelming amount of signals. These can also be traced via c19ivermectin.com and the website of the flccc.
  • “No meaningful evidence“. Daarmee wordt alles van tafel geveegd: wat is ‘meaningful’? Het woord significant durfden ze niet te gebruiken (want gewoon niet onderzocht, dus hoezo niet meaningful?). Met wat slechte wil bekeek je begin 2020 alleen de observaties en lokale onderzoekjes die niet voldeden niet aan onderzoeksnormen die alleen de farmaceuten kunnen betalen.
  • “A worrying lack of safety data” van het medicijn waarvan Merck al vele miljarden doses heeft verkocht en gratis uitgedeeld, met minimale bijwerkingen. Minder dan diverse wereldwijd gebruikte pijnstillers bijvoorbeeld (zie video’s van John Campbell).

"If there is an effect at all, it only occurs at high doses"

Dit is als ik mij goed herinner de bevinding van de eerste in vitro lab-onderzoeken en onderzoeken bij ernstig zieke patiënten. Het is een kwestie van vroeg inzetten, binnen een week na besmetting. Dat argument is dus inmiddels vervallen, zeker met ontwikkelingen als ivermectin administered by inhalation.

In order not to make this article too long, I am not going to make all kinds of other arguments again (such as here). It was now about analysing the motivation and expertise of the BNR editors. And to give Marianne a helping hand.

We ❤ you Marianne!!!

Videos

De nieuwe Covid-pil van Merck, Molnupiravir, is weliswaar wat less effective but patented. This also applies to the new Pfizer pill Paxlovid, which has (partly) the same mechanism as ivermectin.

Dr. John Campbell on Paxlovid vs ivermectin, 22 minutes:

Dr. John Campbell on Molnupiravir vs ivermectin, 29 minutes:

Sweet junk may strangely enough be used against Covid, while we are still dealing with largely obese Covid patients. ivermectin is strictly prohibited. I really wonder what's worse for those people.

"Even the producer (Merck, ed.) says ivermectin does not work against Covid-19."

Bouncer of the arguments in the boycott campaign dated 21 Dec. 2021 in the NOS news.

← previous post Next post →
Related reading pleasure:
Why Ivermectin doesn't work – or does (IVM Part II) Van Dissel also falsely informs the Chamber Molnupiravir vs ivermectin according to Dr. John Campbell

amnesty Anne Frank antibiotics Babies Bioweapons conspiracy theory

fraud ionization Mass formation Un Lawsuits thrombosis

safety Bulgaria Japan Koopmans Repopulation privacy

Mortality Monitor vitaminD cardiovascular ChatGPT Germany filosofie

obfuscation Parliamentary inquiry sociology Wob foreign country journalism

nocebo opinion alijst IC NRC Government information

responsibility narrative praise women Wynia hve

Level Children Public health Side effects infection scientific integrity

keulemans vaccine communication science vaccination excess mortality

statistics media science corruption aerosols lableak CBS

politics research mdhaero ivermectin Measures disinformation

Wuhan Vaccination readiness paradogma Australia Pfizer OUR

Badbatches Fauci Post-Covid norm mortality lockdowns Burkhardt

Baseline UK rivm Excess mortality debate Gupta effectiveness

data censorship asmr deferred care RKI PeterSweden

Ukraine John Causes WOO VE Spike

qaly motive Lareb Hotels heart failure ethics variegated

bhakdi monkeypox Anti-VAX fear

Views (inst:8-10-'21): 1.435
← Keijzer, Walk & Meester lopen stemmen mis tegen de coronapas. Kijk wat jij eraan kunt doen! Dutch Safety Board ignores quality of information RIVM: Wrong Intel →

Would you like a notification e-mail with each new article?

Thanks for your interest!
Some fields are missing or incorrect!
Bijdragen aan virusvaria mag. Klik en vul zelf het bedrag in
👇
Contribute something? Please! Click here.
👍

Out mortality is with vaccinates!

jul 20, 2025

Causes of death behind the excess of women between 40 and 50 years old

jul 20, 2025

Vaccination Effectiveness Negative says Grok

jul 14, 2025

Pregnancy and vaccinations: 45% more miscarriages in week 8-13 (IL), 30% fewer delivery (CZ)

jul 2, 2025

Plottwist: educational levels, vaccination willingness and data silence with Wouter Aukema

jun 29, 2025

Deferred care and excess mortality

jun 22, 2025

Flawed researchers brush up their act with a novelty: the ‘Healthy Vaccinee Effect’

jun 14, 2025

Mortality by cause of death: New (cancer)

jun 12, 2025

And the winner is indeed: Bulgaria!

jun 8, 2025

Mortality by cause of death: cardiovascular disease

mei 30, 2025

And the winner will be...

mei 27, 2025

Cracked Counter Noise Bell

May 24, 2025

« Previous Page

Contribute something? Please! Click here.

Translation


© Contact Anton Theunissen
We use a cookie bar on our website to inform you that we analyze the use. We do not use cookies for marketing purposes. (Google respects the privacy laws.)
OK
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDuurBeschrijving
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
OPSLAAN & ACCEPTEREN
Aangedreven door CookieYes Logo