The Lancet published a Dutch study on the remarkably low Covid rate in certain areas of Africa and possible links with intestinal parasites. Because I had already linked that Covid resistance to the spread of ivermectin and when I tried in vain to find alternative explanations, I started reading the article that appeared in the NRC about this. By Niki Korteweg, in conversation with the Dutch researcher: molecular biologist Tobias Rinke de Wit. After all, it could very well be that it was not ivermectin that was the protective factor, but parasites against which ivermectin is also used. This ranges from single-celled organisms to long worms. The word ivermectin does not appear in the NRC article. So I looked for the Covid-19 context myself.
The research result in a nutshell
The stool of 751 Covid patients was examined for the occurrence of parasites. Of the 751 Covid patients, 255 developed 'severe Covid-19':
- In the group WITHOUT parasites, about half of the patients (49%) developed severe Covid-19.
- In the group of patients WITH parasites, less than a tenth of the patients (9%) developed severe Covid-19.
- There were eleven deaths; all parasiteless(!).
Comorbidities, especially chronic conditions, were much less common in the parasite carriers. That is also an indication that having a parasite can have a positive influence on the immune system. The possible mechanisms are the NRC article said. Either way, it's clear that there's a correlation. But now.
"Now, of course, we want to know if it's a causal relationship [and if so], which parasites give protection, and how long you should have them."Researcher Tobias Rinke de Wit in the article in NRC
Image from the study in the Lancet https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00334-5/fulltext
So not ivermectin...
Could ivermectin use perhaps be a factor in the difference between parasite carriers and non-parasite carriers? The word "ivermectin" appears twice in the play. "None of these patients received ivermectin." and "none of the patients co-infected with parasites included in the cohort did receive anti-parasitic drug ivermectin". So ivermectin is not a factor in the difference between the two groups. Worms could therefore do a good job for the immune system, perhaps that is the underlying cause that there is so little Covid-19 in ivermectin areas.
... Or is it?
It can also be read differently. Nowhere in the selection procedure does it say that ivermectin users are excluded from the study. It only looked at positive PCR tests from random patients who were hospitalized. Wasn't there a single ivermectin user among them!? Zero positive tests is very little, maybe they don't participate in who's ivermectin programs? Yes; in Ethiopia, depending on the district, 60% to 85% of the population uses ivermectin. Let's keep it at 50% for a moment because I can't figure out exactly what the coverage is per district. Then my preliminary conclusion is:
Half of Ethiopians use ivermectin. Of a randomly selected group of 751 Covid-19 patients, not one was found to be taking ivermectin. The chance that ivermectin does not play a role in this is extremely small.
Of course, that does not alter the fact that the worms do not play a role. If you do not have ivermectin, you can always try parasites in any case.
P.S.: WNo one has asked those stranglers if they feel more at home in a healthy body and perhaps leave the sinking ship when they realize that the time has come. That would reverse the causality because that would mean that parasites prefer to seek out healthy bodies, which will also be less polluted by comorbidities and the medication against them. The healing effect of the bugs is not there – but that's me, it must be nonsense, otherwise those scientists would have come up with that... (On the other hand, vitamin D is also questioned as a helpful substance against Covid-19. According to that reasoning, the fact that severe Covid-19 patients have significantly lower Vitamin D levels may be because the disease breaks down Vitamin D. So why not the parasites?)