When I was 21, I almost died from a DVT from the Pill. I was put on Coumadin for a year. A teacher tested my blood during this time and said he’d never seen anyone with as low a cholesterol level as I had. Obviously, not a good period in my life. I was a mess.
Why don't they teach Natural Family Planning methods? because they are free and more reliable! and more in accordance to the Word of God, who cursed Onan for using a contraception method).
Early Christian writers have sometimes focused on the spilling seed, and the sexual act being used for non-procreational purposes. This interpretation was held by several early Christian apologists. Jerome, for example, argued:
But I wonder why he the heretic Jovinianus set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he begrudged his brother his seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?
— Jerome, Against Jovinian 1:19 (AD 393)
Epiphanius of Salamis wrote against heretics who used coitus interruptus, calling it the sin of Οnan:[33]
They soil their bodies, minds and souls with unchastity. Some of them masquerade as monastics, and their woman companions as female monastics. And they are physically corrupted because they satisfy their appetite but, to put it politely, by the act of Onan the son of Judah. For as Onan coupled with Tamar and satisfied his appetite but did not complete the act by planting his seed for the God-given [purpose of] procreation and did himself harm instead, thus, as [he] did the vile thing, so these people have used their supposed [female monastics], committing this infamy. For purity is not their concern, but a hypocritical purity in name. Their concern is limited to ensuring that the woman the seeming [ascetic] has seduced does not get pregnant—either so as not to cause child-bearing, or to escape detection, since they want to be honored for their supposed celibacy. In any case, this is what they do, but others endeavor to get this same filthy satisfaction not with women but by other means, and pollute themselves with their own hands. They too imitate the son of Judah, soil the ground with their forbidden practices and drops of filthy fluid and rub their emissions into the earth with their feet
— Epiphanius of Salamis, Boston, 2010, p. 131
Clement of Alexandria, while not making explicit reference to Onan, similarly reflects an early Christian view of the abhorrence of spilling seed:
Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted.
— Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (AD 191)
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature.
— Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:95:3
I'm curious about something. I've known about Ivermectin for many years being a pet owner and years in Florida even more so. However, it was always used w caution and kept a close eye on for liver damage. Even more recently my dog's new heartworm med has, if I recall, less ivermectin bc of toxicity? I understand it's use but is it my imagination or is it now touted as completely safe?
Thanks for writing. It's given even to dialysis patients!
Ivermectin safety
• No adverse events at COVID drug regimen
• One of the 100 most essential drugs recommended by the WHO
• 3.7 billion doses taken by humans without reported severe side effects
• So safe, that it is an over the counter drug in most countries
• A nature derived medicine (from a bacteria)
A review of 350 articles from scientific journals, concluded:
“It is noteworthy that no deaths have seemingly ever been reported after an accidental or suicidal overdose of ivermectin. No greater toxicity of ivermectin has been substantiated in elderly people despite repeated assertions that an ageing blood-brain barrier might lead to increased ivermectin toxicity level. The positive clinical experience accumulated with ivermectin administration led many medical experts to break away from early adamant contra-indications in pregnant women. Finally, several national pharmacovigilance networks around the world released information and opinions to ascertain ivermectin safety in human subjects. So far, there are no critical safety limitations to ivermectin prescription in current indications.” 1
Note: avermectin is considered teratogenic. Ivermectin, selamectin, doramectin and moxidectin, are avermectin family members but less toxic. If it wouldn’t be possible to use other effective tratments in the mother, maybe P-glycoprotein (P-gp) could better protect the unborn baby.2
1. Practically no contraindications at suggested dosage (cf. vaccine table below).
2. Safe at 10x low dose.
3. Practically no risk of self-medicated overdose (especially if distributed in dropper).
According to a World Health Organization document3:
“Pharmacological strategies to increase the efficacy of ivermectin include:
a. The use of doses higher than the ones approved for onchocerciasis and LF (lymphatic filariasis);
b. Periodic re-dosing schemes;
c. Slow-release formulations suitable for administration in a single encounter;…
… ivermectin has a remarkable safety profile. Limited data suggest that higher doses are also safe.
• 400 mcg/kg… four times a year … is remarkably safe for humans weighing more than 15 kg 4
• More frequent administration has been recommended 5
• In fact, single doses as high as 2000 mcg/kg (10-fold the dose currently used for onchocerciasis) and cumulative doses of up to 3200 mcg/kg in 1week have been well tolerated by healthy volunteers.” 6
The central nervous system (CNS) is the primary target of ivermectin toxicity in all species examined. Preclinical safety studies … have included 14 weeks of daily repeated administration in rats and dogs, establishing a “no observed adverse event level”(NOAEL) of 400 and 500 mcg/kg/day, respectively.
In another study using ascending dosesin Rhesus monkeys, emesis was first observedat the 2000 mcg/kg dose–a level that is significantly higher than the exposure required to kill feeding mosquitoes. Phase I trials in healthy volunteers in the US have suggested that a single dose of up to 2000 mcg/kg is well tolerated.
Multiple-dose studies in human volunteers have shown that cumulative doses of up to 3200 mcg/kg in a week or quarterly doses of up to 800 mcg/kg are well tolerated. The adult dose approved by the US FDA for onchocerciasis and LF is 150–200mcg/kg; multiple-dose regimens at this dose have been approved in Australia for scabies. Until March 2015, the cumulative number of ivermectin tablets used worldwide was 2.7 billion, accounting for more than 928 million patient-years of treatment (Hetty Wask in MD, Merck, personal communication). Most of these tablets have been used in the context of MDA programmes for onchocerciasis or LF. With the standard dose of 150–200 mcg/kg, the most common, direct adverse events seen in disease programmes or field studies have been hypersensitivity and inflammatory/allergic reactions (arthralgia 9.3%, lymphadenopathy 1.2–12.6%, rash/pruritus 22.7% and fever 22.6%). Patients with existing hyperreactive onchodermatitis may be more likely to experience severe adverse reactions.
There are no published reports of life threatening immune reactions such as Stevens Johnson Syndrome, despite the fact that this possibility is noted on the label. Ivermectin MDAs at higher concentrations have been performed for NTDs. Ivermectin (400 mcg/kg) MDAs have been administered safely to thousands of people in India, Cameroon, Papua New Guinea and French Polynesia with minimal adverse events reported. Ramaiah et al. have conducted the largest human study to date of ivermectin MDA at 400 mcg/kg; in the study, five entire villages, roughly 10000 people, were treated by MDA nine times over an 11-year period. French regulatory authorities have recommended ivermectin (400 mcg/kg) MDA in selected areas. The primary safety concern is Loaloa-associated encephalopathy, which places a geographical restriction on the deployment of ivermectin. However, the mechanism is not well understood. The clinical safety of ivermectin during pregnancy has not been appropriately studied. Preclinical studies in pregnant mice, rats and rabbits have shown teratogenicity at doses toxic to the mother (… 5000 mcg/kg and 3000 mcg/kg during pregnancy days 6–18, respectively). Ivermectin has been shown to produce delayed development and increase pup mortality in rats at maternal doses of 1600 mcg/kg. To track exposure in pregnancy, 1276 reports of inadvertent exposure in pregnant women have been filed, of which 442 were in the first trimester. Toxicology studies in neonatal Rhesus monkey shaves how no adverse reactions after 2weeks of daily 100 mcg/kg doses. Safety in paediatric patients weighing less than 15 kg has not been evaluated, and this population is currently not included on the US FDA-approved label.
According to INCHEM.org, a WHO website for “Internationally Peer Reviewed Chemical Safety Information” 7: “Amounts approaching the therapeutic doses in animals (100 to 200 ðg/kg bodyweight) are not hazardous to humans. Ingestions of large quantities (10 to 100 times the animal therapeutic dosage) may produce symptoms resembling those observed in animal toxicology studies at high toxic levels.”
Is the 15 kg base limit for children is a misunderstanding from this extreme case?: “A 16-month-old boy weighing 15 kg ingested approximately 100 to 130 mg (8.7 mg/kg = 130mg/15kg) of ivermectin (as an injectable solution). Ten hours post-ingestion he had mydriasis in one pupil, with frequent vomiting, pallor, 35°C temperature, tachycardia, somnolence and variable blood pressure. He developed urticaria the following day, and had recovered after three days (MSD, 1988).” The baby had swallowed near 10 times the highest dose recommended for COVID (800 mcg/kg).
Mutagenicity: not detected. Teratogenicity: “In a Liberian community-based ivermectin therapy programme, the incidence of major congenital malformations in children born both to ivermectin-treated and untreated mothers was about 2.5%, a figure comparable with rates previously reported in the population at large in Africa (WHO, 1990b). No adverse effects were reported when pregnant mares were given six oral doses of ivermectin 0.6 mg/kg paste at two-week intervals during organogenesis and early pregnancy, and six intramuscular injections of ivermectin at 0.6 mg/kg at two-month intervals during the last two trimesters. The foals born were also unaffected (Campbell & Benz, 1984). Ivermectin is teratogenic in rats, rabbit and mice at or near materno-toxic dose levels. The abnormalities are limited mainly to cleft palate. Mice are the most sensitive species to the effect of ivermectin with maternotoxicity at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day (MSD, 1988).”
Toxicodynamics: “Ivermectin acts on insects by potentiation of GABA-ergic neural and neuromuscular transmission but since mammals have only central GABA-ergic synapses which are to a large extent protected by the blood-brain barrier they are relatively resistant to ivermectin. Some penetration of the blood-brain barrier does occur at relatively high doses, with brain levels peaking between two and five hours after administration. Symptoms seen in a range of mammalian species are CNS depression, and consequent ataxia, as might be expected from potentiation of inhibitory GABA-ergic synapses (Hayes & Laws, 1991).”
“Should not be given to mothers who are breast-feeding until the infant is at least three months old” (less than 2% ends up in breast milk). 8
Pardon me for butting in, but are you speaking about warnings with respect to administering ivermectin to dogs, specifically? That certainly could be the case, because dogs and other nonhumans have quite different metabolisms, and what may be medicine for one species can be useless or even harmful for another.
The anti-parasite medication I get from our vet for my cats is selamectin rather than ivermectin. I'm not sure why or what the reason for this is--could be something as mundane as selamectin still being under patent unlike ivermectin, but there may be other factors as well. In any case, label warnings can be expected to differ for different animal species.
When will a truly scientific approach to the existence of viruses and contagion be done? Seriously, I pursued the scientific proof of both and discovered there is no proof. So I ponder making claims about "covid" and what "makes it better," or "makes it worse" in a publication labeled "Scientific Progress."
Natto comes from the earth, somewhere. Ivermectin comes from earth, somewhere. They both seem to stop the badness. Anyone see a similarity?
Is atherosclerosis caused by high cholesterol?
U. Ravnskov QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, Volume 95, Issue 6, June 2002, Pages 397–403, https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/95.6.397
See these sections in the paper
-Cholesterol does not predict degree of atherosclerosis at autopsy
-Cholesterol does not correlate with degree of coronary atherosclerosis on angiography
-Cholesterol does not correlate with degree of coronary calcification
-Cholesterol does not correlate with degree of peripheral atherosclerosis
When I was 21, I almost died from a DVT from the Pill. I was put on Coumadin for a year. A teacher tested my blood during this time and said he’d never seen anyone with as low a cholesterol level as I had. Obviously, not a good period in my life. I was a mess.
I feel so good eating healthy fats now.
Because of clots, the pill is one of the culling methods used to reduce the population: ob/gyns giving it are accessory to murder.
https://www.hli.org/resources/negative-effects-of-the-pill/
Why don't they teach Natural Family Planning methods? because they are free and more reliable! and more in accordance to the Word of God, who cursed Onan for using a contraception method).
Early Christian writers have sometimes focused on the spilling seed, and the sexual act being used for non-procreational purposes. This interpretation was held by several early Christian apologists. Jerome, for example, argued:
But I wonder why he the heretic Jovinianus set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he begrudged his brother his seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?
— Jerome, Against Jovinian 1:19 (AD 393)
Epiphanius of Salamis wrote against heretics who used coitus interruptus, calling it the sin of Οnan:[33]
They soil their bodies, minds and souls with unchastity. Some of them masquerade as monastics, and their woman companions as female monastics. And they are physically corrupted because they satisfy their appetite but, to put it politely, by the act of Onan the son of Judah. For as Onan coupled with Tamar and satisfied his appetite but did not complete the act by planting his seed for the God-given [purpose of] procreation and did himself harm instead, thus, as [he] did the vile thing, so these people have used their supposed [female monastics], committing this infamy. For purity is not their concern, but a hypocritical purity in name. Their concern is limited to ensuring that the woman the seeming [ascetic] has seduced does not get pregnant—either so as not to cause child-bearing, or to escape detection, since they want to be honored for their supposed celibacy. In any case, this is what they do, but others endeavor to get this same filthy satisfaction not with women but by other means, and pollute themselves with their own hands. They too imitate the son of Judah, soil the ground with their forbidden practices and drops of filthy fluid and rub their emissions into the earth with their feet
— Epiphanius of Salamis, Boston, 2010, p. 131
Clement of Alexandria, while not making explicit reference to Onan, similarly reflects an early Christian view of the abhorrence of spilling seed:
Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted.
— Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (AD 191)
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature.
— Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:95:3
There is plenty of evidence out there about the cholesterol farce. Dr. Mercola wrote about it years ago.
That's good, but he's a never-found virus pusher:
https://takecontrol.substack.com/archive?search=sars%20cov%202
I'm curious about something. I've known about Ivermectin for many years being a pet owner and years in Florida even more so. However, it was always used w caution and kept a close eye on for liver damage. Even more recently my dog's new heartworm med has, if I recall, less ivermectin bc of toxicity? I understand it's use but is it my imagination or is it now touted as completely safe?
Thanks for writing. It's given even to dialysis patients!
Ivermectin safety
• No adverse events at COVID drug regimen
• One of the 100 most essential drugs recommended by the WHO
• 3.7 billion doses taken by humans without reported severe side effects
• So safe, that it is an over the counter drug in most countries
• A nature derived medicine (from a bacteria)
A review of 350 articles from scientific journals, concluded:
“It is noteworthy that no deaths have seemingly ever been reported after an accidental or suicidal overdose of ivermectin. No greater toxicity of ivermectin has been substantiated in elderly people despite repeated assertions that an ageing blood-brain barrier might lead to increased ivermectin toxicity level. The positive clinical experience accumulated with ivermectin administration led many medical experts to break away from early adamant contra-indications in pregnant women. Finally, several national pharmacovigilance networks around the world released information and opinions to ascertain ivermectin safety in human subjects. So far, there are no critical safety limitations to ivermectin prescription in current indications.” 1
Note: avermectin is considered teratogenic. Ivermectin, selamectin, doramectin and moxidectin, are avermectin family members but less toxic. If it wouldn’t be possible to use other effective tratments in the mother, maybe P-glycoprotein (P-gp) could better protect the unborn baby.2
1. Practically no contraindications at suggested dosage (cf. vaccine table below).
2. Safe at 10x low dose.
3. Practically no risk of self-medicated overdose (especially if distributed in dropper).
According to a World Health Organization document3:
“Pharmacological strategies to increase the efficacy of ivermectin include:
a. The use of doses higher than the ones approved for onchocerciasis and LF (lymphatic filariasis);
b. Periodic re-dosing schemes;
c. Slow-release formulations suitable for administration in a single encounter;…
… ivermectin has a remarkable safety profile. Limited data suggest that higher doses are also safe.
• 400 mcg/kg… four times a year … is remarkably safe for humans weighing more than 15 kg 4
• More frequent administration has been recommended 5
• In fact, single doses as high as 2000 mcg/kg (10-fold the dose currently used for onchocerciasis) and cumulative doses of up to 3200 mcg/kg in 1week have been well tolerated by healthy volunteers.” 6
The central nervous system (CNS) is the primary target of ivermectin toxicity in all species examined. Preclinical safety studies … have included 14 weeks of daily repeated administration in rats and dogs, establishing a “no observed adverse event level”(NOAEL) of 400 and 500 mcg/kg/day, respectively.
In another study using ascending dosesin Rhesus monkeys, emesis was first observedat the 2000 mcg/kg dose–a level that is significantly higher than the exposure required to kill feeding mosquitoes. Phase I trials in healthy volunteers in the US have suggested that a single dose of up to 2000 mcg/kg is well tolerated.
Multiple-dose studies in human volunteers have shown that cumulative doses of up to 3200 mcg/kg in a week or quarterly doses of up to 800 mcg/kg are well tolerated. The adult dose approved by the US FDA for onchocerciasis and LF is 150–200mcg/kg; multiple-dose regimens at this dose have been approved in Australia for scabies. Until March 2015, the cumulative number of ivermectin tablets used worldwide was 2.7 billion, accounting for more than 928 million patient-years of treatment (Hetty Wask in MD, Merck, personal communication). Most of these tablets have been used in the context of MDA programmes for onchocerciasis or LF. With the standard dose of 150–200 mcg/kg, the most common, direct adverse events seen in disease programmes or field studies have been hypersensitivity and inflammatory/allergic reactions (arthralgia 9.3%, lymphadenopathy 1.2–12.6%, rash/pruritus 22.7% and fever 22.6%). Patients with existing hyperreactive onchodermatitis may be more likely to experience severe adverse reactions.
There are no published reports of life threatening immune reactions such as Stevens Johnson Syndrome, despite the fact that this possibility is noted on the label. Ivermectin MDAs at higher concentrations have been performed for NTDs. Ivermectin (400 mcg/kg) MDAs have been administered safely to thousands of people in India, Cameroon, Papua New Guinea and French Polynesia with minimal adverse events reported. Ramaiah et al. have conducted the largest human study to date of ivermectin MDA at 400 mcg/kg; in the study, five entire villages, roughly 10000 people, were treated by MDA nine times over an 11-year period. French regulatory authorities have recommended ivermectin (400 mcg/kg) MDA in selected areas. The primary safety concern is Loaloa-associated encephalopathy, which places a geographical restriction on the deployment of ivermectin. However, the mechanism is not well understood. The clinical safety of ivermectin during pregnancy has not been appropriately studied. Preclinical studies in pregnant mice, rats and rabbits have shown teratogenicity at doses toxic to the mother (… 5000 mcg/kg and 3000 mcg/kg during pregnancy days 6–18, respectively). Ivermectin has been shown to produce delayed development and increase pup mortality in rats at maternal doses of 1600 mcg/kg. To track exposure in pregnancy, 1276 reports of inadvertent exposure in pregnant women have been filed, of which 442 were in the first trimester. Toxicology studies in neonatal Rhesus monkey shaves how no adverse reactions after 2weeks of daily 100 mcg/kg doses. Safety in paediatric patients weighing less than 15 kg has not been evaluated, and this population is currently not included on the US FDA-approved label.
According to INCHEM.org, a WHO website for “Internationally Peer Reviewed Chemical Safety Information” 7: “Amounts approaching the therapeutic doses in animals (100 to 200 ðg/kg bodyweight) are not hazardous to humans. Ingestions of large quantities (10 to 100 times the animal therapeutic dosage) may produce symptoms resembling those observed in animal toxicology studies at high toxic levels.”
Is the 15 kg base limit for children is a misunderstanding from this extreme case?: “A 16-month-old boy weighing 15 kg ingested approximately 100 to 130 mg (8.7 mg/kg = 130mg/15kg) of ivermectin (as an injectable solution). Ten hours post-ingestion he had mydriasis in one pupil, with frequent vomiting, pallor, 35°C temperature, tachycardia, somnolence and variable blood pressure. He developed urticaria the following day, and had recovered after three days (MSD, 1988).” The baby had swallowed near 10 times the highest dose recommended for COVID (800 mcg/kg).
Mutagenicity: not detected. Teratogenicity: “In a Liberian community-based ivermectin therapy programme, the incidence of major congenital malformations in children born both to ivermectin-treated and untreated mothers was about 2.5%, a figure comparable with rates previously reported in the population at large in Africa (WHO, 1990b). No adverse effects were reported when pregnant mares were given six oral doses of ivermectin 0.6 mg/kg paste at two-week intervals during organogenesis and early pregnancy, and six intramuscular injections of ivermectin at 0.6 mg/kg at two-month intervals during the last two trimesters. The foals born were also unaffected (Campbell & Benz, 1984). Ivermectin is teratogenic in rats, rabbit and mice at or near materno-toxic dose levels. The abnormalities are limited mainly to cleft palate. Mice are the most sensitive species to the effect of ivermectin with maternotoxicity at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day (MSD, 1988).”
Toxicodynamics: “Ivermectin acts on insects by potentiation of GABA-ergic neural and neuromuscular transmission but since mammals have only central GABA-ergic synapses which are to a large extent protected by the blood-brain barrier they are relatively resistant to ivermectin. Some penetration of the blood-brain barrier does occur at relatively high doses, with brain levels peaking between two and five hours after administration. Symptoms seen in a range of mammalian species are CNS depression, and consequent ataxia, as might be expected from potentiation of inhibitory GABA-ergic synapses (Hayes & Laws, 1991).”
“Should not be given to mothers who are breast-feeding until the infant is at least three months old” (less than 2% ends up in breast milk). 8
References here:
http://bit.ly/research2000
Then why was it monitored so heavily and warned against liver damage?
Pardon me for butting in, but are you speaking about warnings with respect to administering ivermectin to dogs, specifically? That certainly could be the case, because dogs and other nonhumans have quite different metabolisms, and what may be medicine for one species can be useless or even harmful for another.
The anti-parasite medication I get from our vet for my cats is selamectin rather than ivermectin. I'm not sure why or what the reason for this is--could be something as mundane as selamectin still being under patent unlike ivermectin, but there may be other factors as well. In any case, label warnings can be expected to differ for different animal species.
Thanks. Dogs and cats actually.
Anybody know how to make natto? Can we purchase the cultures somewhere and start making our own? You know they will outlaw it since it's good for us.
This is what I found:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTZNXJgZc38
Search for "homemade nattokinase without starter"
If you find something better please share!
Thank you!
When will a truly scientific approach to the existence of viruses and contagion be done? Seriously, I pursued the scientific proof of both and discovered there is no proof. So I ponder making claims about "covid" and what "makes it better," or "makes it worse" in a publication labeled "Scientific Progress."
A Post to Be Viral (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/a-post-to-be-viral
Dear Amaterasu, you'll find a chapter proving that here: http://bit.ly/research2000
I suggest you study in depth the history of the tobacco plant virus, how it was purified, isolated, re-innoculated, and cured.
Seems I have to relinquish My email to read that. Sam's work does not require that. Anywhere I can get the PDF without having to tag M'self?
I will look it over, but anOther has done some looking, too:
Tobacco Mosaic “Virus” - The beginning & end of virology
https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/tobacco-mosaic-virus-the-beginning-and-end-of-virology:8
Are You familiar with the Dr.s Bailey, Sam(antha) and Mark?