Covid hasn’t yet come through Queensland where I live, but it will come sooner or later.

Like many people, I’m wrestling with a decision on whether to risk Covid, whether to risk vaccines or whether to risk ‘alternative’ treatments like Ivermectin with Zink and so forth.

What really bothers me is the dishonest way that the great majority of the mainstream media and politicians are being highly partisan in their approach to this subject (and I’m being kind here).

For instance, in story after story, the media describe Ivermectin in derogatory terms such as “frequently used to deworm horses.”

Whilst this is strictly true, it is highly misleading and omits the fact that Ivermectin is also frequently used to treat people for various ailments including being widely used in the Australian Aboriginal community to treat potentially deadly scabies infections.

As David Archerfield explained in his previous Richardson Post article, Ivermectin, even in very large doses, is rarely fatal.

Having made Ivermectin difficult to obtain, however, some people have been driven to obtain veterinary versions which are not recommended for human consumption.

One such individual subsequently died of Covid as was gleefully reported in this article.

These attacks on Ivermectin are as nonsensical as the attacks on Hydroxychloroquine before it.

The reasons given for those attacks were that Hydroxychloroquine was needed to treat lupus and arthritis.

People who attempted to take Hydroxychloroquine for Covid 19 were accused of depriving others who needed the drug and were actually called “selfish.”

That’s right folks, if you want to save your life by depriving others of a joint pain remedy (of which there are many alternatives) you are a selfish a’hole.

Unbelievably, no attempt was made to increase supplies of this commonly available generic drug. Instead, it was banned with a $13,000 fine for any doctor prescribing it for Covid.

Getting back to Ivermectin, this widely available drug has undergone numerous trials.

A thorough analysis of 63 of these Ivermectin studies can be found here. This analysis concluded that (and I quote)

“Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 63 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 1 trillion. As expected for an effective treatment, early treatment is more successful, with an estimated reduction of 72% in the effect measured using random effects meta-analysis (RR 0.28 [0.18-0.45]). 37% and 96% lower mortality is observed for early treatment and prophylaxis”

Yep, 96% less deaths for early treatment. You might think that given the hysteria surrounding Covid, that Governments and media hacks would pay attention to a statistic like that, but of course, you would be wrong.

All they seem interested in promoting, are largely unsubstantiated claims of harm from Ivermectin and the benefits of multi-billion-dollar mass vaccination campaigns which seem sketchy at best.

What is even more suspicious is that whilst any adverse effects of Ivermectin are trumpeted by media and politicians,  COVID vaccine deaths reported to VAERS in the USA stood at just under 11,000 as of July 16.

This represents more deaths reported from all other vaccines combined since the VAERS system was established in 1990 but when was the last time you saw one of these deaths reported on the TV news?

Almost as bad, is when the press twist words to create demonstrably false impressions as in this incredible example:

“Dr. Fred Wagshul is co-founder of the nonprofit Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, which suggests Ivermectin as both a preventative and treatment for COVID-19.

Dr. Wagshul reportedly prescribed the drug to Jeffery but the hospital refused to administer it. Julie petitioned the court on Aug. 20 and three days later Judge Gregory Howard gave Dr. Wagshul the go-ahead to prescribe 30 milligrams of Ivermectin daily for three weeks, per the report.

The Smiths’ case is the latest where courts have forced doctors to use Ivermectin at the request of the ailing patient’s family.”

Did you read that correctly? A doctor wishes to prescribe Ivermectin, the hospital refuses to allow it but when a court overrides the hospital, they have “forced doctors to use Ivermectin.”

Meanwhile, it was the judge who told the doctor what, and how much, he could prescribe to his patient.

“Excuse me your honour, must I take these with food or do I have to have them on an empty stomach?”

I honestly don’t know how these people look at themselves in a mirror.

That isn’t to say that Ivermectin is definitely a ‘miracle cure’ for Covid. An Oxford University study looked at 10 Ivermectin trials and concluded there was no benefit from Ivermectin.

From what I can determine, however, all of the trials were carried out in Third World Countries, most administered just a single dose and they reported a high risk of bias in most of them (don’t take my word for it, check it out yourself)

Throughout this pandemic, authorities have been handing out increasingly totalitarian diktats with a demand that we accept without question their infallible knowledge of what is best.

Then, just a few days ago, NSW finally admitted to what us ‘Right Wing conspiracy nuts” have been saying all along.

That they have been “recording patients as dying ‘with’ Covid instead of ‘from’ after finally acknowledging many of Australia’s 993 casualties died from something else or had even recovered from the virus.”

Again, you read that correctly. Many of Australia’s Covid deaths were not Covid deaths at all. They were lying to you once more.

In the most incredible twist of irony so far, however, Sweden has just banned Israelis from entering their country due to high rates of Covid infection.

As you may recall, Sweden is the country that refused to go along with the official line whilst Israel is the nation which took it to extremes.

Almost 30% of Israelis have had a triple jab whilst practically all of them have had at least 2.

Meanwhile, Sweden’s death rate from Covid has practically flatlined at zero, despite the fact that they use a model which tends to over exaggerate their death rate.

So what to do?

In times past, it made sense to trust Government and media on issues of public health.

Unfortunately, the current crop of politicians, bureaucrats and journalists have destroyed that trust and appear to be more interested in protecting the profits of the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry.

What is most worrying is that the vaccines being forced on us are a radical gene altering medication with no long-term studies to guide us.

Even the short-term effects are being hidden by (anti) social media companies, regular media and governments.

In my previous employment welding and fabricating live pipework in oil refineries and gas plants I was required to assess and evaluate insane risks on a daily basis.

We don’t know the long-term risks involved in giving everyone a Covid vaccine but let’s just take one example.

Suppose that everyone who took the vaccine had children who were sterile? We wouldn’t find that out for almost 2 decades.

By the time we realised, we would have wiped out most of our capacity to reproduce our population.

I don’t know what the chance of that happening is, but I know it isn’t zero.

With such a catastrophic consequence involved, it is simply insane to go ahead with mass vaccination, even if the vaccines were 100% effective and had zero short term risks (which they aren’t and don’t).

The whole thing stinks like a 3 day old, unrefrigerated fish and forcing these vaccines on the population could turn out to be a public health catastrophe, an act of mass genocide or anything in between.

I pray to God that I’m wrong.