© Gateway Pundit
Twitter has blocked a link to an article in a
peer-reviewed scientific journal that suggested the antiparasitic drug ivermectin could be useful against Covid-19. The platform claims the journal's website is "potentially unsafe."
Twitter user Karl Denninger (@TickerGuy) posted a link to an observational
study in the
European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences that found healthcare workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh who were treated with ivermectin as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP) were markedly less likely to become infected with Covid-19. Just 6.9 percent of those given the drug tested positive for Covid-19, while a whopping 73.3 percent of those who did not became infected.
No sooner had his tweet slamming the "GHOULS" in charge of the US response to the pandemic (and telling doubters to stick the study where the sun doesn't shine) gone live on Thursday morning, however, than Denninger discovered Twitter had blocked the link with a warning screen advising users "this site may be unsafe."
Users who attempted to access the peer-reviewed journal were confronted with an alert that the link was "identified by Twitter or [its] partners as being potentially spammy or unsafe" and could potentially "steal personal information or harm electronic devices." This would be quite an accomplishment for a static text-only page with no links or scripts running.
Twitter's fondness for blocking traffic to "wrongthink" sites with spurious warning pages is a well-established headache for the alternative media, but ejmed.org is no ZeroHedge or BitChute. Indeed, it's not political at all, let alone pro- or anti-establishment. Nevertheless, the social media behemoth saw fit to block not just that one article,
but the whole ejmed.org site.
Even in the face of such a significant difference between the experimental and control trial group, the authors were tentative in their conclusions, stating only that ivermectin "should be subjected to large-scale trials all over the world to ascertain its effectiveness as pre-exposure prophylaxis for Covid-19."
While the off-patent drug is best known as a deworming medicine, it also has an established reputation as an antiviral drug. Over two dozen
trials have suggested it is effective in treating even late-stage Covid-19, including one successful study by the same Bangladeshi researchers who published the ivermectin-as-PreP paper.
Were such a drug to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of Covid-19, however,
it could jeopardize the newly-released vaccines' emergency use authorization, which requires there be no safe and approved treatments for a disease before a vaccine can be deployed on an emergency basis. Ivermectin is FDA-approved — like another controversial drug, hydroxychloroquine, it's been on the market for decades for use treating other conditions. However, the agency has thus far refused to consider approving ivermectin to treat coronavirus.
While Twitter has not explained its decision to block the entire website of the
European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, the platform declared earlier this month that it would be removing all "misleading" tweets about vaccines. Any post that suggests vaccines intentionally cause harm, "control populations," or have side effects is fair game, as is any tweet that suggests Covid-19 is not serious. While most of these guidelines are subjective, Twitter plans to double down on them in the new year, adding warning labels to tweets with "disputed" claims about vaccines.
For now, however, Denninger seems to have found a way around Twitter's mysterious outburst of anti-academic bigotry, posting a screen-cap of another study that came to similar conclusions as the censored paper in addition to the link.
Reader Comments
R.C.
But of course the moment people find out what really works and what's more -- does not cost an arm and a leg -- the social network slaves of the depop crowd kick into action --- oh me god! -- damage control! -- the sheople must remain in the lockdown pen, masked and fearful ...
But the twitters and the farce books of this world, along with their deranged masters -- these spineless traitors, betraying and besmirching the trust their gazillions of subscribers had placed in them -- will soon be history and plague us no more.
RC
Another clever propaganda article.
There is no need for Ivermectin or anything else for the vast majority of people who might contract this cold.
These articles, much like the former HCQ ones, prop up the fear that anything is needed. It's not.
But if you're nervous and considering the poison prick vs one of the drugs above then by all means avoid the prick!
With HCQ there's potential heart issues and a certain genetic enzyme deficiency I can't remember right now... G6 or something?
Guess maybe, no worse for wear...