Despite the CDC and FDA's attempts to undermine or discredit Ivermectin's effectiveness in reducing or preventing COVID-related deaths, awareness of it spread like wildfire.

Graphs from John Hopkins' research comparing nations that used Ivermectin against those that did not have gone viral on social media.

One that has received the most attention was the graph that demonstrated the obvious contrast between African countries that take Ivermectin on a regular basis and those that do not. The disparities were striking, with the pro-Ivermectin nations clearly beating COVID-19. When compared to nations that do not use Ivermectin on a large scale, the death rates were extremely low.

The graph, however, is just "the tip of the iceberg," says NOQ Report Editor-In-Chief JD Rucker.


Comparison of daily deaths in Africa, based on Ivermectin use and non-use, per a new study. (via @birb_k / Twitter)
Comparison of daily deaths in Africa, based on Ivermectin use and non-use, per a new study. (via @birb_k / Twitter)



A study, "Why COVID-19 is not so spread in Africa: How does Ivermectin affect it?" provided additional evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.

Rucker offered the following key points from the study:

First, he noted that countries that use Ivermectin had less advanced medical systems than those that do not use it. This usually leads in a lower life expectancy and more "sporadic" testing. However, these countries have avoided a COVID-19 mortality catastrophe due to unrestricted usage of Ivermectin.

Second, he said that owing to large differences in mortality rates, Africa seems to be the ideal setting for this kind of study. Countries that advertise Ivermectin as an anti-parasitic agent were not aggressively seeking to use it against COVID-19, and had been taking the medicine "universally" for years. This means then that the given mortality data clearly delineates between nations that use Ivermectin and those that do not.

The study says "the community-directed onchocerciasis treatment with ivermectin is the most reasonable explanation for the decrease in morbidity and fatality rate in Africa."

The third and probably most important "hidden" finding from the study, he added, is that recovery and death rates for COVID-19 patients did not differ statistically between Ivermectin and non-Ivermectin-using countries. That means that once a person has been examined and officially diagnosed with COVID-19, they recover or die at approximately the same rate.

"This tells us that other factors such as medical proficiency, environmental differences, or access to vaccines do not contribute to whether someone lives or dies once they have become sick with the disease. Since overall mortality rates per capita are significantly lower in Ivermectin nations but case fatality rates are the same, Ivermectin is clearly effective as an early treatment and perhaps even as a preventative measure," Rucker concluded.

Other reasons mentioned by the other scientists in the study, despite the lack of scientific proof, include a larger percentage of young people, a warmer environment, and extensive BCG (Bacillus Calmette-Guérin) vaccination.

The study also highlighted that on January 27, 2021, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) approved the restricted use of Ivermectin for humans. Since then, there has been a decrease in the number of new COVID-19 cases in South Africa.

The study, conducted by Japanese scientists Hisaya Tanioka, Sayaka Tanioka, and Kimitaka Kaga, came to the following conclusion:

"In conclusion, in the countries where ivermectin is distributed to and used by the entire areas, it suggests to lead a reduction in mortality, to accelerate patient recovery and, to avoid death. And this analytical study will suggest that early treatment with ivermectin may accelerate recovery and prevent worsening of symptoms in patients with mild disease. These findings can be efficiently translated into therapies for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)."