Merck, a major supplier of Ivermectin, statement on Covid-19 and IVM [MERGED]

[emeryjre]

Merck, a major supplier of Ivermectin for Parasite Control in 3rd world countries, would have benefited from a finding of effectiveness for Ivermectin in the use against Covid-19.
They could find no effectiveness in preventing infection against Covid-19.
They could find no reduction in symptoms after being infected with Covid-19.

Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Merck.com

 

[SueDonJ]

The only reasonable deduction is that Merck did not consult Bill.

 

[GregT]

Merck, a major supplier of Ivermectin for Parasite Control in 3rd world countries, would have benefited from a finding of effectiveness for Ivermectin in the use against Covid-19.
They could find no effectiveness in preventing infection against Covid-19.
They could find no reduction in symptoms after being infected with Covid-19.

Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Merck.com

Except its generic.

Off patent.

No one makes money from supplying IVM.

No one makes money if it is shown to work in a clinical trial (which it hasn’t to date).

 

[emeryjre]

Sure, nobody making money selling IVM

With all due respect I call Bull Dung

Intercepted: The Companies Making Millions From Unproven Covid Remedies (theintercept.com)

 

[emeryjre]

Here is a story from Time Magazine about the pill mill behind the sale of Ivermectin.

'America's Frontline Doctors' Peddle Bogus COVID-19 Treatment | Time

If you would like more news articles, let me know. I have plenty.

 

[PigsDad]

The only reasonable deduction is that Merck did not consult Bill.

Best post I've seen in a long time!

Kurt

 

[GregT]

Sure, nobody making money selling IVM

With all due respect I call Bull Dung

Intercepted: The Companies Making Millions From Unproven Covid Remedies (theintercept.com)

Big Pharma? Do they make money supplying IVM? Or any other generic? I’m sure you understand the difference in profit margins between a drug under patent and an off-patent drug.

And it is a Merck issued press release, doesn’t Merck have anti-virals in development for the treatment of COVID?

Isn’t it reasonable to think that Big Pharma views any generic drug (pick your generic) as a threat to their COVID franchise of vaccines and patented anti-virals?

Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?

Best,

Greg

 

[GregT]

...

 

[SueDonJ]

Big Pharma? Do they make money selling IVM? Or any other generic? I’m sure you understand the difference in profit margins between a drug under patent and an off-patent drug.

And it is a Merck issued press release, doesn’t Merck have anti-virals in development for the treatment of COVID?

Isn’t it reasonable to think that Big Pharma views any generic drug (pick your generic) as a threat to their COVID franchise of vaccines and patented anti-virals?

Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?

Best,

Greg

Yes, we have discussed ad nauseam the fact that in the US, "Big Pharma Science" is big business. Ever has it been, ever shall it be. The only mystery about it is why all of a sudden with the onset of COVID-19 that fact became reason enough to distrust *everything* the established scientific community says about COVID-19.

 

[GregT]

Yes, we have discussed ad nauseam the fact that in the US, "Big Pharma Science" is big business. Ever has it been, ever shall it be. The only mystery about it is why all of a sudden with the onset of COVID-19 that fact became reason enough to distrust *everything* the established scientific community says about COVID-19.

Agreed.

So why does Emeryjre post a Merck press release and think it’s free of conflict of interest?

Best,

Greg

 

[SueDonJ]

Agreed.

So why does Emeryjre post a Merck press release and think it’s free of conflict of interest?

Best,

Greg

Anybody who reads this forum would know without a doubt that the first post in this thread would invite conflict, regardless of the fact that it is a special form of insanity to question the scientific discoveries of an established Big Pharma corp that's had plenty of warning that *everything* they report will be suspect in certain circles. It's the fact that they would have been infinitely better served if they could have reported discoveries completely opposite to what they've published, that brings this particular criticism to the highest level of insanity.

 

[emeryjre]

Big Pharma? Do they make money supplying IVM? Or any other generic? I’m sure you understand the difference in profit margins between a drug under patent and an off-patent drug.

And it is a Merck issued press release, doesn’t Merck have anti-virals in development for the treatment of COVID?

Isn’t it reasonable to think that Big Pharma views any generic drug (pick your generic) as a threat to their COVID franchise of vaccines and patented anti-virals?

Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?

Best,

Greg

The conspiracy theory resurfaces.

It is a shame that Ivermectin does not work as an anti-viral except in a test tube. At levels that would kill a person.

By the way, how do you get Ivermectin. Do you pay for it?

Somebody is making money on the sale of Ivermectin. Perhaps it is you and Bill.

 

[emeryjre]

Agreed.

So why does Emeryjre post a Merck press release and think it’s free of conflict of interest?

Best,

Greg

If you do not like my posts, you are welcome to ignore them.

Also, you are welcome to ask me directly instead of going to someone else to make some obtuse implication.

I notice you did not comment on the statement.

It is true that Merck, a developer of Ivermectin, found no measurable efficacy or effectiveness using Ivermectin to stop infections, reduce the severity of symptoms, or decrease the time of illness for Covid-19 Virus.

Do you dispute that report

Your attack is to ascribe some conspiracy theory to the report.

I would think a contentious report would contain some misinformation. Point out the misinformation in the report.

You have lost all touch with reality as well.

 

[GregT]

Hello TUGgers,

I've been told that this has been discussed ad nauseum, so this may merely be a restatement of what is well accepted.

Pfizer revenues

2016 $53B
2017 $52B
2018 $40B (Viagra went off patent at the end of 2017)
2019 $41B
2020 $42B
2021 $81B
2022 $102B (projected)

Gross margin declined from 76% in 2017 to 61% in 2021 so maybe vaccines don't have the same margin as the drug business.

Both Pfizer and Merck have antiviral drugs that are available for sale in the United States. Paxlovid is expected to sell $22B in revenue in 2022, the Merck drug is expected to sell $5B - $5.5B, or 10% of Merck's total revenue.

TUGgers are correct that Big Pharma is a big business, always has been and always will be. But COVID has completely transformed their businesses and when they issue a press release on competing (generic) products, we should recognize how important the COVID business is now to Big Pharma.

Best,

Greg

 

[GregT]

If you do not like my posts, you are welcome to ignore them.

Also, you are welcome to ask me directly instead of going to someone else to make some obtuse implication.

I notice you did not comment on the statement.

It is true that Merck, a developer of Ivermectin, found no measurable efficacy or effectiveness using Ivermectin to stop infections, reduce the severity of symptoms, or decrease the time of illness for Covid-19 Virus.

Do you dispute that report

Your attack is to ascribe some conspiracy theory to the report.

I would think a contentious report would contain some misinformation. Point out the misinformation in the report.

You have lost all touch with reality as well.

No I find your comments quite interesting. I do not wish to ignore your posts though I certainly do not wish to consistently engage in the back and forth that is the cesspool of this subforum.

I dread the future climate change subforum.

But I simply don't agree with you on some points. I do agree that there is no randomized controlled trial that shows a reduction in transmission, symptoms, or severe covid.

There are only a couple of options:

1) IVM simply doesn't work as the proponents promise or
2) In these studies, IVM has not being dosed at a level to show clinical improvement (dosage and/or timing). The Duke press release suggested ACTIV-6 is dosing at 600 mcgs/kg for 6 days. That will be interesting.

I am keenly interested in the answer.

Best,

Greg

 

[SueDonJ]

Hello TUGgers,

I've been told that this has been discussed ad nauseum, so this may merely be a restatement of what is well accepted.

Pfizer revenues

2016 $53B
2017 $52B
2018 $40B (Viagra went off patent at the end of 2017)
2019 $41B
2020 $42B
2021 $81B
2022 $102B (projected)

Gross margin declined from 76% in 2017 to 61% in 2021 so maybe vaccines don't have the same margin as the drug business.

Both Pfizer and Merck have antiviral drugs that are available for sale in the United States. Paxlovid is expected to sell $22B in revenue in 2022, the Merck drug is expected to sell $5B - $5.5B, or 10% of Merck's total revenue.

TUGgers are correct that Big Pharma is a big business, always has been and always will be. But COVID has completely transformed their businesses and when they issue a press release on competing (generic) products, we should recognize how important the COVID business is now to Big Pharma.

Best,

Greg

As a moderator I don't understand why this warrants its own thread when a little over an hour ago in an ongoing, related thread you just asked the question, "Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?"

So, these threads are being merged.

 

[GregT]

As a moderator I don't understand why this warrants its own thread when a little over an hour ago in an ongoing, related thread you just asked the question, "Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?"

So, these threads are being merged.

Can we merge it with a different thread then where Pfizer's revenues are the focus of the thread? I think it will get buried here.

 

[SueDonJ]

Can we merge it with a different thread then where Pfizer's revenues are the focus of the thread? I think it will get buried here.

Yeah, it could be merged with any number of threads in this forum in which Big Pharma revenues have been discussed, but *this one* is the most current and *you* were the one who introduced the business of big pharma into this thread. I'm okay with leaving the merge as is but you are certainly free to report it and see if any of the other mods/Admin think there's a better solution.

 

[GregT]

Yeah, it could be merged with any number of threads in this forum in which Big Pharma revenues have been discussed, but *this one* is the most current and *you* were the one who introduced the business of big pharma into this thread. I'm okay with leaving the merge as is but you are certainly free to report it and see if any of the other mods/Admin think there's a better solution.

Okay Sue, objection withdrawn.

I do welcome TUGger comments on the actual points raised, however.

Best,

Greg

 

[emeryjre]

No I find your comments quite interesting. I do not wish to ignore your posts though I certainly do not wish to consistently engage in the back and forth that is the cesspool of this subforum.

I dread the future climate change subforum.

But I simply don't agree with you on some points. I do agree that there is no randomized controlled trial that shows a reduction in transmission, symptoms, or severe covid.

There are only a couple of options:

1) IVM simply doesn't work as the proponents promise or
2) In these studies, IVM has not being dosed at a level to show clinical improvement (dosage and/or timing). The Duke press release suggested ACTIV-6 is dosing at 600 mcgs/kg for 6 days. That will be interesting.

I am keenly interested in the answer.

Best,

Greg

The back and forth comes from misinformation being presented as a "fact".

You started in on the Merck post as being somehow "wrong."

If you want to stop presenting information from Infowars, fake trials from FLCCC, conspiracy theories at all levels. acknowledge the pill mill operations of the FLCCC, and other anti-vax information, the thread would not be as back and forth.

 

[bluehende]

Big Pharma? Do they make money supplying IVM? Or any other generic? I’m sure you understand the difference in profit margins between a drug under patent and an off-patent drug.

And it is a Merck issued press release, doesn’t Merck have anti-virals in development for the treatment of COVID?

Isn’t it reasonable to think that Big Pharma views any generic drug (pick your generic) as a threat to their COVID franchise of vaccines and patented anti-virals?

Has anyone on TUG discussed what a financial bonanza COVID has been for the big pharmaceutical and diagnostic testing businesses?

Best,

Greg

Are you saying that saving millions of lives is bad. They should make no profit? The evidence against IVM is not coming from big pharma. It is coming from the medical professionals.