A few days ago, Dr. Ciro Maguiña highlighted the positive effects of the use of ivermectin in his treatment against COVID-19.

In the framework of the second wave of COVID-19 , the Ministry of Health (Minsa) and EsSalud once again included Ivermectin  in the new kit for the outpatient treatment of patients with this disease, despite being withdrawn last year.

Through a document dated January 8, released by Canal N, it details the  new composition of the kit , along with paracetamol and masks, to treat vulnerable people in the initial stage.

The president of the Congress COVID commission,  Leonardo Inga, said that it is a controversial issue where there is no official scientific communication that demonstrates the effectiveness of Ivermectin; however, there are studies that reveal that it has been efficient.

For his part, the infectologist Eduardo Gotuzzo indicated that the use of ivermectin in the first stage of COVID-19 would help stop its advance.

“When a high-risk person begins to have covid, then ivermectin can be used two days maximum three days,” he said days ago.

As is public knowledge, the vice dean of the Medical College of Peru (CMP),  Ciro Maguiña , highlighted the positive effects of the use of ivermectin in his treatment against the coronavirus when he was admitted to the Edgardo Rebagliati Hospital because of this disease.

Related: La Pampa will begin to treat coronavirus patients with Ivermectin: Argentina

Malaysia to run trials for 2 drugs in Covid-19 treatment, including Ivermectin

Not Using Ivermectin, One Year In, Is Unethical And Immoral

The FLCCC Alliance— On a mission to Save Thousands & Slow the Pandemic

COVID-19: A realistic approach to community management – HCQ & IVM in concert with vaccination

Top US medics recommend ‘sequenced multidrug therapy’ including HCQ & Ivermectin, for early high-risk COVID-19 infections

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
On Trend

Latest Stories

Facebook Suspends Craig Kelly For Posts Citing Medical Professionals

“The effect of censoring debate on these early treatments could have possibly been responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people.
So, where we should have been having more open debate and more free debate, shutting down debate is likely to have killed people. Not just one or two people, but probably hundreds of thousands. This is why throughout the last 250 years people have said free speech is so important. This is why people have said, ‘I may not agree with what you say but I’ll fight to my death your right to say it.’”

Read More »