Dear Editor,

Once again prominent medical practitioners in Jamaica have called for the use of Ivermectin in the COVID-19 battle. In an open letter to Health and Wellness Minister Dr Christopher Tufton, some highly regarded professionals stated, “It is widely agreed that there is enough evidence to support the use of Ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 at the discretion of doctors and with the agreement of their patients. We need not await [World Health Organization] WHO approval of the use of Ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19. The WHO, unfortunately, has been slow, and sometimes incorrect, in its assessment and advice on various aspects of the pandemic, and specifically so in relation to its current stance on Ivermectin.”

The views of our respected doctors are not new or peculiar to them. The University of Liverpool’s Andrew Hill and others carried out a meta-analytical breakdown of 18 studies that found that Ivermectin was associated with reduced inflammation and a faster elimination of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. In a Financial Times report, ‘Cheap antiparasitic could cut chance of COVID-19 deaths by up to 75%’, it was revealed that in six of these trials the risk of death was reduced by 75 per cent in a subset of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 ( www.ft.com/content/e7cb76fc-da98-4a31-9c1f-926c58349c84).

The question that needs to be answered is: Why is there such a reluctance to officially sanction the use of Ivermectin, despite scientific studies and personal reports of people who have benefited from this drug? I think we got an important clue recently. According to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a booster COVID-19 vaccine may be needed for people who have already been vaccinated as soon as eight to 12 months after their second shot. Fauci said on CNN, “We know that the vaccine durability of the efficacy lasts at least six months, and likely considerably more, but I think we will almost certainly require a booster sometime within a year or after getting the primary dose ( edition.cnn.com/2021/05/19/health/covid-vaccine-booster-anthony-fauci/index.html).

I found the timing (May 2021) of this information extremely troubling. Didn’t these esteemed gentlemen know earlier that a booster shot would be required? Why wait to share this information when millions have already received a first or second shot? It is definitely not wrong to question whether profits are driving the constant pushback against the use of Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

The pharmaceutical companies are making billions in profit through the manufacture of these vaccines, while there would be little or no profit to be made from long-existing medications such as Ivermectin. Pfizer said it expects global sales of its novel coronavirus vaccine to reach US$26 billion in 2021 — a milestone that would make it the biggest selling pharmaceutical product in the world ( www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/05/04/pfizer-covid-vaccine-revenue/). Both Moderna and Pfizer have said they expect their vaccines will remain in demand for at least several years as coronavirus variants proliferate around the world and people require booster shots to maintain immunity after their initial doses.

Can the lack of interest in Ivermectin be traced to financial considerations, rather than medical efficacy? I commend our local doctors who have gone against the grain to tell of the importance of Ivermectin in the fight against COVID-19; however, sadly, at this time, it seems to be all about the money, baby!

Marsha Thomas

marshburns@hotmail.com