Not even close. This is an antiviral drug that was first developed by Merck for influenza and later shelved, Merck is now attempting to resurrect Molnupiravir by gaining a more lax EUA that does not require the more stringent protocols of a full FDA approval. Ivermectin is a complexly different drug class so the two should not be compared - apples and oranges.

Molnupiravir theoretically works as an antiviral by tricking the virus into using the drug for replication thereby inserting errors into the virus’ genetic code once replication is underway. When enough copying errors occur then the virus is essentially killed off, unable to replicate any further - or so the story goes. The problem that arises is similar to that of suboptimal use of antibiotics. The ability to introduce mutations to the virus itself are significant enough to change how the virus functions, but not so powerful as to stop it from replicating and becoming the next dominant variant. In other words, the risk of developing and selecting for supercharged variants is very real and very likely.

Molnupiravir’s metabolite, an active compound called NHC, has been known and studied for decades. The metabolite works by creating havoc with RNA polymerase, the enzyme critical for viral replication. Nothing to go wrong here, right? Researchers have been trying to understand just how damaging NHC can be to our own healthy cells. The trouble with Molnupiravir is that its mutagenic powers may also create havoc among other enzymes in the body, including the nucleic acids in our own healthy DNA. Molnupiravir may not just lead to the growth of cancerous tumors but may also have the potential to cause birth defects, either through sperm precursor cells or in pregnant women.

Once again, we see big Pharma looking to make a profit over the health and safety of the public. Because of the pursuit of EUA for dangerous and expensive drugs like Molnupiravir, cheaper and safer treatments such as HCQ and Ivermectin will continue to be suppressed and vilified. The public has been trained well to look for the latest and greatest technologies over what is already established and proven.

Not even close. This is an antiviral drug that was first developed by Merck for influenza and later shelved, Merck is now attempting to resurrect Molnupiravir by gaining a more lax EUA that does not require the more stringent protocols of a full FDA approval. Ivermectin is a complexly different drug class so the two should not be compared - apples and oranges.

Molnupiravir theoretically works as an antiviral by tricking the virus into using the drug for replication thereby inserting errors into the virus’ genetic code once replication is underway. When enough copying errors occur, the virus is essentially killed off, unable to replicate any further - or so the story goes. The problem that arises is similar to that of suboptimal use of antibiotics. The ability to introduce mutations to the virus itself are significant enough to change how the virus functions, but not so powerful as to stop it from replicating and becoming the next dominant variant. In other words, the risk of developing and selecting for supercharged variants is very real and very likely.

Molnupiravir’s metabolite, an active compound called NHC, has been known and studied for decades. The metabolite works by creating havoc with RNA polymerase, the enzyme critical for viral replication. Nothing to go wrong here, right? Researchers have been trying to understand just how damaging NHC can be to our own healthy cells. The trouble with the drug is that its mutagenic powers may also create havoc among other enzymes in the body, including the nucleic acids in our own healthy DNA. Molnupiravir may not just lead to the growth of cancerous tumors but may also have the potential to cause birth defects, either through sperm precursor cells or in pregnant women.

Once again, we see big Pharma looking to make a profit over the health and safety of the public. Because of the pursuit of EUA for dangerous and expensive drugs like Molnupiravir, cheaper and safer treatments such as HCQ and Ivermectin will continue to be suppressed and vilified. The public has been trained well to look for the latest and greatest technologies over what is already established and proven.

Not even close. This is an antiviral drug that was first developed by Merck for influenza and later shelved, Merck is now attempting to resurrect Molnupiravir by gaining a more lax EUA that does not require the more stringent protocols of a full FDA approval. Ivermectin is a complexly different drug class so the two should not be compared - apples and oranges.

Molnupiravir theoretically works as an antiviral by tricking the virus into using the drug for replication, then inserting errors into the virus’ genetic code once replication is underway. When enough copying errors occur, the virus is essentially killed off, unable to replicate any further - or so the story goes. The problem that arises is similar to that of suboptimal use of antibiotics. The ability to introduce mutations to the virus itself are significant enough to change how the virus functions, but not so powerful as to stop it from replicating and becoming the next dominant variant. In other words, the risk of developing and selecting for supercharged variants is very real and very likely.

Molnupiravir’s metabolite, an active compound called NHC, has been known and studied for decades. The metabolite works by creating havoc with RNA polymerase, the enzyme critical for viral replication. Nothing to go wrong here, right? Researchers have been trying to understand just how damaging NHC can be to our own healthy cells. The trouble with the drug is that its mutagenic powers may also create havoc among other enzymes in the body, including the nucleic acids in our own healthy DNA. Molnupiravir may not just lead to the growth of cancerous tumors but may also have the potential to cause birth defects, either through sperm precursor cells or in pregnant women.

Once again, we see big Pharma looking to make a profit over the health and safety of the public. Because of the pursuit of EUA for dangerous and expensive drugs like Molnupiravir, cheaper and safer treatments such as HCQ and Ivermectin will continue to be suppressed and vilified. The public has been trained well to look for the latest and greatest technologies over what is already established and proven.