Deworming Quotes

As a wise Pug once said, all you need is love, kibble and a de-worming tablet every three to six months.

The benefits of good nutrition may be particularly strong for two sets of people who do not decide what they eat: unborn babies and young children. In fact, there may well be an S-shaped relationship between their parent’s income and the eventual income of these children, caused by childhood nutrition. That is because a child who got the proper nutrients in utero or during early childhood will earn more money every year of his or her life: This adds up to large benefits over a lifetime. For example, the study of the long-term effect of deworming children in Kenya, mentioned above, concluded that being dewormed for two years instead of one (and hence being better nourished for two years instead of one) would lead to a lifetime income gain of $3,269 USD PPP. Small differences in investments in childhood nutrition (in Kenya, deworming costs $1.36 USD PPP per year; in India, a packet of iodized salt sells for $0.62 USD PPP; in Indonesia, fortified fish sauce costs $7 USD PPP per year) make a huge difference later on.

Make school affordable. For example, provide family stipends for keeping girls in school. Help girls overcome health barriers. For example, offer deworming treatments. Reduce the time and distance to get to school. For example, provide girls with bikes. Make schools more girl-friendly. For example, offer child-care programs for young mothers. Improve school quality. For example, invest in more and better teachers. Increase community engagement. For example, train community education activists. Sustain girls’ education during emergencies. For example, establish schools in refugee camps. Today,

Or take school attendance. Everybody seems to have different ideas on how to raise it. We should pay for uniforms. Advance school fees on credit. Offer free meals. Install toilets. Raise public awareness of the value of education. Hire more teachers. And on and on. All of these suggestions sound perfectly logical. Thanks to RCTs, however, we know that $100 worth of free meals translates into an additional 2.8 years of educational attainment – three times as much as free uniforms. Speaking of proven impact, deworming children with intestinal complaints has been shown to yield 2.9 years of additional schooling for the absurdly small investment of $10 worth of treatment. No armchair philosopher could have predicted that, but since this finding was revealed, tens of millions of children have been dewormed.

For example, in many developing countries, children, and in particular girls, do not spend enough time at school, even when school is free, to learn as they should. To change this, the following strategies have been suggested: •Unconditional cash transfers for girls; •Cash transfers for girls, conditional on attendance; •Merit scholarships for girls; •Free primary school uniforms; •Deworming through primary schools; •Providing information to parents about the increased wages of those who stay at school. All of these strategies look plausible. When resources for education are scarce, as they always are, especially in developing countries, which one should be tried? In the absence of randomized testing, it would be impossible to know. But the Jameel Poverty Action Lab has tested them and found that the last one on the list is by far the most cost-effective. Every $100 spent on providing information to parents about the increased wages of those who stay at school results in an amazing 20.7 additional years spent at school! Deworming through primary schools is also highly cost-effective, leading to 13.9 additional years spent at school per $100 spent. Of the remaining interventions, the first two are relatively ineffective, both gaining less than 1 additional year per $100, and the cash transfers, whether conditional or unconditional, gain less than one-tenth of an additional year per $100.8 The most effective method thus results in more than two hundred times the benefits of the two least effective methods, which means that for every $100 spent on one of the least effective methods, $99.50 is wasted. When resources are limited and education is so important to the future of children, that waste means that many human beings do not achieve their full potential.

Suddenly, there’s a movement down by my belly. I look down. Pete’s lap is moving? “Seriously, Pete,” I say. “This is not the place.” He chuckles and drops onto a sofa. The hand warmer of his hoodie is wiggling, moving up and down. “Why don’t you come and see what I got for you?” he says, waggling his eyebrows. A laugh escapes my throat, even though I say, “That is so not funny.” “Come on, little girl,” he taunts. “Come and see what’s in my pocket.” His hoodie is definitely wiggling, and there’s something in there. I go sit beside him, and he arches his hips toward me when I reach out and press gently on the lump. “Keep going,” he says. His voice is suddenly hoarse. I reach into the side of the pocket and feel a cold nose sniff my hand. I lift the edge and look down. “What’s that?” I ask, but I’m already smiling. “That’s your present,” he says. He’s still smirking. “I just got back from the vet with her. She got deflead and dewormed and had her ears cleaned and got tested for kitty diseases. She’s healthy.” He pulls her out, and she’s so tiny she fits in the palm of his hand. “I got a litter box and some food and stuff, too,” he says. He’s watching me, almost like he’s waiting for me to shove it at him and start screaming. She’s teeny weenie, and she has orange hair. “What’s her name?” I ask. He shrugs. “That’s up to you.” “Ginger,” I say. “She’s a Ginger.” I lift her to my cheek, and she nuzzles me. “Is she really mine?” “Well,” he says, grinning, “If I wanted some pussy of my own, I would just ask for some.” I startle. But then I realize what he said is so freaking ludicrous that I start to laugh. It’s a deep belly laugh, and I can barely catch my breath. I lean over and kiss him. “You want some, all you have to do is ask,” I say. He growls low in his throat and pulls me in so he can kiss me.

The osteopath Dr. Joseph Mercola observed,102 “This idea that ivermectin is a horse dewormer that poses a lethal risk to humans is pure horse manure, shoveled at us in an effort to dissuade people from using a safe and effective drug against COVID-19. . . . The intent is clear. What our so-called health agencies and the media are trying to do is confuse people into thinking of ivermectin as a ‘veterinary drug,’ which simply isn’t true. Ultimately, what they’re trying to do is back up the Big Pharma narrative that the only thing at your disposal is the COVID shot.

In late August 2021, NIH, FDA, and CDC launched an innovative new campaign to slander ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” that only deluded foolhardy nincompoops would consume.

Rolling Stone, the onetime banner of the counterculture, had by 2021 devolved into a reliable mouthpiece for medical cartel orthodoxies.89 In October 2021, Rolling Stone announced that it had removed from its website a 2005 article linking mercury in vaccines to brain injuries in children. Rolling Stone also reported that Oklahomans overdosing on ivermectin horse dewormer were causing emergency rooms to be “so backed up that gunshot victims were having hard times getting” access to health facilities.

On August 15, the FDA instructed, on its website: “You are not a horse.” In an August 21, 2021 Twitter post,84 the FDA expanded the theme: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” The White House and CNN also urged listeners that they should avoid veterinary products. CDC joined the chorus, warning Americans to not risk their health consuming a “horse de-wormer.” Elsewhere on its website, the CDC urged black and brown human immigrants to load up on ivermectin. “All Middle Eastern, Asian, North African, Latin American, and Caribbean refugees should receive presumptive therapy with: ivermectin, two doses 200 mcg/Kg orally once a day for two days before departure to the United States.85 Whether this was intended to deworm them or to prevent COVID transmission during travel to the US is unclear.

You can’t make a lousy charity good by having a low overhead.” TF: Will introduced me to GiveWell.org, a site that conducts in-depth research to determine how much nonprofits and foundations actually accomplish (in terms of lives saved, lives improved, etc.) per dollar spent. This avoids the problem of most other charity “rankers,” which look at low admin and overhead costs as a flawed proxy for “efficient.” Of course, if a charity is doing the wrong things, being financially lean means nothing, hence Will’s quote. It’s all about real-world results. According to GiveWell.org in 2016, three of the most effective and impactful charities are: Against Malaria Foundation Deworm the World Initiative Give Directly *

In late August 2021, NIH, FDA, and CDC launched an innovative new campaign to slander ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” that only deluded foolhardy nincompoops would consume. Picking up on those themes, The Independent asked, “Ivermectin: Why Are US Anti-Vaxxers Touting a Horse Dewormer as a Cure for COVID?

You eye the burger with anticipation, and you don’t think about how the standard practice for cattle is to treat them prophylactically with antibiotics and dewormers, thereby breeding bacterial and parasite resistance and leading to the rise of superbugs, which can trigger hard-to-treat infections and foodborne illnesses.

Against Malaria Foundation (AMF) Deworm the World Initiative Give Directly

So,” Jesiba said, drumming her fingers on her desk, “the pup goes to pitch a deworming medicine to a bunch of wolves and comes home Prime.