Coronavirus, Covid 19 Discussion and How It Has Affected Your Daily Life Chat Thread

[Winter Creek Coop]

I haven't heard anybody "quickly dismissing" it, certainly I'm not. What I said was that since it's only been approved for parasite infections, there needs to be more studies before it's approved for covid, just like was done with viagra before it was approved for ED. And that I hope there are more studies, since apparently there's been some evidence of good results. But I don't think there are any "quick answers" or quick fixes.

Its over the counter in much of the world. It is a WHO essential medicine with a great safety profile. Lets study it to death while people die from covid. It’s being slow played because there is no money to be made from it. We can rush through multiple experimental vaccines and other novel therapies like monoclonal anyibodies, but the cheap effective option needs more study? It is quick because its safe and available and cheap. Drugs are used off label all of the time. Why does this one need to be studied to death. It has been studied extensively over its 40+ years history. It makes no sense to slow play this. Remember this is a global emergency right?

https://c19ivermectin.com Go read for yourselves.

I am still confused by the pushback from regular folks. I get that the pharmas have no profit motive, but why are some regular folks on here so opposed to another bullet in the gun, so to speak, against this Covid monster?

 

[Molpet]

I am still confused by the pushback from regular folks. I get that the pharmas have no profit motive, but why are some regular folks on here so opposed to another bullet in the gun, so to speak, against this Covid monster?

Usually, but not always, people recommending it also have conspiracy theories.
And I just got this email https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

 

[Hayden Goseek]

Great ! I'm getting in line for my shot tomorrow morning.

 

[BDutch]

Its over the counter in much of the world. It is a WHO essential medicine with a great safety profile. Lets study it to death while people die from covid. It’s being slow played because there is no money to be made from it. We can rush through multiple experimental vaccines and other novel therapies like monoclonal anyibodies, but the cheap effective option needs more study? It is quick because its safe and available and cheap. Drugs are used off label all of the time. Why does this one need to be studied to death. It has been studied extensively over its 40+ years history. It makes no sense to slow play this. Remember this is a global emergency right?

https://c19ivermectin.com Go read for yourselves.

View attachment 2555730

I am still confused by the pushback from regular folks. I get that the pharmas have no profit motive, but why are some regular folks on here so opposed to another bullet in the gun, so to speak, against this Covid monster?

Today there was an article about ivermectin in one of the best newspapers in the Netherlands. It said there has been research but there is no proof that it helps.

I must wait for another month at least for a vaccination, because I’m not in a target group. I think they are vaccinating 75+ with Pfizer right now and 63-64, handicapped and obese with Astra Zenica.

 

[Molpet]

And another about invectrium.... Basically the trial was too small and inconclusive https://news.yahoo.com/popular-drug-does-not-alleviate-130532393.html

 

[Winter Creek Coop]

Today there was an article about ivermectin in one of the best newspapers in the Netherlands. It said there has been research but there is no proof that it helps.

I must wait for another month at least for a vaccination, because I’m not in a target group. I think they are vaccinating 75+ with Pfizer right now and 63-64, handicapped and obese with Astra Zenica.

You should ask the reporter to do better research and write a follow-up. For example below is an excerpt from https://c19ivermectin.com/caivm.html

100% of the 44 studies to date report positive effects. Random effects meta-analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows an 82% reduction, RR 0.18 [0.12-0.27], and prophylactic use shows 89% improvement, RR 0.11 [0.05-0.23].
Mortality results show 75% lower mortality, RR 0.25 [0.15-0.44] for all treatment delays, and 84% lower, RR 0.16 [0.04-0.63] for early treatment.
• 100% of the 23 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated 70% improvement, RR 0.30 [0.19-0.48].
• The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 44 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 18 trillion (p = 0.000000000000057).

 

[Ruthster55]

View attachment 2556195

A button rather than a sticker. Awesome!!! You can wear that for a while!

 

[EmmaDonovan]

Usually, but not always, people recommending it also have conspiracy theories.
And I just got this email https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

Well, let's take a look at what the FDA says - and doesn't say - here:

"FDA has not approved ivermectin for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans."

The FDA has not approved ANY vaccines for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans, either. None. The current vaccines are emergency use authorization (EUA) only. That is not the same as "approved." Approved and authorized are two different and distinct processes and criteria. The FDA does not use those terms interchangeably and neither should we, although I have seen many in the media do so. It's something to keep in mind when you see the FDA say Ivermectin hasn't been "approved:" neither have the vaccines.

"Ivermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses)."

And? Drugs are prescribed for off-label use all the time, that's between you and your doctor: "From the FDA perspective, once the FDA approves a drug, healthcare providers generally may prescribe the drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient." Source here.

"Taking large doses of this drug is dangerous and can cause serious harm."

It doesn't take a "large dose" to combat COVID-19. This is an irrelevant statement at best and a scare tactic at worst.

The dose for a 150 lb. adult to combat COVID-19 is 13.6 mg. That is not "large." In fact that is identical to the prescribing dose of Ivermectin to treat strongyloidiasis, ascariasis, cutaneous larva migrans, filariasis, or scabies in adult humans. Sources here and here.

"Ivermectin preparations for animals are very different from those approved for humans."

"Very different" isn't the same thing as "harmful." They certainly choose their words carefully.

I am high-risk for the virus thanks to a lifetime of pulmonary issues. I have been taking a prescription (for humans) of Ivermectin since December. My doctor takes the same prescription. My housemate (who doesn't have health insurance) has been taking veterinary Ivermectin since January. We're all doing great.

 

[Winter Creek Coop]

Well, let's take a look at what the FDA says - and doesn't say - here:

"FDA has not approved ivermectin for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans."

The FDA has not approved ANY vaccines for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans, either. None. The current vaccines are emergency use authorization (EUA) only. That is not the same as "approved." Approved and authorized are two different and distinct processes and criteria. The FDA does not use those terms interchangeably and neither should we, although I have seen many in the media do so. It's something to keep in mind when you see the FDA say Ivermectin hasn't been "approved:" neither have the vaccines.

"Ivermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses)."

And? Drugs are prescribed for off-label use all the time, that's between you and your doctor: "From the FDA perspective, once the FDA approves a drug, healthcare providers generally may prescribe the drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient." Source here.

"Taking large doses of this drug is dangerous and can cause serious harm."

It doesn't take a "large dose" to combat COVID-19. This is an irrelevant statement at best and a scare tactic at worst.

The dose for a 150 lb. adult to combat COVID-19 is 13.6 mg. That is not "large." In fact that is identical to the prescribing dose of Ivermectin to treat strongyloidiasis, ascariasis, cutaneous larva migrans, filariasis, or scabies in adult humans. Sources here and here.

"Ivermectin preparations for animals are very different from those approved for humans."

"Very different" isn't the same thing as "harmful." They certainly choose their words carefully.

I am high-risk for the virus thanks to a lifetime of pulmonary issues. I have been taking a prescription (for humans) of Ivermectin since December. My doctor takes the same prescription. My housemate (who doesn't have health insurance) has been taking veterinary Ivermectin since January. We're all doing great.

Excellent post!

 

[Beer can]

Why do they call it the novel coronavirus? It’s a long story......
30 days hath September, April, June, and November, all the rest have 31, except for March which was infinite.