Ivermectin and ignorance

[KarynVA]

@Hilltop Flock maybe this information from the FDA is helpful related to your inquiry, above:

Ivermectin tablets are approved for use in people for the treatment of some parasitic worms (intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis) and ivermectin topical formulations are approved for human use by prescription-only for the treatment of external parasites such as headlice and skin conditions such as rosacea. Ivermectin is FDA-approved for use in animals for prevention of heartworm disease in some small animal species, and for treatment of certain internal and external parasites in various animal species.

FDA is concerned about the health of consumers who may self-medicate by taking ivermectin products intended for animals, thinking they can be a substitute for ivermectin intended for humans. People should never take animal drugs, as the FDA has only evaluated their safety and effectiveness in the particular animal species for which they are labeled. These animal drugs can cause serious harm in people.


Bear in mind also, that the FDA has recommended physicians do not prescribe ivermectin to COVID-19 patients, saying it could adversely interact with other medications and be lethal in large doses. The National Institutes of Health's guidance says not enough information is available to permit a recommendation for or against the drug's use to treat COVID-19.

 

[Hilltop Flock]

@Hilltop Flock maybe this information from the FDA is helpful related to your inquiry, above:

Ivermectin tablets are approved for use in people for the treatment of some parasitic worms (intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis) and ivermectin topical formulations are approved for human use by prescription-only for the treatment of external parasites such as headlice and skin conditions such as rosacea. Ivermectin is FDA-approved for use in animals for prevention of heartworm disease in some small animal species, and for treatment of certain internal and external parasites in various animal species.

FDA is concerned about the health of consumers who may self-medicate by taking ivermectin products intended for animals, thinking they can be a substitute for ivermectin intended for humans. People should never take animal drugs, as the FDA has only evaluated their safety and effectiveness in the particular animal species for which they are labeled. These animal drugs can cause serious harm in people.


Bear in mind also, that the FDA has recommended physicians do not prescribe ivermectin to COVID-19 patients, saying it could adversely interact with other medications and be lethal in large doses. The National Institutes of Health's guidance says not enough information is available to permit a recommendation for or against the drug's use to treat COVID-19.

Yes, I agree!

I was offering an anecdote about the topic initially, but remembered I also heard something about that the otc version of ivermectin, sold at most farm stores, is not the same as what is prescribed by a physician or veterinarian.

I had heard that through a friend who heard it from her vet and wonder if anyone else had heard the same info?

I wonder if that were true, would anyone then hesitate to take it?

 

[KarynVA]

... I also heard something about that the otc version of ivermectin, sold at most farm stores, is not the same as what is prescribed by a physician or veterinarian.

I had heard that through a friend who heard it from her vet and wonder if anyone else had heard the same info?

I wonder if that were true, would anyone then hesitate to take it?

Well, I'd say even just based on @Coops Dad post from page 1 of this thread, probably not. It's hard to know exactly what he's saying here, but it sounds to me like his friend who works in a veterinary setting has taken it (and one could assume it was the animal version based on the context, but hard to know for sure based on what was written in the post). Then Coops Dad proceeds to explain how to "self administer" the dosage, presumably adjusting it from the animal dosage to the human dosage.

My best friend is a vet tech and used ivermectin when he caught covid. He's mid 60's, obese, smoker and diabetic. He came through it with symptoms of a mild cold and has had no lasting effects.

A doctor can prescribe ivermectin prophylactically or to treat covid symptoms. It appears that, for self administration, getting the dose correct would be the hard part.

From what I'm seeing in the news and such, people ARE using the type of ivermectin that is made for animals, rather than getting a prescription from a doctor who, let's face it, is likely less than trustworthy since they would be going against the Food and Drug Administration's express caution to not prescribe it for Covid.

 

[sybonbon]

And here we are......

 

[KarynVA]

Actually, it's more like this:

 

[KarynVA]

I don't want to start anything here, but remember that the FDA approved thalidomide for nausea in pregnant women and we know how that turned out.

@Vacman This is not true. Don't believe everything you see on social media, please.

Proof
Thalidomide was prescribed for a range of conditions including pneumonia, colds and flu and for relieving the symptom of nausea often experienced in early pregnancy.

One country that did not approve thalidomide for marketing and distribution was the USA, where it was rejected by the Food and Drug Administration.

See also
Social media users began sharing the hashtag #Thalidomide on Twitter on Wednesday after news that Britain had approved a COVID-19 vaccine made byPfizer Inc. and Germany’s BioNTech.

CLAIM: “Rapid 8 month tested vaccine? Thalidomide was a RAPID APPROVED drug introduced in 1957, to address nausea and insomnia in pregnant women. It was marketed in 50 countries before being withdrawn in 1962 due to malformations in newborns. Be careful with what is coming.”

AP’S ASSESSMENT: Missing context. There are different approval processes for the coronavirus vaccines and the drug thalidomide. Thalidomide was not approved for sale in the U.S. when first introduced in the 1950s. The drug did not undergo extensive trials as is being done with COVID-19 vaccines currently being developed.

THE FACTS: As drugmakers seek emergency use authorization for their COVID-19 vaccines, social media users are attempting to cast doubt about their safety because of how quickly they are being produced.

Pfizer and Moderna recently announced that clinical trials showed their vaccines were more than 90 percent effective. When the coronavirus was declared a global pandemic in March, medical professionals predicted that developing a vaccine to combat COVID-19 could take 18 months or more.

Posts online are comparing the short time period in which COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with issues around thalidomide, a drug that was once banned worldwide for causing birth defects in babies. The drug was in development for about four years from about 1953 to 1957 before it was introduced into the German market and sold in nearly 50 countries. It was advertised as a safe, over-the-counter sedative.

The drug was not approved in the U.S. at the time, but Americans were given the drug in two clinical trials. After it was discovered that the drug led pregnant women to give birth to babies with severe birth defects, U.S. agencies changed their policy on approving drugs. Thalidomide was approved by the FDA in 1997 under tight restrictions to treat inflammation in leprosy patients. It has since been approved for other uses although it is not approved for use by pregnant women.

 

[Tre3hugger]

@KarynVA i respect and appreciate you. Keep fightin that good fight

 

[KarynVA]

It makes me incredibly sad and upset that there are nefarious entities and individuals, including foreign actors and troll farms, that propagate misinformation that harms Americans. Well-meaning individuals who are unintentionally influenced by those evil-doers are not entirely to blame, it's an insidious and pervasive force that is difficult to overcome or avoid.

Sigh ....

 

[Vacman]

@Vacman This is not true. Don't believe everything you see on social media, please.

Proof
Thalidomide was prescribed for a range of conditions including pneumonia, colds and flu and for relieving the symptom of nausea often experienced in early pregnancy.

One country that did not approve thalidomide for marketing and distribution was the USA, where it was rejected by the Food and Drug Administration.

See also
Social media users began sharing the hashtag #Thalidomide on Twitter on Wednesday after news that Britain had approved a COVID-19 vaccine made byPfizer Inc. and Germany’s BioNTech.

CLAIM: “Rapid 8 month tested vaccine? Thalidomide was a RAPID APPROVED drug introduced in 1957, to address nausea and insomnia in pregnant women. It was marketed in 50 countries before being withdrawn in 1962 due to malformations in newborns. Be careful with what is coming.”

AP’S ASSESSMENT: Missing context. There are different approval processes for the coronavirus vaccines and the drug thalidomide. Thalidomide was not approved for sale in the U.S. when first introduced in the 1950s. The drug did not undergo extensive trials as is being done with COVID-19 vaccines currently being developed.

THE FACTS: As drugmakers seek emergency use authorization for their COVID-19 vaccines, social media users are attempting to cast doubt about their safety because of how quickly they are being produced.

Pfizer and Moderna recently announced that clinical trials showed their vaccines were more than 90 percent effective. When the coronavirus was declared a global pandemic in March, medical professionals predicted that developing a vaccine to combat COVID-19 could take 18 months or more.

Posts online are comparing the short time period in which COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with issues around thalidomide, a drug that was once banned worldwide for causing birth defects in babies. The drug was in development for about four years from about 1953 to 1957 before it was introduced into the German market and sold in nearly 50 countries. It was advertised as a safe, over-the-counter sedative.

The drug was not approved in the U.S. at the time, but Americans were given the drug in two clinical trials. After it was discovered that the drug led pregnant women to give birth to babies with severe birth defects, U.S. agencies changed their policy on approving drugs. Thalidomide was approved by the FDA in 1997 under tight restrictions to treat inflammation in leprosy patients. It has since been approved for other uses although it is not approved for by pregnant women.

You are correct as far as the newborn issue is concerned, but it has been approved for two uses even now and there are some serious side effects:

Thalidomide has also been associated with a higher occurrence blood clots and nerve and blood disorders. Northwestern University’s pharmacovigiliance team, Research on Adverse Drug Events And Reports (RADAR), has launched a joint project with the Walgreens pharmacy at Northwestern Memorial Hospital so that these side effects may be understood and monitored, like those affecting fetal development. RADAR, led by Dr. Charles Bennett of the Feinberg School of Medicine, combines the expertise of clinicians, academics, pharmacists, and statisticians to monitor and disseminate information about adverse drug reactions to cancer drugs.
Their project tracks the number of patients who get a blood clot after receiving thalidomide, whether or not the patient received an anticoagulant drug, which are used to help prevent clotting, and if so, which drug was used. Tracking this information will help researchers better identify the incidence and prevention of thalidomide-associated blood clots, allowing the drug to continue to serve as an effective therapy for many patients.

You would think that given the time period that has elapsed since the 1950's, the FDA would by now have reacted to the blood clot and nerve and blood disorders issues.

 

[KarynVA]

Doubling down, eh? Why am I not surprised. @Vacman, you wrote: "the FDA approved thalidomide for nausea in pregnant women ..." and you KNOW that isn't true.

You owe everyone an apology. A little humility would serve you well in life.

As to the FDA, they aren't perfect and neither is any drug or medication. You are naive to expect any different.