IVERMECTIN - Do NOT be these people!

[Swbertrand1]

Seems like this might be the best place to put this, but I'm not sure. Anyway...,

With Covid seeming to run rampant and having care and concern for all of us on this site, I felt like this might be a timely post.

It seems there are some that believe that taking Ivermectin to treat Covid is a good idea, so it might be worth your time to read this:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...reated-a-doctor-says/ar-AAO38Tm?ocid=msedgntp

 

[MysteryChicken]

I've seen the news.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

I think we've all seen the news - and I'm no more interested in an anecdote from a Dr. in a single rural hospital than I am about an anecdote from a claimed researcher in Pakistan purporting that Ivermectin is effective against coronavirii in a petri dish. Particularly when its associated with claims of rural shooting victims in OK - there aren't that many of them. Could as easily, and more accurately say there's no room in the ER for car accident survivors, or heart attack victims, or construction accident victims in the ER. That's not science, in either case.

I am frustrated that I may actually need Ivermectin for my animals, and can't get any in a form I can use to dose them - because there's still no shortage of stupid in the world, currently fueled by some mix of desperation and media-enabled ignorance.

 

[Swbertrand1]

I am frustrated that I may actually need Ivermectin for my animals, and can't get any in a form I can use to does them - because there's still no shortage of stupid in the world, currently fueled by some mix of desperation and media-enabled ignorance.

Indeed.

 

[saysfaa]

Finally, a large NHI recognized study of ivermectin as a treatment.

Hopefully it will show what the other studies have. And what the countries that have been using it have found. https://c19ivermectin.com/?fbclid=IwAR2OnJAiXlu_cJfKgrerYPpHRCnMkD-8sLvD9aW0CEZ5LTZoS68YZzpDb0c

Then doctors can start prescribing it appropriately and manufacturers can start making appropriate amounts. It is easy it make; it wouldn't take long to make enough.

Stupidly taking horse-sized doses doesn't mean the medicine is not safe when used appropriately.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Finally, a large NHI recognized study of ivermectin as a treatment.

Hopefully it will show what the other studies have. And what the countries that have been using it have found. https://c19ivermectin.com/?fbclid=IwAR2OnJAiXlu_cJfKgrerYPpHRCnMkD-8sLvD9aW0CEZ5LTZoS68YZzpDb0c

Then doctors can start prescribing it appropriately and manufacturers can start making appropriate amounts. It is easy it make; it wouldn't take long to make enough.

Stupidly taking horse-sized doses doesn't mean the medicine is not safe when used appropriately.

If you are talking about the pre-publication meta analysis, it merely bundles a bunch of extremely small studies, of different doasages, looking for differing outcomes, in differing trials, under differing conditions and tries to make some broad claims. Worse, many of those studies involved combined therapies, which can make no claims about the effectiveness of Ivermectin directly.

It is a falacy to believe that one can select a large number of individually unreliable studies and derive reliable data from it. You **may** come to the correct solution. Or not.

Personally, I'm not rejecting Ivermectin treatment out of hand, but reliable clinical evidence as to its effectiveness against COVID-19 is somewhere between scant and lacking. Even CS KOW, who did an early meta-analysis suggesting it was worth exploring (back in Feb/Mar) has subsequently printed a new paper indicating the past data was unreliable. There have been a number of very public retractions as well, including (perhaps most famously at present) the Elgazzar study which accounted for a large portion of the beneficial effect reported in later meta-studies. Indead, Chaccour (whose TINY and statistically irrelevant study is cited approvingly below) is interviewed in the link provided, and he doesn't support Ivermectin use, only more investigation.

The Lopez-Medina study is also cited approvingly in this meta-analysis, but its been flagged as problematic as well. The numbers don't add up. Nor were its protocols followed - including mixing dosages of ivermectin and the placebo. A large number of the other studies here are retrospective, greatly increasing the chances of cherry picking a subset of data.

 

[MysteryChicken]

I'm also fully vaccinated, & had the feeling the whole Ivermectin thing was a load of crud.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

and for those who might mistakenly believe I have it "in for" ivermectin as treatment, I have followed the delays, retractions, and public take downs of numerous efforts at studies in support of various COVID vaccine candidates as well, including the Astra Zeneca effort at "massaging" the data and combining small studies to try and make a larger subset, as well as the delays in the Sanofi and Novavax efforts.

Science - done correctly - plays no favorites, and math is uncaring. I'm just thankful the raw data is more readily available than it was in the past, so we can see beyond the headline claims at the basis for them.

 

[saysfaa]

...Personally, I'm not rejecting Ivermectin treatment out of hand, but reliable clinical evidence as to its effectiveness against COVID-19 is somewhere between scant and lacking...

I agree with this part (some other parts, too). Hence the "Finally..."

The link is the most comprehensive list of the studies done on Ivermectin regarding Covid that I've been able to find. I think most sources of info on this (meaning all sides) do a lot of cherry-picking and a lot of spinning. I like being able to see how many people were involved in each study and what the parameters were.

I think it does work effectively and safely when used appropriately - from the personal experiences of people I know personally. All of whom took medicine made for treating covid in people. Not in the US.

 

[mamajos]

This has been proven to be a false story.