IVERMECTIN - Do NOT be these people!

[Beer can]

ALSO, it looks like they are testing it (based on design of the study as described in the link) as a prophylactic, NOT as a cure.

I think prophylactics might be very necessary. The vaccine is great but not 100%
If there is something that can help we need it.
People are still getting covid even vaccinated.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

if you mean are they made up of the same individually uninteresting members of the periodic table, then sort of. Do they work the same way? no. is this some big conspiracy? doesn't look that way.

i'll make it easy for you, one not scientist to another.


Does this.
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ivermectin
C48H74O14


look like this?
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/145996610
C13H19N3O7

and for what its worth, this is remdesivir
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/121304016
C27H35N6O8P


Nope. not even close.

 

[saysfaa]

Thank you. Haven't had anyone answer me yet on the question besides saying one is a wormer other a antiviral....
What I really want to know is if there is a big difference between the two as far as chemical composition.
Keep hearing Merck couldn't make $ off ivermectin because a generic cheap drug now so they developed a new patented drug that's pretty close to the same.
??
...

This might shed some light...
How Ivermectin works against parasites
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2008/050742s022lbl.pdf
"...Ivermectin is a member of the avermectin class of broad-spectrum antiparasitic agents which have a unique mode of action. Compounds of the class bind selectively and with high affinity to glutamate-gated chloride ion channels which occur in invertebrate nerve and muscle cells. This leads to an increase in the permeability of the cell membrane to chloride ions with hyperpolarization of the nerve or muscle cell, resulting in paralysis and death of the parasite. Compounds of this class may also interact with other ligand-gated chloride channels, such as those gated by the neurotransmitter gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA).
The selective activity of compounds of this class is attributable to the facts that some mammals do not have glutamate-gated chloride channels and that the avermectins have a low affinity for mammalian ligand-gated chloride channels...."

And how it works against viruses (specifically HIV, influenza, and west nile - doesn't mention covid)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32135219/

Which says "...We previously identified the small molecule ivermectin as an inhibitor of HIV-1 integrase nuclear entry...We show here that ivermectin's broad spectrum antiviral activity relates to its ability to target the host importin (IMP) α/β1 nuclear transport proteins...We establish for the first time that ivermectin can dissociate the preformed IMPα/β1 heterodimer, as well as prevent its formation, through binding to the IMPα armadillo (ARM) repeat domain to impact IMPα thermal stability and α-helicity."

I understand a little of that - it stops the virus from transporting through the cell membranes.



https://www.merck.com/news/merck-st...rated-by-voluntary-license-partners-in-india/

"...Molnupiravir (EIDD-2801/MK-4482) is an investigational, orally bioavailable form of a potent ribonucleoside analog that inhibits the replication of multiple RNA viruses including SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19...."

I understand less of this. But nucleoside is part of DNA or RNA; ribonucleoside is certain kinds on nucleosides. Analog means it is close enough to substitute in some ways. It doesn't substitute well enough for replication.

Edit to correct, it doesn't substitute well enough for good replication - it doesn't stop all replication - one analogy is an old-style copy machine making a copy of a copy of a copy of a...

 

[Aunt Angus]

It's all so fascinating...

 

[RoosterML]

I wonder if Valbazen would have produced better results

 

[sdm111]

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.

View attachment 2821214

You can literally replace ivermectin with vaccine in this post so whats the difference

 

[Swbertrand1]

Poultry brings us together, politics divide us, covid is not politics discussing what is going on with covid is not politics.
I don't see why you think that post is political though.

Indeed. Reading comprehension?

 

[U_Stormcrow]

You can literally replace ivermectin with vaccine in this post so whats the difference

The difference is that when AstraZeneca tried that BS, they were called on it - and had to start testing all over. Handy Timeline (out of date, more problems since) **AND** that their "study" didn't involve interviewing 20 or 30 people, after their recovery following a multi drug treatment regimen, then claiming success. All of the Ivermectin trials combined involved less participants than the AstraZeneca trials, who got in trouble, in part, for trying to combine their South American trial data with their US trial data, in spite of differing protocols and study goals, as well as the errors in administering them.

For comparison, here's the Moderna study started in July of last year, involving ongoing monitoring of over 30,000 patients. The similar Pfizer trial involved monitoring over 46,000 participants. Both studies had a simple measure - how frequently did vaccinated participants catch COVID compared to unvaccinated? Only later did they start to get sample sizes large enough to make some claims about the relative severity of disease in the vaccinated vs unvaccinated, and those were (at least initially) offered with cautions about the confidence of the conclusions.

If you don't understand how post-hoc selection can introduce bias, or how pure chance can influence small studies, I can't help you. As has been said elswhere, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."

 

[catballou]

We've all seen the news and made up our minds with our own free will. Doctors, and hubby and I are both doctors, know more than the media. Stop stirring up trouble. This is a site for POULTRY, NOT POLITICS! By stirring up trouble, you show your true nature. Either post about poultry or LEAVE!

No politics involved in any of these posts. Just people who are concerned about the use of ivermectin and covid.

 

[catballou]

I think prophylactics might be very necessary. The vaccine is great but not 100%
If there is something that can help we need it.
People are still getting covid even vaccinated.

But not dying from it.