This is the same active ingredient used to treat heartworm in dogs and kill other types of parasites.
It’s also been used to treat river blindness in humans, with billions of doses administered over several decades
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
71–80 of 644 posts
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#72The FDA has a page on Invermectin for Covid treatment, which provides a reminder that veterinary drugs are not designed for human consumption. https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul... "For one thing, animal drugs are often highly concentrated because they are used for large animals like horses and cows, which can weigh a lot more than we do—a ton or more. Such high doses can be highly toxic in…
Ivermectin isn't a "veterinary drug", it's been used as a human medicine for decades.
The use of ivermectin in humans to treat parasites won a Nobel Prize.
Quoting from the Wikipedia page:
"Half of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded jointly to Campbell and Ōmura for discovering avermectin, "the derivatives of which have radically lowered the incidence of river blindness and lymphatic filariasis, as well as showing efficacy against an expanding number of other parasitic diseases"
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
While randomized trials are certainly the gold-standard for determining if you should give a new drug to treat an arbitrary disease, that process is far too conservative during a pandemic where a huge majority of the world cannot access proper medical care. Ivermectin is already massively produced, used throughout the world, and cheap to manufacture (compared to new anti-Covid drugs). Even months ago before the benef…
>The sudden drop in Covid cases in India as the clearest indicator to me. Nah that's just confirmation bias and rumors. It wasn't effective at all, otherwise India wouldn't have taken it off the recommended drugs list.
>India wouldn't have taken it off the recommended drugs list.
Normally authorities are afraid to go against W.H.O recommendations, because if it didn't work out, it would be hard to justify it on the basis of local observations alone, at least on paper.
But the important thing is that some states still did it, which might indicate there was very observable benefit.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#74I think the future is going to look back on this pandemic and be simply amazed that the public allowed social media companies to dictate to the world what scientists and the people could and could not discuss. Much in the same way we look at the 16th century with Galileo and the Catholic Church.
Scientists discuss science in YouTube comments? That's a first to me.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#75I think the future is going to look back on this pandemic and be simply amazed that the public allowed social media companies to dictate to the world what scientists and the people could and could not discuss. Much in the same way we look at the 16th century with Galileo and the Catholic Church.
This thread is literally under a scientific publication investigating the effectiveness of Ivermecitin, but yeah, basically like Galileo Galilei. Except not at all.
Any discussion of ivermectin on platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and twitter is met with ceremonial bans or deletion. Even when the discussion is between doctors or is part of a senate hearing (see: dark horse podcast with Bret and Cory, and Cory’s testimony to the senate which have both been taken off YouTube)
So yes it is an apt comparison.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#76It's banned on YouTube because of multiple authoritative sources indicating it's not a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19.
Here is the FDA's stance: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul...
Here is the European equivalent of the AMA advising against it's use: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-advises-against-use-iv...
Here is an RCT in JAMA finding it ineffective: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389
And here is Merck, that sells Ivermectin, but whose vaccine didn’t make it through clinical trials, discouraging the use of Ivermectin for COVID-19: https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use...
If Ivermectin worked on COVID-19, the manufacturer of Ivermectin that has made no money on vaccines for COVID-19 would probably be pushing it wouldn't they?
There have been some studies that found it effective in vitro, but as noted in other comments, at several times the safe dosage in vivo.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#77The FDA has a page on Invermectin for Covid treatment, which provides a reminder that veterinary drugs are not designed for human consumption. https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul... "For one thing, animal drugs are often highly concentrated because they are used for large animals like horses and cows, which can weigh a lot more than we do—a ton or more. Such high doses can be highly toxic in…
The warning is there because some people decided to self-medicate and bought veterinary doses and ODed.
You can also over-dose on dihydrogen monoxide - should we also ban any discussion on that?
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#78This looks less ridiculous than the last metaanalysis on Ivermectin that was posted here.
Still if you look at it there's some reason for caution. Not all of the included studies were RCTs, some were not blinded. If you look at the "Risk of Bias"-Table there are really only three studies that could qualify as high quality.
I'm waiting for judgement from medical experts.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#79Whether ivermectin helps with covid or not, it's certainly not an advertising company's role to censor the debate.
Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, "there is a worldwide conspiracy to suppress Ivermectin so that Big Pharma can make vaccines" is clearly a conspiracy theory, it's not a tautology. Seriously, why all the tinfoil?
People called the lab leak theory a conspiracy theory (because it was associated with Trump and “racism”). Now we have blue-chip liberal celebrities like Jon Stewart coming out in favor of the lab leak hypothesis.
Giving the benefit of the doubt (that new evidence is compelling), that still doesn't retroactively justify anything. The information available in the past is not affected by the informative available in the future. If we discover that Bush irrefutably orchestrated 9/11, that doesn't make the conspiracy theorists' rationales more rational. It feels natural to make that connection, but that's only in service of our side-taking tendencies.