Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

journals.lww.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 644 posts

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#161

Post by ALittleLight »

MilnerRoute wrote: post #90
mgamache wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually a meta analysis can offer better evidence then a single RCT. https://ascopost.com/issues/june-10-2014/randomized-trials-v...

Wait a minute... This post is a debate between two opposing viewpoints. So it also makes the exact opposite point: The primary difference between a randomized controlled trial and meta-analysis is that the former “provide the highest level of evidence because they contain the least amount of bias. Randomized controlled trials reduce bias, while meta-analyses increase bias." This Hacker News story is about a recent me…

Important thing to know about that study is they are testing time to recovery for people with mild covid.

I'm not anywhere near an expert, but two things stood out to me reading this study. First, time to recover in the ivermectin group was 10 days versus 12 in the placebo. The paper calls this "not significant" but it's not clear to me whether that's statistically not significant, and if so, why wouldn't it be, or if knocking two days off recovery isn't that meaningful. The other thing I noticed reading it was that only one person out of 400 died and that person was in the placebo group.

I think the Brett Weinstein response would be something like -

A. Ivermectin's best benefit is as a prophylactic not a treatment.

B. Ivermectin should be administered as early after onset as possible to treat, whereas here there was some delay to get people organized, enrolled in trial, etc.

C. It's hard to measure effect when the disease is mild.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#162

Post by redrain »

birken wrote: post #100
desine wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't get EUA for the vaccines if there's a working treatment. The doctor who promoted Hydroxychloroquine and zinc treatment, Dr. Zelenko, is still banned from Twitter for spreading COVID disinformation. There's both actual conspiracies in this world, and well poisoning to damage the conversations. When you look at the amount of money these companies stand to make from producing billions of vaccinations, you shou…

Pfizer, a company that has contributed probably trillions of dollars to global GDP over the past 6 months, is massively underperforming the stock market when you compare pre-pandemic to now [1]. The stock price in theory should price in all the future cash flows from the vaccine. What is your basis that the pharma companies are making tons of money on these vaccines? It isn't like the vaccines are pure profit. The ph…

> What is your basis that the pharma companies are making tons of money on these vaccines?

I am not sure, but doesn't companies make a lot of money if their product sells a lot? I thought it was basic economics.

Do you really need to look at the stocks to understand it?

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#163

Post by dang »

christmm wrote: post #149

Discussions about ivermectin must be banned from youtube. It smells of Trump too much. Any scientific dissent, even justified, should not be tolerated.

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. We're trying for a different sort of internet here, if possible.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#164

Post by f38zf5vdt »

Ivermectin has to be one, presumptuously, of the most ridiculous foreign PSYOP interventions in recent memory. I believe that somewhere there's a bet going on for how many Westerners they can get taking dog medication thinking it makes them immune to COVID19.

We already have a cure! In most countries, it's even _free_! And yet I read paranoid blogs online from conspiracy theorists who refuse a vaccine but guzzle down veterinary medication user to treat heartworm and digestive parasites.

Pound me with downvotes, I'll hold my breath until I see a large scale randomized double-blind trial.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#165

Post by wrycoder »

enkid wrote: post #103
alaxsxaq wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is from the FDA website. "Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate, FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN threat age…

Can you point to anything that says the FDA would consider HCQ or any of these other drugs as alternatives to vaccines? They are not the same, and though they could both treat COVID, my reading is not that this would limit vaccine emergency authorization if there was a non vaccine treatment. This is especially true considering there are multiple vaccines approved under emergency use which would be direct competitors.…

I get vaccinated for flu every year. And yet there is Tamiflu, an effective palliative.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#166

Post by dang »

_gtly wrote: post #34

@dang why was this flagged?

Users flagged it. That's basically always the reason when you see [flagged] on a submission. (With comments it's a little more ambiguous - moderators will also sometimes put [flagged] on a comment, though still in a tiny minority of cases.)

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html#flag

We sometimes turn off flags, especially when an article seems to contain enough significant new information to support a substantive discussion. I've done that in this case.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#167

Post by dang »

oDot wrote: post #65
guscost wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users with enough karma can flag things they don’t like.

Yes, very unfortunate.

That's an illusion; it only seems that way when you judge by specific prominent cases that you care about.

Turning off flagging on HN would have the same effect as turning off the immune system in a human body, only faster.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#168

Post by adrianmonk »

weaksauce wrote: post #150
desine wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't get EUA for the vaccines if there's a working treatment. The doctor who promoted Hydroxychloroquine and zinc treatment, Dr. Zelenko, is still banned from Twitter for spreading COVID disinformation. There's both actual conspiracies in this world, and well poisoning to damage the conversations. When you look at the amount of money these companies stand to make from producing billions of vaccinations, you shou…

> You can't get EUA for the vaccines if there's a working treatment. Per the FDA: ""Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate, FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threate…

Also, I simply wouldn't assume the FDA considers a treatment (this drug) an alternative to something that prevents the disease (vaccines).

They both are used for the same disease but in different ways. They are only alternatives in a very broad sense.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#169

Post by f38zf5vdt »

dang wrote: post #159
f38zf5vdt wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a raging case of COVID19, and deep into a 39C fever I began burning offerings and meat and honey to the moon. It was late at night, and I figured maybe the Moon God would be awake. There was no effect on the fever. Once the dawn came, I gyrated wildly in the direction of the sun while burning incense. Within hours, my fever broke and was down to a lukewarm 38C! Now I see that COVID19 is the domain of the Sun Go…

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar, especially not on divisive topics. We all know that anecdotes aren't statistical evidence. That doesn't make them offtopic. They're interesting, and they're the lifeblood of conversation. Generally on HN the approach is to trust readers to be able to make their own minds. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... If you wouldn't mind reviewing…

My anecdote is exactly as valid as his. You can't prove the Sun God didn't cure me.

Re: Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

#170

Post by brokensegue »

mikeytown2 wrote: post #129

N=1. Me and my 2 year old had covid. My wife started ivermectin and never got sick. Shared bed and sick 2 year old wants mommy. Ivermectin didn't work for me (diarrhea) but my fever went from 102.7 down to 99 12 hours after HQC after 6 days of a slow downward spiral (fever kept going up and up every day). So for me, my take is the drugs absolutely worked.

this is not how science works
Post reply on HN