Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of Covid-19 Infection

Post by mcguire » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 8:55 PM UTC

andreilys wrote: post #118

JoshuaDavid wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydroperoxyl (the common name for hydrogen dioxide) should just break down into water and oxygen gas as soon as it encounters H+ ions (e.g. when it touches liquid water), no? Is there some particular reason you think the dangers are being repressed? If your answer is something to do with "free radicals" my understanding is that most of those come from metabolic processes rather than things you eat.

Thanks for correcting me, meant to say dihydrogen monoxide, aka water ;) My point being that you can over-dose on almost any compound at high enough doses. So instead of driving the conversation underground and letting patients self-medicate, we should empower doctors with proper information rather than painting Ivermectin as a conspiracy theory drug

Post by ceejayoz » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 8:57 PM UTC

vimy wrote: post #211

azinman2 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of others have debunked this here. Yet with all this conspiracy stuff there’s a big elephant in the room that no one seems to ever talk about: Covid is a global virus. The FDA can block and approve whatever treatments in the US, but it has no authority in Brazil or Thailand. If all these conspiracy drugs worked well yet the FDA blocked it for some malicious intent, the rest of the world would approve and use it.…

Most regions that use ivermectin have significantly less deaths. Example: https://twitter.com/jjchamie/status/1334228581870931968

Post by newsclues » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 8:59 PM UTC

void_mint wrote: post #15

goldemerald wrote: post #7

I heard about Ivermectin for the first time this week and was shocked how much it seemed that I had stepped into conspiracy theory land. There seemed to be an overwhelming amount of evidence over the last year that this repurposed drug is effective at treating Covid during a variety of stages (preventative, first positive test, ICU admittance, and even long haul). But since there hadn't been a randomized trial the dr…

> I truly hope in the coming years the censorship of this topic will be the catalyst for allowing free speech to prevail on social media. If someone died because of a "Take Ivermectin and you'll survive COVID" video on YouTube, who's to blame? Should YouTube not take steps to prevent the spread of misinformation that could kill people? edit Big downvotes, no response. Great system.

Post by raphlinus » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

swader999 wrote: post #252

jiofih wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being proven right. That’s the anti-vac crowd’s dearest interest.

That's the wrong side to look at this from. These are just people on the fringe with little influence and funding. If ivermectin was authorized as a viable treatment the vaccines receiving emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been possible. There were and still are billions on the line.

Post by analyte123 » Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 9:05 PM UTC

joe_the_user wrote: post #227

analyte123 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the EMA link says that current evidence for ivermectin is insufficient and it cannot currently be recommended outside of trials. This not the same as claiming that it does not work or that it is hazardous, although many journalists can seemingly not tell the difference. The FDA’s advisory is mostly about people overdosing on veterinary ivermectin. They emphasize that overdose and medication interactions are…

It seems it is you who is misrepresenting the ema link. Key quote: " Although ivermectin is generally well tolerated at doses authorised for other indications, side effects could increase with the much higher doses that would be needed to obtain concentrations of ivermectin in the lungs that are effective against the virus. Toxicity when ivermectin is used at higher than approved doses therefore cannot be excluded. "…