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

Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#41

Post by CryptoPunk »

timmytokyo wrote: post #37
logicalmonster wrote: post #13

Sick people trying the human doses of Ivermectin should be the easiest risk-management decision in the history of humanity. You have a drug that is safe in human doses, cheap, and reported to have a positive effect. You lose nothing by trying it and gaining more data.

If people are taking Ivermectin instead of a vaccine, then we as a society have a lot to lose. There is no clinically significant evidence that Ivermectin prevents COVID-19 or reduces its severity. Whereas there is abundant evidence that the vaccines do.

Ivermectin use and vaccination are not mutually exclusive.

Or are you suggesting that if anti-vaxxers were convinced to not use ivermectin, or otherwise prevented from using it, they'd be more likely to get the vaccine?

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#42

Post by logicalmonster »

timmytokyo wrote: post #37
logicalmonster wrote: post #13

Sick people trying the human doses of Ivermectin should be the easiest risk-management decision in the history of humanity. You have a drug that is safe in human doses, cheap, and reported to have a positive effect. You lose nothing by trying it and gaining more data.

If people are taking Ivermectin instead of a vaccine, then we as a society have a lot to lose. There is no clinically significant evidence that Ivermectin prevents COVID-19 or reduces its severity. Whereas there is abundant evidence that the vaccines do.

* Short of using force, most people who are hesitant about the vaccines at this point are not going to rush to vaccinate anytime soon. A non-trivial portion of the population may never choose to get it. If there is some treatment that works, it basically starts to wind Covid down today.

* Do I know if Ivermectin is effective? No, that's why I'd like sick people to have the option to try, to both attempt and save their lives, as well as gather more data. It's an easy decision.

* There is evidence that leaky vaccines can drive mutations and cause worse problems. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/leaky-vac...

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#44

Post by grepfru_it »

off_sounder wrote: post #24
RobLach wrote: post #21

Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require hospitalization, and 99%+ at preventing death? Covid-19 prevention and treatment is basically a solved problem. My limited understanding of other's reality suggests to me that people have connected deeply with a community (through identity poltics or... fun) that is no longer relevant in a p…

I'm skeptical about the efficacy of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine over longer periods of time. I've still not heard a reasonable explanation about why this vaccine is expected to work long-term when the flu shot clearly does not. Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. Can anyone give me an explanation of why vaccines are touted for fast-evolving viruses like the flu and SARS-CoV-2?

> Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus.

The SARS-cov-2 proofreading mechanism would like to have a word with your horribly inaccurate point

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#45

Post by duxup »

logicalmonster wrote: post #13

Sick people trying the human doses of Ivermectin should be the easiest risk-management decision in the history of humanity. You have a drug that is safe in human doses, cheap, and reported to have a positive effect. You lose nothing by trying it and gaining more data.

The problem with random people taking it is that's not "more data". They're not in a study, and they're likely to not try other treatment.

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#46

Post by jleyank »

dham wrote: post #32
RobLach wrote: post #21

Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require hospitalization, and 99%+ at preventing death? Covid-19 prevention and treatment is basically a solved problem. My limited understanding of other's reality suggests to me that people have connected deeply with a community (through identity poltics or... fun) that is no longer relevant in a p…

We need a backup plan. While there a lot of drugs being developed for the treatment of Covid-19, it's easier to use a drug that has already been around for a while because the safety profile is pretty much known. Spray and pray drug development led to our most useful drugs we use today and in the past.

Actually, I don’t think there are any drugs developed to fight COVID. Yeah, there are monoclonal antibodies developed from the initial cohort of symptomatic patients, and various anti inflammatories that have been effective in reducing the intensity of a cytokine storm. There are small molecule efforts, but these things take time. There is a delta specific vaccine in initial clinical trials but it’s bloody hard to get a placebo group together anymore.

The vaccines (of which there are both traditional and novel delivery mechanisms and payloads) represent the best way of reducing the impact of the infection. There is only a short window in most people in which there is an active COVID infection. The problem starts with the aftermath - those with a strong, active immune system zap their lungs or other organ systems. Hence the anti inflammatories.

Viruses aren’t fully alive and they lack many/most of the biological features typical drugs affect. Thus, unless there’s a fortunate side effect, the risk to the human > risk to the virus.

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#47

Post by jleyank »

logicalmonster wrote: post #42
timmytokyo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are taking Ivermectin instead of a vaccine, then we as a society have a lot to lose. There is no clinically significant evidence that Ivermectin prevents COVID-19 or reduces its severity. Whereas there is abundant evidence that the vaccines do.

* Short of using force, most people who are hesitant about the vaccines at this point are not going to rush to vaccinate anytime soon. A non-trivial portion of the population may never choose to get it. If there is some treatment that works, it basically starts to wind Covid down today. * Do I know if Ivermectin is effective? No, that's why I'd like sick people to have the option to try, to both attempt and save thei…

If they won’t take a rapidly developed vaccine, why would they take a rapidly developed treatment? By the time things are “safely tested”, they’ll either be dead from COVID or recovered from it. Long COVID would suck, though.

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#48

Post by jleyank »

RattleyCooper wrote: post #29
RobLach wrote: post #21

Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require hospitalization, and 99%+ at preventing death? Covid-19 prevention and treatment is basically a solved problem. My limited understanding of other's reality suggests to me that people have connected deeply with a community (through identity poltics or... fun) that is no longer relevant in a p…

>Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin Probably because Ivermectin has gone through the rigorous process of testing/approval required for use in humans, that we haven't had time to do with the vaccine. I mean, it's completely understandable why people would seek out well-tested drugs, that are more predictable due to the scientific scrutiny they've been under, than a vaccine that got rushed into production…

Check the mode of action of ivermectin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#Mechanism_of_action). It blocks nerve and muscle chloride channels resulting in paralysis. Humans rely on it not crossing the blood-brain barrier to avoid killing themselves. Viruses lack such channels, as do normal human cells.

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#49

Post by simonh »

jbotz wrote: post #22
p_l wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big problem is that the pills people are obtaining are "just a horse dewormer" . The specification is different, the dosages are different, and the active ingredients differ (drug delivery is frighteningly complex area). Meanwhile people made enough run on ivermectin-based horse dewormer that people had trouble getting it for livestock.

> the dosages are different, and the active ingredients differ Neither the dosages nor the active ingredients are different. Both for humans and for animals, the recommended dose of Ivermectin to treat parasites is 200 micrograms per kilogram of body weight. The "active ingredients" are Ivermectin, period. I have a bottle of injectable Ivermectin intended for cattle here, and it says it's pure Ivermectin in propylene…

They give two reasons that I think are much more than uh, we haven't said it's ok. One is people are getting sick and hospitalised for taking this stuff. The second is, it can have interactions with other medications people might be taking or conditions they might have. Also the stuff you have might be free of non-active ingredients with adverse risks for humans, but other formulations might well contain such ingredients.

Note that the FDA does not say don't take it if your doctor prescribes it, they just say in that case you should follow the directions precisely. The problem is the majority of people taking this stuff don't seem to be doing so under medical guidance. That's a serious issue they have a responsibility to address.

Re: Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19

#50

Post by logicalmonster »

jleyank wrote: post #47
logicalmonster wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Short of using force, most people who are hesitant about the vaccines at this point are not going to rush to vaccinate anytime soon. A non-trivial portion of the population may never choose to get it. If there is some treatment that works, it basically starts to wind Covid down today. * Do I know if Ivermectin is effective? No, that's why I'd like sick people to have the option to try, to both attempt and save thei…

If they won’t take a rapidly developed vaccine, why would they take a rapidly developed treatment? By the time things are “safely tested”, they’ll either be dead from COVID or recovered from it. Long COVID would suck, though.

> If they won’t take a rapidly developed vaccine, why would they take a rapidly developed treatment?

* Ivermectin has long since been approved for human usage. It might not treat Covid very well (this is very much unproven) but a proper dose wouldn't kill you.

* People who are resisting the vaccines are famously seeking out the version of Ivermectin made for horses. Of course there's interest in trying this out.

Post reply on HN