Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
theatlantic.com
Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
1–10 of 93 posts
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#2The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it. Since there is no money for expensive research studies or clinical trials, all the research studies that get done will be low budget and subject to being called "lousy science".
How about just properly reporting and studying the actual facts from one of the very large real world trials, like the one in India?
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#3The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it. Since there is no money for expensive research studies or clinical trials, all the research studies that get done will be low budget and subject to being called "lousy science". How about just properly reporting and studying the actual facts from one of the very large real world trials, like the one in India?
I think how effective modern ad campaigns are run are part to blame. You don't just shove your product as gold, you make sure to throw dirt on the alternatives. Which includes online troll armies these days. We're talking about leaving billions on the table and possibly being pushed out by your competition. A death sentence in modern day economy. it just sounds anti-narrative and is hard to swallow.
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#4Why would not some government fund the proper research into Ivermectin and Covid and be done with it. A lot of money was already thrown into the problem, throwing a bit more into a possible cheap and safe preventive treatment is a no brainer, unless I am missing something. Even this article suggests that there are some studies showing promise for Ivermectin, well, go create a big proper one and put an end to this debate. I can't stand Ivermectin zealots and anti-Ivermectin knowitalls.
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#5The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it. Since there is no money for expensive research studies or clinical trials, all the research studies that get done will be low budget and subject to being called "lousy science". How about just properly reporting and studying the actual facts from one of the very large real world trials, like the one in India?
Seems like governments should be funding proper studies, as they might benefit from a low cost treatment option.
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#6We don't need to discuss it anymore.
The big tech and Narrative talkers already decided since the beginning what is good or bad for us.
And what is truth or not.
/s
Maybe even a simple Buffy (Joe Rogan) guy may have some common sense.
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#7The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it. Since there is no money for expensive research studies or clinical trials, all the research studies that get done will be low budget and subject to being called "lousy science". How about just properly reporting and studying the actual facts from one of the very large real world trials, like the one in India?
> The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it.
How then do you explain the numerous off-patent drugs that are currently in widespread production by the major drug companies?
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#8It's as though medical literature is going through the same process that the Internet did: built with the assumption of good behavior, and that good actors would swamp bad ones. That turns out to be untrue, and correcting it after the fact is much harder.
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#9Hopefully the NIH funded ACTIV-6 Trial will provide more definitive evidence on Ivermectin, given that it is a US based study and has 15,000 participants.
However, I don't know how the trial stacks up against prior work in terms of dose, and the estimated completion date is DEC 2022.
https://www.nih.gov/research-training/medical-research-initi...
Re: Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following
#10The problem is that Ivermectin is off patent, so no drug company can make any money from it. Since there is no money for expensive research studies or clinical trials, all the research studies that get done will be low budget and subject to being called "lousy science". How about just properly reporting and studying the actual facts from one of the very large real world trials, like the one in India?
I'm skeptical of the "there's no money in it" angle. Ivermectin advocates seem to be suggesting that you take it as a preventative measure for covid - i.e., that the way to stop the pandemic is to have everyone take ivermectin. Each individual ivermectin tablet, at current levels of demand and quality control, costs a couple of dollars.
Compare that with the vaccine, which costs governments a couple tens of dollars, but people get at most four shots per year.
I agree that there isn't money in licensing the ivermectin patent, but there is absolutely a lot of money to be made in manufacturing ivermectin itself, convincing people to take preventative ivermectin, and meeting worldwide demand. And every single pharmaceutical company can play that game - not just a couple of very rich ones in rich countries with research labs capable of making their own covid vaccine. Frankly, it should be a little bit surprising that not even one of them has tried this strategy.