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

Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

adn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 208 posts

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#141

Post by karaterobot »

OneEyedRobot wrote: post #112

That's odd. A quick look at sci-hub shows a bunch of ivermectin papers that don't look half bad. I figure that if a physician wants to go off-label on a prescription they should go ahead. Plenty of warnings of course. Buying it at the feed store along with fish antibiotics is sketchy, but remember that it's your body after all. People forget that. God knows how many people are harmed by Tylenol overdoses.

The issue is that there aren't any studies showing that safe doses are effective for treating this disease in humans. The studies on monkey cell cultures are what they are, but nobody seems to be noticing that the dose you'd have to use to get those effects in living humans is unsafe. As a rule, medicine should be more likely to treat the illness than to kill you. If my doctor prescribed Ivermectin, I guess I'd take it, but if my doctor prescribed it at this point, they should get their license revoked.

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#142

Post by Griffinsauce »

zepto wrote: post #124
devwastaken wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The announcement is for people with basic reasoning skills, not for those that take drugs based on Facebook posts. Ivermectin, like many drugs, is used for various things. COVID is not one of them, and those pushing it have no expertise to understand the medical studies, nor are they interested in doing a comprehensive evaluation. Yet again, actual experts aren't on the playing field, it's talking heads and hired deg…

What’s the difference between those that take drugs based on Facebook posts and those who take drugs based on TV adverts?

Multiple things can be bad.

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#143

Post by tomnipotent »

zepto wrote: post #140
tomnipotent wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like all the evidence we had around the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine? The paper from Argentina around Ivermectin is already suspected of fraud. I won't hold my breath it'll end up with good results.

If you were a believer in science, you’d understand that there is no connection between hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. Edit: you dishonestly added the following to your comment after I replied: “The paper from Argentina around Ivermectin is already suspected of fraud. I won't hold my breath it'll end up with good results.” For what it’s worth, I’m not referring to that paper. But again, if you understood science,…

Within a minute of posting it.

> there is no connection between hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin

You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up?

I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works.

> For what it’s worth, I’m not referring to that paper.

So you're not referring to any science at all, then? I'm unable to find any other published literature on the subject.

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#144

Post by beaner »

PeterisP wrote: post #133
beaner wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are. If they weren't, they'd say "People are overdosing on ivermectin by taking doses intended for Horses." Instead they call the drug itself a "horse dewormer," and make it sound like that's its exclusive use, and that it should not be taken by humans in any dose. That's false.

Well, they should not be taken by humans in any dose to try and treat respiratory problems. If your doctor gives you a prescription of ivermectin to treat some worm problems, knock yourself out, but there's nothing wrong a simple general message "do not take ivermectin just because you thing you want it" - it's a prescription drug, so use only if explicitly, personally advised by a doctor who has looked into your par…

I agree. People are doing the wrong thing by taking horse-sized doses, and should be careful with drugs that are not prescribed to them. The way you're phrasing things would be a much more understandable message that would not push people further away.

The question of whether or not to take things not prescribed to you is another question I suppose. LSD is an illegal drug but helps a lot of people. Ivermectin is widely, widely used and safely at that. Not being prescribed is not the same as being dangerous, so when it comes to self-medication my personal belief is that it is acceptable to work outside those boundaries, so long as you're being knowledgable and safe about it. (Which a lot of people are not doing in this case.)

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#145

Post by zepto »

tomnipotent wrote: post #143
zepto wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were a believer in science, you’d understand that there is no connection between hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. Edit: you dishonestly added the following to your comment after I replied: “The paper from Argentina around Ivermectin is already suspected of fraud. I won't hold my breath it'll end up with good results.” For what it’s worth, I’m not referring to that paper. But again, if you understood science,…

Within a minute of posting it. > there is no connection between hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up? I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works. > For what it’s worth, I’m not referring to that paper. So you're not referring to any science at al…

> You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up?

If you believed in science you’d know that’s a political connection not a scientific one.

> I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works.

Yes, you are mistaking politics for science.

More edits you dishonestly added after my reply:

“So you're not referring to any science at all, then? I'm unable to find any other published literature on the subject.”

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#146

Post by rajin444 »

junon wrote: post #120
rajin444 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the experts have any long term studies on efficacy (5+ years out)? It seems like they figured out the 6 month (or is it 5? or 8?) window only recently. It also seems learning the vaccine is non sterilizing is new as well. I don't fault them for any of this. Science takes time and iteration. Nobody can account for unknown unknowns - the only solution is time.

What is the alternative?

Based on current data? I have no idea. It's an absolute mess:

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2021/09/03/i-have-not-been-sil...

For a start, we could stop making claims that we don't know to be true. Replace "the vaccine is safe and effective, and if we all get the vaccine the pandemic will be over" with "the vaccine is the best tool we have to prevent serious disease and death".

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#147

Post by ithkuil »

ceejayoz wrote: post #83
dataflow wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's like when the CDC first said that masks are ineffective to try to keep people from hoarding them. The way I remember it was more like, the CDC said: - They don't know yet if surgical (and in general, non-N95) masks are effective against COVID-19 spread. They never denied this for N95. - Hospitals are running out of surgical (and N95...) masks, and given the above, people should stop hoarding them. That seemed.…

At the time, the US Surgeon General tweeted: > "Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!" There was absolutely quite a bit of false messaging on the point from authority figures.

Yeah they should have said.

"Stop buying masks. There is a shortage and if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk! Since we live in a very capitalistic society we cannot reserve masks for healthcare use and instead we have to rely on all of you to do the right thing. Keep in mind that masks may not offer the kind of protection you think they do, i.e. they do not make you invincible, you're still advised to stay at home and keep social distancing. When supply of masks will be restored we will likely encourage people to wear them as to reduce community (probabilistic) spread, which works even if the masks are not 100% effective."

Unfortunately nobody would read things that don't fit in a tweet.

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#148

Post by tomnipotent »

zepto wrote: post #145
tomnipotent wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Within a minute of posting it. > there is no connection between hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up? I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works. > For what it’s worth, I’m not referring to that paper. So you're not referring to any science at al…

> You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up? If you believed in science you’d know that’s a political connection not a scientific one. > I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works. Yes, you are mistaking politics for science. More edits you dishonestly added after my reply : “So you'r…

How is it ANY different from the current situation other than your own personal opinion? Moving the goal posts doesn't help your argument.

> Yes, you are mistaking politics for science.

This isn't very convincing. What makes your position non-political or more scientific? Talk about dishonesty.

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#149

Post by dataflow »

abstractbarista wrote: post #136
dataflow wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(a) Do you call any case where someone turns out to be wrong "false messaging"? Their prior knowledge led them to believe (wrongly, but it seems to me, quite honestly) that non-N95 masks would not be effective, and they didn't have evidence to the contrary, and they very openly explained that their fear is healthcare providers not having masks, which was 100% a sincere worry any official worth their salt would have.…

They stated something as fact to influence our behavior, when they did not actually have the requisite knowledge to make such a statement at that point in time. They should have instead said "We don't know whether they're effective yet, so don't hoard them, because doing so could cause X." There's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know something yet. Instead, they make commands without supporting evidence. That…

Can you at least link to an official recommendation from the CDC so we can talk about the same thing?

So far the only link I've seen is a tweet (not an official recommendation) from the surgeon general (not the CDC).

Re: Doctors and pharmacists ramp up calls for Americans to stop using ivermectin

#150

Post by zepto »

tomnipotent wrote: post #148
zepto wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You mean a connection like being pushed as a cure for the same disease while lacking any substantial, peer-reviewed data to back it up? If you believed in science you’d know that’s a political connection not a scientific one. > I think maybe we have different ideas of how science and the scientific method works. Yes, you are mistaking politics for science. More edits you dishonestly added after my reply : “So you'r…

How is it ANY different from the current situation other than your own personal opinion? Moving the goal posts doesn't help your argument. > Yes, you are mistaking politics for science. This isn't very convincing. What makes your position non-political or more scientific? Talk about dishonesty.

> How is it ANY different…

How is what any different?

> What makes your position non-political or more scientific? Talk about dishonesty.

What position have I claimed is non-political or more scientific?

Post reply on HN