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

Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 348 posts

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#151

Post by headsoup »

odonnellryan wrote: post #126
headsoup wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't quite my point. The point is not to immediately devalue experts critical of the consensus, but keep informed and considered. To dismiss either side whole-handedly is ignorant. What is happening especially now is precisely that, this whole 'misinformation' drive is to encourage the dismissal of critical opinion (on more and more topics it seems). This is a bad road to go down. And you make a good example o…

There wasn't any real evidence for the use of Ivermectin. Some public policies were not perfect or misguided (lockdowns) some were inconsistent with both messaging and implementation (masks) some were really good and people are against them for no logical reason (vaccines, though maybe requirements are totalitarian in cases). I think the reality is that because there are holes in the response to covid, people dismiss…

All of your points have no certainty. I'm not sure what you're attempting to show here?

> I think the reality is that because there are holes in the response to covid, people dismiss the whole

I think a more salient point is perhaps that because so much effort was put into covering the 'holes' (not to mention the coining and dissemination of the label 'misinformation') rather than be honest about them, distrust was created. It is sensible to question when any groups make concerted efforts to dismiss and censor alternative views, regardless of the merits. Evidence and transparency on the side of the reason/truth should not need such measures.

The authorities and press infantalised the population on the assumption people are too stupid to process information and make their own informed choices. This is bad precedent.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#152

Post by janmarsal »

jeroenhd wrote: post #101
janmarsal wrote: post #81

I don't get it. I don't understand anything about medicine but as far as I know the Japanese used ivermectin to treat COVID so it's not just some developing countries that use it. I'm from Finland and our national news company even reported about some Finnish pharma companies that developed a nasal spay that could treat COVID. That nasal spray included ivermectin and they said it's such a shame ivermectin has such a…

The danger was not that the medicine itself, but the fact that it was a) unproven to have any effect, b) often taken in horse doses causing nasty side effects (because horse medicine if often good enough for human consumption, even if it's not held to the same standard) and above all c) seen as an alternative to proper measures like vaccination, masks, the whole ordeal. It's a pretty good way to get rid of parasites,…

https://yle.fi/news/3-11946611 ^ Okay so if "a)" is true then are these nasal spray companies full of shit or what?

The part "b)" about horse dewormer overdoses have been confirmed to be fake news long ago so I think don't need to dwell on that too much. I still don't know whether ivermectin is effective or not though. If it's not then I still don't understand what's the big deal. Why does it have to be smeared so hard.

And this whole "c)" thing. That's the most disturbing part to me. That's basically like religious fundamentalism to me. I just can't wrap my head around it. Why should vaccination be the only acceptable way to treat COVID and that we shouldn't even consider the alternatives as if they were some kind of heresies? I just don't understand. To me it seems like the vaccine fundamentalists are more interested in obedience than science. In science we need opposing views and this obviously means that some of those views will be proven to be false, but if you try to effectively SUPPRESS those opposing views then you can't call it science anymore. Also, there's always a good chance that the mainstream view can be false. I mean, just like with religions but that's one of those worm cans that only make people mad if we pop it open.

My whole life I was taught that trying to cure seasonal flu with vaccine is silly because the flu mutates too fast and it just leads to an endless loop of seasonal vaccines. Then covid happens and suddenly I should forget everything I knew about vaccines even though with the talk about all these booster shots it only makes it seems like the old knowledge makes more sense than this new knowledge. My brain refuses to accept this nonsense, I can't help it.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#153

Post by xadhominemx »

tux1968 wrote: post #10
jiggawatts wrote: post #6

Ivermectin works because the first trials were done in developing economies where the average person had a high chance of parasitic infections. The steroids used as a standard front-line treatment for severe COVID decreases the immune response to parasites, allowing them to multiply unchecked. This killed patients indirectly, but dead is dead , and they "checked in" with COVID, not parasite complaints. Ivermectin is…

> The misunderstandings around this drug stem from misunderstandings of basic statistics and the scientific method. This is why you shouldn't get your medical advice from Joe Rogan. You're 100% correct, of course. But the prevalent MSM response, of calling it horse medicine, was equally damaging. Since it is a well known, effective, and respected medicine used in humans, this characterization as "horse paste" made it…

> was equally damaging

In what way? Ivermectin was pitched as an alternative to vaccination, leading people to avoid the highly effective vaccines.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#154

Post by tinus_hn »

NoraCodes wrote: post #98
snidane wrote: post #43

While the ivermectin story is largely explained by the confounding factor of parasite presence in developing countries, it indirectly helped covid patients by curing them of other problems and thus reducing the potence of covid. Not so much in the developed countries since the parasite problem was small. Concerning though, was the society's attitude to the Ivermectin, an safe drug prescribed by WHO in Africa en masse…

> Who would have though that Vladimir Putin would become the world's most successful doctor and cure the world of the pandemic overnight. Please, don't leave us hanging - i want to hear the rest! I wonder if your novel might be better suited for AO3 or FanFiction.net, though?

If you want to hear the rest just watch the news, it’s ongoing. Perhaps it didn’t happen the same everywhere but in a lot of countries it was out with the old COVID and in with the new Ukraine war.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#155

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

moistofreason wrote: post #143
baumandm wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it's click-bait, but people were actually taking livestock versions of Ivermectin, in paste form. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/23/covid-...

Many major pharmacies in the US refused to fill prescriptions for off-label use of IVM, due to the media freak out about it… Some people decided to go to farm supply stores and take the sterile bovine injectable form of IVM orally. This whole situation would not have happened if social media, YouTube, and major news outlets didn’t make such a stink about using a drug. It has virtually no negative side-effects, over 4…

Just because it's safe doesn't mean they should hand it out like candy to anyone who wants it.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#156

Post by moistofreason »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #155
moistofreason wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many major pharmacies in the US refused to fill prescriptions for off-label use of IVM, due to the media freak out about it… Some people decided to go to farm supply stores and take the sterile bovine injectable form of IVM orally. This whole situation would not have happened if social media, YouTube, and major news outlets didn’t make such a stink about using a drug. It has virtually no negative side-effects, over 4…

Just because it's safe doesn't mean they should hand it out like candy to anyone who wants it.

They aren’t… they are refusing to fill prescriptions, you know, written by doctors.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#157

Post by acdha »

cersa8 wrote: post #84

Isn't Ivermectin most effective at the onset of symptoms [0] ? From the article "They looked at data from all patients; then analyzed data from patients who received ivermectin or a placebo 24 hours before they were hospitalized" This sounds like Ivermectin was given when symptoms where so severe, hospitalization was required. This could well be too late for Ivermectin to be effective. [0] https://www.ijidonline.com/…

No. Ivermectin has not proven effective at any point.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#158

Post by bena »

edmcnulty101 wrote: post #61
HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to go back and re-read my comment. He is skewing by cherry-picking. The two aren’t mutually incompatible.

It's skew to you because the world is binary to you. My opinions vs The bad guys. Joe Rogan has people with all kinds of differing opinions to create a rich marketplace of ideas where the idea wins on merit not censorship. As I said, there's no reason to have more than one main stream person repeating the same thing repeated on every network. When Labotomies won the Nobel Prize you would have possibly been upset that…

> create a rich marketplace of ideas where the idea wins on merit not censorship.

This is demonstrably false. Ideas on Joe Rogan do not win on merit. Unless merit is based on quantity of bullshit.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#159

Post by nostoc »

headsoup wrote: post #67
coldtea wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you cherry-pick your experts enough, you’ll be able to find one that agrees with you, no matter how absurd your position. So? Some experts are more experts than others?

Interesting you are downvoted, this is precisely what is happening. The contradicting experts are quickly labelled as quacks and loonies, yet we have a long history of the early critical voices being eventually proved right (cholesterol, sugar, cigarettes, asbestos, Oxycodone, bio-labs, roundup, DDT, radium, etc). It's a long list and yet we behave the same every single time. This time I'm sure the consensus/"the sci…

Going down the "Some quacks were right, therefore all quacks are right" path will not lead you to a healthy place.

Yes, there is inertia in the scientific community, and sometimes the dissenting voices have a hard time being heard. That much is true.

But that is true because most of the time, the dissenting voices are wrong, if not outright lunatics.

Re: Ivermectin Didn’t Reduce Covid-19 Hospitalizations in Largest Trial to Date

#160

Post by janmarsal »

xadhominemx wrote: post #128
janmarsal wrote: post #81

I don't get it. I don't understand anything about medicine but as far as I know the Japanese used ivermectin to treat COVID so it's not just some developing countries that use it. I'm from Finland and our national news company even reported about some Finnish pharma companies that developed a nasal spay that could treat COVID. That nasal spray included ivermectin and they said it's such a shame ivermectin has such a…

> If it's placebo at worst then why did the media try to demonize it so hard? Because anti-vaxxers pitched it as an alternative to vaccination, and many people listened.

Why is an alternative to vaccination a bad thing exactly? I'm vaccinated and I'm certainly not against vaccines per se, but when they're talking about 4th booster shot then to me it only indicates that maybe vaccines wasn't the right way to treat this pandemic. Why is this such a a dangerous thought? Why should I accept vaccines as the only way forward? That's probably my biggest question here. Almost make me feel like they're scared of someone finding a better way out of this.
Post reply on HN