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

Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 493 posts

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#171

Post by davidw »

rory wrote: post #25

Ivermectin probably doesn't do anything to fight Covid-19, but the American media has really shown their corruption in the way they've treated it. It's clearly a safe drug to take in human-designed doses, and it's cheap to produce. Laughing at people for poisoning themselves with "horse dewormer" instead of pointing out that they are turning to the vet store because their access to medicine has been marginalized is s…

The actual vaccine is free, though.

Edit: we can talk plenty about how bad the US health care system is, but in this case, the actual vaccine, that does a fantastic job of protecting people from COVID, is free in that you don't have to spend a dime out of pocket.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#172

Post by davidw »

buescher wrote: post #60
shadowgovt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many users have been taking it in human-designed doses, given that it's not generally prescribed for COVID-19 (and therefore those who are taking it for that purpose are mostly self-medicating)?

Fortunately for me, I know next to nothing about ivermectin, except that the American left is very, very concerned people might be taking it, and I don't know of anyone actually taking it that doesn't have a radio show or podcast. So in my ignorance I would guess very few people are actually taking it and a lot of people are talking about it.

People are turning up in hospitals because they've OD'd on it.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#173

Post by swader999 »

brandonmenc wrote: post #54
ashtonkem wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are literally taking horse formulations of ivermectin because doctors are rightfully refusing to prescribe ivermectin for an off label and ineffective use. Oh, and the access to this medicine is “marginalized” BECAUSE IT DOESNT WORK TO TREAT COVID. We generally do not expect doctors to prescribe medicine that will not work or is not appropriate for the patients condition. Complaining about their access being m…

> People are literally taking horse formulations of ivermectin People are taking the horse formulation because most pharmacists won't even fill an off-label prescription for the drug, which - even if it has no effect on COVID - is safe and taken by a quarter billion people every year. Let people take it. It's not harmful. Or, make a big huge deal about people taking it and, well, then it becomes a big huge deal.

Ivermectin from horse paste cleared up all of my long covid symptoms except for lung inflammation which prednisone fixed after the ivm. Pretty incredible. Felt better after a few hours and after each subsequent daily dose of five total.

A lot of the studies don't seem to be using enough doses or they use too low of a dose. I was at .06g/kg body weight per dose. Also you need to take it with zinq!

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#174

Post by winocm »

hackingforfun wrote: post #143
tzs wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is an article from May 2020 about 15 drugs [1], including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, that were being looked into to see if they might help COVID. It goes into the mechanisms that led researchers to believe they were worth looking at. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-020-00019-9 Edit: Oops...forgot to link the article. Added.

Interesting, thanks.

I really don't want to go back rehashing the point as to why it doesn't work, mainly because finding all of the references again and double checking the wording to make sure it matches the literature is rather time consuming...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28544765

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#175

Post by swader999 »

davidw wrote: post #171
rory wrote: post #25

Ivermectin probably doesn't do anything to fight Covid-19, but the American media has really shown their corruption in the way they've treated it. It's clearly a safe drug to take in human-designed doses, and it's cheap to produce. Laughing at people for poisoning themselves with "horse dewormer" instead of pointing out that they are turning to the vet store because their access to medicine has been marginalized is s…

The actual vaccine is free, though. Edit: we can talk plenty about how bad the US health care system is, but in this case, the actual vaccine, that does a fantastic job of protecting people from COVID, is free in that you don't have to spend a dime out of pocket.

If you pay my taxes it is.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#176

Post by swader999 »

davidw wrote: post #172
buescher wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately for me, I know next to nothing about ivermectin, except that the American left is very, very concerned people might be taking it, and I don't know of anyone actually taking it that doesn't have a radio show or podcast. So in my ignorance I would guess very few people are actually taking it and a lot of people are talking about it.

People are turning up in hospitals because they've OD'd on it.

No they aren't. All of those reports have been retracted.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#177

Post by hackingforfun »

winocm wrote: post #174
hackingforfun wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, thanks.

I really don't want to go back rehashing the point as to why it doesn't work, mainly because finding all of the references again and double checking the wording to make sure it matches the literature is rather time consuming... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28544765

I'm not saying they do work. I just appreciated the reference and thought it was interesting to read through. I am pro-vaccine and think that is the most effective course of action. Anyway, thanks for the link to your other post.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#178

Post by swader999 »

simonh wrote: post #29
programmarchy wrote: post #15

How does the current field of studies compare to Remdesivir? Remdesivir is a repurposed antiviral (originally designed for Ebola) with fairly low efficacy, and very severe side effects, and it breezed through FDA emergency authorization. I don't understand why it seems that the bar is set so low for Remdesivir, but so high for Ivermectin.

>How does the current field of studies compare to Remdesivir? Remdesivir has three randomised controlled trials all of which indicate statistically significant effects, and there don't seem to be any credible challenges to these trials results. Currently given the concerns about the irregularities in the data in it's existing trials, Ivermectin has none.

Say goodbye to your kidneys.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#179

Post by davidw »

swader999 wrote: post #176
davidw wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are turning up in hospitals because they've OD'd on it.

No they aren't. All of those reports have been retracted.

https://news.ohsu.edu/2021/09/17/five-oregonians-hospitalize... doesn't look retracted to me.

Only stands to reason that if people are taking it kind of randomly, a few are going to screw up and take too much.

Re: Lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are unreliable

#180

Post by tootie »

rory wrote: post #25

Ivermectin probably doesn't do anything to fight Covid-19, but the American media has really shown their corruption in the way they've treated it. It's clearly a safe drug to take in human-designed doses, and it's cheap to produce. Laughing at people for poisoning themselves with "horse dewormer" instead of pointing out that they are turning to the vet store because their access to medicine has been marginalized is s…

On The Media did a really good segment with a journalist from Mother Jones of all places. She broke down the rise of Ivermectin and the whiplash response to demonize it even when, as you say, it is safe for human consumption and had at least some positive in vitro test results. As much as it is not worthy of being recommended as a treatment, it's unlikely to be harmful and has/had at least a slim chance of working.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/how-iverme...

Post reply on HN