3 ms·
The company is pretty clear: It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified: No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect
by DanBC 5y ago
The company is pretty clear:
It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:
No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies;
No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;
A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.
- mikece 5y ago> A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies. Ivermectin is one of the most-dosed drugs -- over 3.7 billion doses given worldwide -- with multiple studies showing that the drug is not only effective but safe. To have someone at Merck suggesting there is a "lack of safety" at this point is highly suspect.
- yokaze 5y ago> To have someone at Merck... It is not someone at Merck, it is a company release, which goes through a release process, involving a fair amount of people. So more than "someone". > suggesting there is a "lack of safety" at this point is highly suspect. The complaint is about a lack of "safety data", not safety. > with multiple studies showing that the drug is not only effective but safe Maybe, point they are making, the majority do not even bother to collect safety data, which I take, is not how medical studies should be done. > [...] is highly suspect. How? I fail to see that. A company, which currently left in the dust by its competitors, which do have vaccines, is clearly distancing itself from studies claiming that their product has the benefit others claim. I could understand suspicion, if a company makes positive claims about their product, but if they are clearly distancing themselves from beneficial claims, I tend to believe them.