5 ms·

The makers of Ivermectin are against the use of Ivermectin for Covid. https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic

The makers of Ivermectin are against the use of Ivermectin for Covid. https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use... The dissenters are advocating things even the company that stands to profit from those things opposes. That’s how off the deep end this is.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago
The company has another upcoming drug they want to push rather than ivermectin: https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 E: To add, I'm not a doctor but Brett Weinstein seems adamant that ivermectin is a very safe drug for humans. One point he has made is that because ivermectin is safe for consumption, there's no (Or very little) downside to taking it in an attempt to prevent or help with COVID.
- Pyramus 5y ago
  So you are asserting they don't want to benefit from both?
  - ZephyrBlu 5y ago
    I don't know much about the economics of drugs, but I've seen this type of statement a few times: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27496008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27496008
    - Pyramus 5y ago
      I don't get it, why would Merck leave money on the table. Merck has and will develop many more Covid drugs. It does not make sense to bet everything on one horse where there is a lot of uncertainty and risk that any drug will see the light of day. I get that it makes sense as a narrative device to discredit Merck ("big pharma has acted against our interest in the past, so they are acting against our interest here"), but it does not make sense from Merck's point of view.
      - bookofsand 5y ago
        > In marketing strategy, cannibalization refers to a reduction in sales volume, sales revenue, or market share of one product as a result of the introduction of a new product by the same producer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalization_(marketing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalization_(marketing)
        Pyramus 5y ago
        That's a valid argument if marketing was the primary decision maker in drug development. But that is not the case, at this very moment Merck is likely developing several potential drugs for Covid in parallel, and there is no guarantee any of them will make it to market, costing Merck millions (probably billions) in development cost. I'm no proponent of big pharma, and it's possible executives at Merck convened and decided to bet it all on drug X and at the same time not to profit from ivermectin. I think it's very unlikely, because it doesn't make sense. It only makes sense in a comic world where everything is black and white and the motive of the bad guy solves the mystery. I'm very confused that Bret, who I respect, is falling for this simplistic ad-hominem argument.
      - briefcomment 5y ago
        The profit margin on Ivermectin is likely nothing, while the margin on Merck's upcoming drug is likely very high.
      - fastglass 5y ago
        because the newer treatment will likely cost more money it's not like riverblindness is a first-world problem you can charge people more money for treating
  - eruleman 5y ago
    Merck can't benefit from both ivermectin & their new emergency-use-authorized drug. Emergency use authorization requires "no adequate, approved, and available alternatives." [1] It's against their financial incentive to have ivermectin, an out-of-patent drug, be authorized for treatment of covid. See https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441?s=20 https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441... [1] https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emerge...
    - Pyramus 5y ago
      I don't get it. So are you saying somebody else should go for EUA for ivermectin for Covid, and then Merck couldn't go for EUA for their new drug? Or are you saying Merck couldn't go for several EUAs for Covid at the same time?
      - briefcomment 5y ago
        Merck can't get an EUA for their new drug if there's an existing treatment that works. If Ivermectin works, then their other drug becomes worthless. Same thing for the mRNA vaccines. They're all under EUA. It would've been impossible to get them an EUA if we had found out Ivermectin worked.
  - hollerith 5y ago
    Ivermectin is an old drug, so cannot be patented, which means that Merck has no way to prevent competitors from selling the drug, so no way to keep prices high.
    - dlp211 5y ago
      Yes, because we all know that insulin can be had for ten cents a vile right now....oh...wait. Can we please stop trying to rationalize an irrational market. There is no reason to believe that the age of the drug has anything to do with it's profitability.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - hollerith 5y ago
        There are different insulins. It might be that the expensive ones are still under patent (and genuinely work better than the old ones for many patients). Also, it might be that some or all of the insulins are just naturally costly to manufacture, so that when competition is not prevented by patents, the price stays high. (This would be the case for example if the insulin must be extracted from pigs and if each pig yields only a few doses of insulin.) That doesn't contradict the fact that many drugs still under patent sell for 100s of times their cost of manufacture, then when the patent expires the sell price drops to close to the cost of manufacture.
- tootie 5y ago
  https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/07/ivermectin-as-a-covid-19-therapy https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/07/iv...
ds206 5y ago
No. Ivermectin is off patent. There is no money to be made. That is the point. Everyone wants to invent new drugs and vaccines to make a buck. Btw, Merck is distancing themselves from Ivermectin because they have a new drug in the works. Please read/watch more.
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  Seems like there's a ton of money to be made with the drug. Just call it a "miracle cure" and sell it to all of the anti vax conspiracy theorists for $500 a dose. Works great for chronic Lyme antibiotics and essential oils, why not ivermectin too?
loceng 5y ago
Here's the flipside to your point: "Dr. Robert Malone is the inventor of mRNA Vaccine technology." - here he is discussing Ivermectin with Bret Weinstein: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_NNTVJzqtY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_NNTVJzqtY Another video Bret had to re-upload and only a short amount of it, because YouTube removed the original and gave him a strike for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q01LUg97eto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q01LUg97eto
- lupire 5y ago
  What does Dr Malone say about ivermectin?
  - loceng 5y ago
    Best to actually listen to the 3 hours to hear everything he says and its nuance, no?
    - drawfloat 5y ago
      My next paper is also just a bibliography with zero engagement on my part provided.
- systemBuilder 5y ago
  Geez did ya ever consider that Bret Weinstein - the leader of that youtube Podcast - might have a gargantuan ax to grind? https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/bret-weinstein-files-38m-tort-claim-against-evergr/?utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=cpc&utm_id=chacka&utm_campaign=TWT+-+DSA https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/bret-weinstei...
- systemBuilder 5y ago
  That statement that Malone"invented"is mRNA vaccines is internet heresay. My information is that this woman did the most to creat mRNA vaccines. Her position as EVP of BioNGen suggest that she is the more respected scientist ... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karik%C3%B3 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karik%C3%B3
sb057 5y ago
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/merck-s-must-do-a-new-trial-for-faltering-425m-covid-drug-u-s-government-asked-it-to-buy https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/merck-s-must-do-a-new-...
micouay 5y ago
1. There's no patent on Ivermectin. (Correct me if I got it wrong) 2. Merck has announced an agreement with US gov for 1.7 mln courses of anew antiviral treatment for $1.2 bln. Also they have no real argument against IM: > 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. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210609005142/en/Merck-Announces-Supply-Agreement-with-U.S.-Government-for-Molnupiravir-an-Investigational-Oral-Antiviral-Candidate-for-Treatment-of-Mild-to-Moderate-COVID-19 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210609005142/en/Mer... https://mobile.twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 https://mobile.twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/140264794837...
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  > Also they have no real argument against IM: > > 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. If "no basis for a potential therapeutic effect" is not an argument against using it, then why suggest Ivermectin and not some other drug with no known connection to Covid-19? Why Ivermectin and not, I don't know, Escitalopram?
  - ufo 5y ago
    The in vitro studies show that ivermectin might be effective against covid, if given at a super high dose, higher than what would be safe. In the topsy turvy world of ivermectin proponents, this is seen as a argument in favor of ivermectin
throwkeep 5y ago
What you're missing is that Ivermectin is decades old and off patent so anyone can make it cheap. Merck is against it because they are working on a new drug that they'll have a monopoly on. Typical of big pharma. Why are people blindly accepting what big pharma says when it comes to Covid, as though the industry has suddenly turned a new leaf?
- dlp211 5y ago
  Then a genetics company could produce it for Covid and beat Merck to market.
jb775 5y ago
This is all about making money...including the covid vaccine. Covid is even more of a goldmine because they locked in special liability protections. Big money has a decent amount of influence over what information is accessible to the general public. We're witnessing the modern version of burning books...but many are too WOKE to realize.
- _holographic_ 5y ago
  yeah, the lack of common sense is getting worse by the day, absolutely stunning.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago

The company has another upcoming drug they want to push rather than ivermectin: https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 E: To add, I'm not a doctor but Brett Weinstein seems adamant that ivermectin is a very safe drug for humans. One point he has made is that because ivermectin is safe for consumption, there's no (Or very little) downside to taking it in an attempt to prevent or help with COVID.

Pyramus 5y ago
So you are asserting they don't want to benefit from both?
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  I don't know much about the economics of drugs, but I've seen this type of statement a few times: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27496008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27496008
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    I don't get it, why would Merck leave money on the table. Merck has and will develop many more Covid drugs. It does not make sense to bet everything on one horse where there is a lot of uncertainty and risk that any drug will see the light of day. I get that it makes sense as a narrative device to discredit Merck ("big pharma has acted against our interest in the past, so they are acting against our interest here"), but it does not make sense from Merck's point of view.
    - bookofsand 5y ago
      > In marketing strategy, cannibalization refers to a reduction in sales volume, sales revenue, or market share of one product as a result of the introduction of a new product by the same producer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalization_(marketing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalization_(marketing)
      - Pyramus 5y ago
        That's a valid argument if marketing was the primary decision maker in drug development. But that is not the case, at this very moment Merck is likely developing several potential drugs for Covid in parallel, and there is no guarantee any of them will make it to market, costing Merck millions (probably billions) in development cost. I'm no proponent of big pharma, and it's possible executives at Merck convened and decided to bet it all on drug X and at the same time not to profit from ivermectin. I think it's very unlikely, because it doesn't make sense. It only makes sense in a comic world where everything is black and white and the motive of the bad guy solves the mystery. I'm very confused that Bret, who I respect, is falling for this simplistic ad-hominem argument.
    - briefcomment 5y ago
      The profit margin on Ivermectin is likely nothing, while the margin on Merck's upcoming drug is likely very high.
    - fastglass 5y ago
      because the newer treatment will likely cost more money it's not like riverblindness is a first-world problem you can charge people more money for treating
- eruleman 5y ago
  Merck can't benefit from both ivermectin & their new emergency-use-authorized drug. Emergency use authorization requires "no adequate, approved, and available alternatives." [1] It's against their financial incentive to have ivermectin, an out-of-patent drug, be authorized for treatment of covid. See https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441?s=20 https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441... [1] https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emerge...
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    I don't get it. So are you saying somebody else should go for EUA for ivermectin for Covid, and then Merck couldn't go for EUA for their new drug? Or are you saying Merck couldn't go for several EUAs for Covid at the same time?
    - briefcomment 5y ago
      Merck can't get an EUA for their new drug if there's an existing treatment that works. If Ivermectin works, then their other drug becomes worthless. Same thing for the mRNA vaccines. They're all under EUA. It would've been impossible to get them an EUA if we had found out Ivermectin worked.
- hollerith 5y ago
  Ivermectin is an old drug, so cannot be patented, which means that Merck has no way to prevent competitors from selling the drug, so no way to keep prices high.
  - dlp211 5y ago
    Yes, because we all know that insulin can be had for ten cents a vile right now....oh...wait. Can we please stop trying to rationalize an irrational market. There is no reason to believe that the age of the drug has anything to do with it's profitability.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - hollerith 5y ago
      There are different insulins. It might be that the expensive ones are still under patent (and genuinely work better than the old ones for many patients). Also, it might be that some or all of the insulins are just naturally costly to manufacture, so that when competition is not prevented by patents, the price stays high. (This would be the case for example if the insulin must be extracted from pigs and if each pig yields only a few doses of insulin.) That doesn't contradict the fact that many drugs still under patent sell for 100s of times their cost of manufacture, then when the patent expires the sell price drops to close to the cost of manufacture.
tootie 5y ago
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/07/ivermectin-as-a-covid-19-therapy https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/07/iv...

ds206 5y ago

No. Ivermectin is off patent. There is no money to be made. That is the point. Everyone wants to invent new drugs and vaccines to make a buck. Btw, Merck is distancing themselves from Ivermectin because they have a new drug in the works. Please read/watch more.

seattle_spring 5y ago
Seems like there's a ton of money to be made with the drug. Just call it a "miracle cure" and sell it to all of the anti vax conspiracy theorists for $500 a dose. Works great for chronic Lyme antibiotics and essential oils, why not ivermectin too?

loceng 5y ago

Here's the flipside to your point: "Dr. Robert Malone is the inventor of mRNA Vaccine technology." - here he is discussing Ivermectin with Bret Weinstein: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_NNTVJzqtY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_NNTVJzqtY Another video Bret had to re-upload and only a short amount of it, because YouTube removed the original and gave him a strike for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q01LUg97eto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q01LUg97eto

lupire 5y ago
What does Dr Malone say about ivermectin?
- loceng 5y ago
  Best to actually listen to the 3 hours to hear everything he says and its nuance, no?
  - drawfloat 5y ago
    My next paper is also just a bibliography with zero engagement on my part provided.
systemBuilder 5y ago
Geez did ya ever consider that Bret Weinstein - the leader of that youtube Podcast - might have a gargantuan ax to grind? https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/bret-weinstein-files-38m-tort-claim-against-evergr/?utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=cpc&utm_id=chacka&utm_campaign=TWT+-+DSA https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/25/bret-weinstei...
systemBuilder 5y ago
That statement that Malone"invented"is mRNA vaccines is internet heresay. My information is that this woman did the most to creat mRNA vaccines. Her position as EVP of BioNGen suggest that she is the more respected scientist ... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karik%C3%B3 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katalin_Karik%C3%B3

sb057 5y ago

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/merck-s-must-do-a-new-trial-for-faltering-425m-covid-drug-u-s-government-asked-it-to-buy https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/merck-s-must-do-a-new-...

micouay 5y ago

1. There's no patent on Ivermectin. (Correct me if I got it wrong) 2. Merck has announced an agreement with US gov for 1.7 mln courses of anew antiviral treatment for $1.2 bln. Also they have no real argument against IM: > 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. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210609005142/en/Merck-Announces-Supply-Agreement-with-U.S.-Government-for-Molnupiravir-an-Investigational-Oral-Antiviral-Candidate-for-Treatment-of-Mild-to-Moderate-COVID-19 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210609005142/en/Mer... https://mobile.twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1402647948371005441 https://mobile.twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/140264794837...

tsimionescu 5y ago
> Also they have no real argument against IM: > > 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. If "no basis for a potential therapeutic effect" is not an argument against using it, then why suggest Ivermectin and not some other drug with no known connection to Covid-19? Why Ivermectin and not, I don't know, Escitalopram?
- ufo 5y ago
  The in vitro studies show that ivermectin might be effective against covid, if given at a super high dose, higher than what would be safe. In the topsy turvy world of ivermectin proponents, this is seen as a argument in favor of ivermectin

throwkeep 5y ago

What you're missing is that Ivermectin is decades old and off patent so anyone can make it cheap. Merck is against it because they are working on a new drug that they'll have a monopoly on. Typical of big pharma. Why are people blindly accepting what big pharma says when it comes to Covid, as though the industry has suddenly turned a new leaf?

dlp211 5y ago
Then a genetics company could produce it for Covid and beat Merck to market.

jb775 5y ago

This is all about making money...including the covid vaccine. Covid is even more of a goldmine because they locked in special liability protections. Big money has a decent amount of influence over what information is accessible to the general public. We're witnessing the modern version of burning books...but many are too WOKE to realize.

_holographic_ 5y ago
yeah, the lack of common sense is getting worse by the day, absolutely stunning.