5 ms·

Full article is worth reading, but the TL;DR is that one of the key studies in the Ivermectin COVID-19 narrative is full of glaring issues that suggest some or

Full article is worth reading, but the TL;DR is that one of the key studies in the Ivermectin COVID-19 narrative is full of glaring issues that suggest some or all of the data was fabricated. When this potentially fraudulent study is removed from meta-analyses, the statistical significance of Ivermectin in treating COVID-19 disappears. More recent studies also fail to show statistical significance for Ivermectin in COVID-19: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5#Sec2 https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s128... There are further Ivermectin trials ongoing. Meanwhile, Ivermectin has become deeply intertwined with conspiracy theory circles who have come to believe that Ivermectin is a magic bullet against COVID-19. They can't understand why governments aren't deploying Ivermectin to end the pandemic, which has spawned numerous waves of misinformation and conspiracy theories that pharmaceutical companies and/or governments are acting to cover up what they believe is a miracle cure. If you want a peak into some of the conspiratorial thinking around Ivermectin, look at the top posts on the /r/ivermectin sub on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/top/?t=month https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/top/?t=month The topic has spread to popular outlets like the Joe Rogan podcast and Fox News, as well as become a meme in conspiracy and anti-vax circles. It's still possible that Ivermectin might have some small modulating effect on COVID-19, but there's no real evidence that it's actually a miracle cure. We've also known for a long time that Ivermectin can cause serious adverse neurological events in certain populations: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5929173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5929173/

tomByrer 5y ago
A counter with many citations & analysis for those who like to research both sides of the story: https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-meta-analytical-fixers-an-ivermectin https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-meta-analytical-...
- wonnage 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure this is the blog of a grifter as it links to ivmmeta.com which seems to be part of a spam network of COVID-19 misinformation https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678 https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111...
  - 0-_-0 5y ago
    To me your link reads more like a part of a spam network of COVID-19 misinformation
  - tomByrer 5y ago
    I'm pretty sure 'spam network' is a ad hominem logical fallacy, & perhaps your link is a appeal to authority. There is sufficient proofs pro-IVM. Yes there is anti-proofs, I'm sure there are valid concerns there also. But consider how much $$$ exchanges hands with vaccines, which the emergency authorization of may not have happened if IVM was fully recognized treatment for C19. Not only the profits of the shots is more, but said companies already spend much $$$ on advertising on news channels & web, cloud compute time on major platforms (MicroSoft, Google, Amazon), research funding, etc... (I'm NOT saying the billion$ is proof of bias, but something to consider.) https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Ivermectin-in-the-prophylaxis-and-treatment-of-COVID-19.pdf https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/F...
mgarfias 5y ago
Ivermectin (and other some other drugs) cause neurological problems in canines with the MDR1 gene mutation. Wonder if some people have a similar mutation?
- pbak 5y ago
  Do people have a canine MDR1 gene ?
  - giardini 5y ago
    Ruff! Ruff! Grrrr...!
    - pbak 5y ago
      Weredoggies confirmed.
  - gus_massa 5y ago
    IIUC it's a gene that we share with dogs and many (all?) animals. For example here is a paper about mutations in the human version https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11990778/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11990778/ Perhaps we don't have the same mutations, but it's totally possible. A relevant paper that compares human and dog versions: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16686372/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16686372/
    - pbak 5y ago
      Thanks!
jfengel 5y ago
I haven't seen Joe Rogan, and I don't get what's going on there. As far as I can tell, it seems his big win is that he gets on both big-name celebrities and crackpots. I've seen him called a very good interviewer, but I honestly don't know exactly what that means, and how it's different from just getting guests who speak well. The impression I get is that he seems even-handed to a certain stripe of people who think that playing to their bias and/or giving unquestioning air time to contrarians is what constitutes even-handedness. Am I even vaguely on track here? I don't have much interest in interview shows in general; the format just isn't terribly interesting to me. The few I do listen to are those that invite relatively obscure scientists to explain their work -- the Ologies podcast and the BBC's Life Scientific. I dislike politics, after decades of watching it become worse. But I feel like I should have an inkling of what it's about.
- blooalien 5y ago
  A "good interviewer" is one who can ask "the right questions" when they've got a guest who may have something worth saying. A really good interviewer can tease information out of a guest during an interview that they likely might not otherwise have said aloud in a public venue. Is Joe Rogan a "good interviewer"? I haven't watched enough of him to have much of an opinion, but what little I have watched, his guests seem pretty comfortable talking to him.
bamboozled 5y ago
Let me ask you this, what would truly be the end game here ? Why would people make this stuff up about Ivermectin? What’s the motive?
lawnchair_larry 5y ago
You’re extremely misinformed about the pro-ivermectin side. This narrative is really a disservice.

tomByrer 5y ago

A counter with many citations & analysis for those who like to research both sides of the story: https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-meta-analytical-fixers-an-ivermectin https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-meta-analytical-...

wonnage 5y ago
I'm pretty sure this is the blog of a grifter as it links to ivmmeta.com which seems to be part of a spam network of COVID-19 misinformation https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678 https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111...
- 0-_-0 5y ago
  To me your link reads more like a part of a spam network of COVID-19 misinformation
- tomByrer 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure 'spam network' is a ad hominem logical fallacy, & perhaps your link is a appeal to authority. There is sufficient proofs pro-IVM. Yes there is anti-proofs, I'm sure there are valid concerns there also. But consider how much $$$ exchanges hands with vaccines, which the emergency authorization of may not have happened if IVM was fully recognized treatment for C19. Not only the profits of the shots is more, but said companies already spend much $$$ on advertising on news channels & web, cloud compute time on major platforms (MicroSoft, Google, Amazon), research funding, etc... (I'm NOT saying the billion$ is proof of bias, but something to consider.) https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Ivermectin-in-the-prophylaxis-and-treatment-of-COVID-19.pdf https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/F...

mgarfias 5y ago

Ivermectin (and other some other drugs) cause neurological problems in canines with the MDR1 gene mutation. Wonder if some people have a similar mutation?

pbak 5y ago
Do people have a canine MDR1 gene ?
- giardini 5y ago
  Ruff! Ruff! Grrrr...!
  - pbak 5y ago
    Weredoggies confirmed.
- gus_massa 5y ago
  IIUC it's a gene that we share with dogs and many (all?) animals. For example here is a paper about mutations in the human version https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11990778/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11990778/ Perhaps we don't have the same mutations, but it's totally possible. A relevant paper that compares human and dog versions: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16686372/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16686372/
  - pbak 5y ago
    Thanks!

jfengel 5y ago

I haven't seen Joe Rogan, and I don't get what's going on there. As far as I can tell, it seems his big win is that he gets on both big-name celebrities and crackpots. I've seen him called a very good interviewer, but I honestly don't know exactly what that means, and how it's different from just getting guests who speak well. The impression I get is that he seems even-handed to a certain stripe of people who think that playing to their bias and/or giving unquestioning air time to contrarians is what constitutes even-handedness. Am I even vaguely on track here? I don't have much interest in interview shows in general; the format just isn't terribly interesting to me. The few I do listen to are those that invite relatively obscure scientists to explain their work -- the Ologies podcast and the BBC's Life Scientific. I dislike politics, after decades of watching it become worse. But I feel like I should have an inkling of what it's about.

blooalien 5y ago
A "good interviewer" is one who can ask "the right questions" when they've got a guest who may have something worth saying. A really good interviewer can tease information out of a guest during an interview that they likely might not otherwise have said aloud in a public venue. Is Joe Rogan a "good interviewer"? I haven't watched enough of him to have much of an opinion, but what little I have watched, his guests seem pretty comfortable talking to him.

bamboozled 5y ago

Let me ask you this, what would truly be the end game here ? Why would people make this stuff up about Ivermectin? What’s the motive?

lawnchair_larry 5y ago

You’re extremely misinformed about the pro-ivermectin side. This narrative is really a disservice.