4 ms·

there is some evidence that ivermectin has antiviral activity in-vitro, tested on primate cells. Many drugs have effects that are outside of on-label indication

there is some evidence that ivermectin has antiviral activity in-vitro, tested on primate cells. Many drugs have effects that are outside of on-label indications, as those are really just for marketing purposes. Physicians are absolutely free to prescribe things off-label, do so routinely, and in fact in many situations the majority of prescriptions happen to be off-label. The only concern here is 1) that concentration needed to achieve that effect may potentially be toxic to humans. 2) in-vitro studies mighte be insufficient/weak evidence and may fail in-vivo (happens all the time)

fatbird 5y ago
Which is to say that the more immediate concern is that it has never been tested or approved for human consumption and there are no guidelines around dosage or expected efficacy and if you're taking it because you heard about it as you seem to have, you're wildly guessing about a treatment in preference to availing yourself of a proven treatment that's been administered almost a billion times in the last 18 months under great scrutiny. If you take Ivermectin in preference to getting vaccinated, you deserve to die. The preferred moral outcome here is for you to die by your own hand rather than let your willful ignorance increase the risk to your community.
- norvvryo 5y ago
  Ivermectin has been tested and approved for use in humans. It is used to treat parasites and rosacea. https://www.pdr.net/drug-summary/Stromectol-ivermectin-391.1180 https://www.pdr.net/drug-summary/Stromectol-ivermectin-391.1... https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ivermectin#section=Drug-and-Medication-Information https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ivermectin#section...
  - sunkenvicar 5y ago
    Indeed, ivermectin is orders of magnitude safer than many OTC drugs. Nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide and about 13 deaths in half a century. Arguments against ivermectin are becoming quite tiresome because it causes virtually zero harm. In fact, Pfizer is impressed with its anti-viral properties and release of a similar (read:patentable) drug is imminent. Merck is another (early) source of ivermectin misinformation.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dang 5y ago
  You broke the site guidelines egregiously with that last paragraph. Seriously not cool. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do anything like that on HN again—regardless of how wrong other people are, or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: it unfortunately looks like you've been using HN primarily for flamewar. We ban that sort of account as well, so would you please not do that anymore? We're trying for curious, thoughtful conversation here.
  - fatbird 5y ago
    Your house, your rules, my apologies.
cycomanic 5y ago
But the argument was that "the vaccines are too unproven so we should not trust them" and the solution is to take a medication that has seen orders of magnitude less testing and is known to be toxic (there are reports of large increases to calls to poison control because of this)?!
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  Ivermectin has been on the market for decades, it's side effects are well understood. It's used all the time around the world. Toxic controls was very unfortunate events of people consuming veterinarian formulations designed for animals that weigh 1000+ lbs and overdosing. That means only that there is enough desperate people, and very few physicians willing to supervise the treatment. I would be far more concerned about it's efficacy and people getting treatment that they think will help, when in fact it does not.

fatbird 5y ago

Which is to say that the more immediate concern is that it has never been tested or approved for human consumption and there are no guidelines around dosage or expected efficacy and if you're taking it because you heard about it as you seem to have, you're wildly guessing about a treatment in preference to availing yourself of a proven treatment that's been administered almost a billion times in the last 18 months under great scrutiny. If you take Ivermectin in preference to getting vaccinated, you deserve to die. The preferred moral outcome here is for you to die by your own hand rather than let your willful ignorance increase the risk to your community.

norvvryo 5y ago
Ivermectin has been tested and approved for use in humans. It is used to treat parasites and rosacea. https://www.pdr.net/drug-summary/Stromectol-ivermectin-391.1180 https://www.pdr.net/drug-summary/Stromectol-ivermectin-391.1... https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ivermectin#section=Drug-and-Medication-Information https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ivermectin#section...
- sunkenvicar 5y ago
  Indeed, ivermectin is orders of magnitude safer than many OTC drugs. Nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide and about 13 deaths in half a century. Arguments against ivermectin are becoming quite tiresome because it causes virtually zero harm. In fact, Pfizer is impressed with its anti-viral properties and release of a similar (read:patentable) drug is imminent. Merck is another (early) source of ivermectin misinformation.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dang 5y ago
You broke the site guidelines egregiously with that last paragraph. Seriously not cool. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do anything like that on HN again—regardless of how wrong other people are, or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: it unfortunately looks like you've been using HN primarily for flamewar. We ban that sort of account as well, so would you please not do that anymore? We're trying for curious, thoughtful conversation here.
- fatbird 5y ago
  Your house, your rules, my apologies.

cycomanic 5y ago

But the argument was that "the vaccines are too unproven so we should not trust them" and the solution is to take a medication that has seen orders of magnitude less testing and is known to be toxic (there are reports of large increases to calls to poison control because of this)?!

inter_netuser 5y ago
Ivermectin has been on the market for decades, it's side effects are well understood. It's used all the time around the world. Toxic controls was very unfortunate events of people consuming veterinarian formulations designed for animals that weigh 1000+ lbs and overdosing. That means only that there is enough desperate people, and very few physicians willing to supervise the treatment. I would be far more concerned about it's efficacy and people getting treatment that they think will help, when in fact it does not.