4 ms·

There’s a kind of parallel history of why people ended up taking ivermectin, which was The Dark Horse podcast with Brett Weinstein. On the show they talked exte

by gdubs 5y ago

There’s a kind of parallel history of why people ended up taking ivermectin, which was The Dark Horse podcast with Brett Weinstein. On the show they talked extensively about their theory that ivermectin was an effective prophylactic against Covid-19, but because the drug was out of patent, pharmaceutical companies had not interest in slowing down the vaccines. (Their words, not mine.) IIRC some countries actually rolled out ivermectin at scale, but AFAIK, the studies have all been disappointing in terms of its effectiveness. One problem with everyone calling it horse dewormer and calling people stupid, is there seems to be a lot of people out there who consider themselves independent thinkers, have read a lot about the history of ivermectin, and see this kind of poking-fun as dishonest (and I would think probably hardening their views that there’s a manufacturing of consent happening.) I’m vaccinated — I just like to listen to lots of podcasts, read different people’s takes. FWIW, it doesn’t seem like ivermectin does what Weinstein suggested — and he made some very bold claims. I also don’t think the shorthand of “horse dewormers” is helping reach anyone who’s uneasy about the vaccines. But, that’s just my lay-person opinion.

analog31 5y ago
What I wonder is how absurd does this stuff have to get before we can no longer maintain the posture of political correctness with a straight face?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
input_sh 5y ago
> IIRC some countries actually rolled out ivermectin at scale, but AFAIK, the studies have all been disappointing in terms of its effectiveness. Oh it's even worse than that. Argentinian study concluded that those who received ivermectin over placebo ended up on a respirator sooner[0]: > The mean time from study enrollment to invasive mechanical ventilatory support (MVS) was 5.25 days (SD ± 1.71) in ivermectin group and 10 days (SD ± 2) in placebo group, (p = 0.019). [0] https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5 https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s128...
bigbillheck 5y ago
> but because the drug was out of patent, pharmaceutical companies had not interest in slowing down the vaccines. This is a thing that often gets claimed, but there's a special three-year "New Clinical Investigation Exclusivity" that's available. (https://www.fda.gov/media/135234/download https://www.fda.gov/media/135234/download p15)
dariusj18 5y ago
I agree that people seem to be too focused on the Horse part given that it is approved for and used by humans. Same thing with Ketamine though and it is still mostly referred to as a Horse tranquillizer. I think at it's core though I think the derogatory nature is similar to making fun of the drunk asshole who ate dog food at a party. It's not deemed fit for human consumption, and sure the manufacturer isn't intentionally trying to poison your dog with bad food, but it still wouldn't have the same level of quality control.
skinkestek 5y ago
> There’s a kind of parallel history of why people ended up taking ivermectin, which was The Dark Horse podcast with Brett Weinstein. Worth mentioning: those guys on that podcast were very positive to the vaccine, they only said that it was a shame that health authorities wouldn't use both. I tried pointing it out to the friend of me who sent it. It didn't work. He is still against Covid-19 vaccines. (I'm not taking a position right here and now, except that I find it weird that my anti-covid-vaccination friend can listen to only half of what is said in that podcast)
SOLAR_FIELDS 5y ago
I also agree that calling it “horse dewormer” is a pretty lazy attempt to denigrate people and doesn’t really do much to reach out in a mature or effective way. Regardless of its effectiveness for COVID, ivermectin has been a safe, commonly prescribed anti parasite drug for humans since the early 1970’s. It was also championed early on as a possible prophylactic and treatment option by reputable doctors, most notably Dr. Paul Marik of EVMS who has treated thousands of COVID patients. If you googled “EVMS COVID protocol” as late as May of this year you were treated to a long form PDF about inpatient and outpatient care authored by Marik claiming that there was significant benefit to using ivermectin to treat COVID. I tried to find the document to link here and I noticed that the old one referencing ivermectin has been conspicuously removed sometime in the last few months. So it seems like the lesson here is that once bad information gets out it’s really hard to change it. It’s not like this trend started by Dr. Oz or unqualified Youtubers or as some uncoordinated misinformation campaign. Actual qualified doctors that we should be listening to were claiming for a long time that it could help people. And now that we know that’s not the case it’s really hard to take that back.
- nradov 5y ago
  We don't know that that's not the case. There have been many studies so far, some of which showed significant positive results and others which showed no benefit. The science remains unclear. That's why the NIH has prioritized ivermectin for a large scale clinical trial. https://www.nih.gov/research-training/medical-research-initiatives/activ/covid-19-therapeutics-prioritized-testing-clinical-trials#activ6 https://www.nih.gov/research-training/medical-research-initi...

by gdubs 5y ago

analog31 5y ago

What I wonder is how absurd does this stuff have to get before we can no longer maintain the posture of political correctness with a straight face?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

input_sh 5y ago

> IIRC some countries actually rolled out ivermectin at scale, but AFAIK, the studies have all been disappointing in terms of its effectiveness. Oh it's even worse than that. Argentinian study concluded that those who received ivermectin over placebo ended up on a respirator sooner[0]: > The mean time from study enrollment to invasive mechanical ventilatory support (MVS) was 5.25 days (SD ± 1.71) in ivermectin group and 10 days (SD ± 2) in placebo group, (p = 0.019). [0] https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5 https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s128...

bigbillheck 5y ago

> but because the drug was out of patent, pharmaceutical companies had not interest in slowing down the vaccines. This is a thing that often gets claimed, but there's a special three-year "New Clinical Investigation Exclusivity" that's available. (https://www.fda.gov/media/135234/download https://www.fda.gov/media/135234/download p15)

dariusj18 5y ago

I agree that people seem to be too focused on the Horse part given that it is approved for and used by humans. Same thing with Ketamine though and it is still mostly referred to as a Horse tranquillizer. I think at it's core though I think the derogatory nature is similar to making fun of the drunk asshole who ate dog food at a party. It's not deemed fit for human consumption, and sure the manufacturer isn't intentionally trying to poison your dog with bad food, but it still wouldn't have the same level of quality control.

skinkestek 5y ago

> There’s a kind of parallel history of why people ended up taking ivermectin, which was The Dark Horse podcast with Brett Weinstein. Worth mentioning: those guys on that podcast were very positive to the vaccine, they only said that it was a shame that health authorities wouldn't use both. I tried pointing it out to the friend of me who sent it. It didn't work. He is still against Covid-19 vaccines. (I'm not taking a position right here and now, except that I find it weird that my anti-covid-vaccination friend can listen to only half of what is said in that podcast)

SOLAR_FIELDS 5y ago

I also agree that calling it “horse dewormer” is a pretty lazy attempt to denigrate people and doesn’t really do much to reach out in a mature or effective way. Regardless of its effectiveness for COVID, ivermectin has been a safe, commonly prescribed anti parasite drug for humans since the early 1970’s. It was also championed early on as a possible prophylactic and treatment option by reputable doctors, most notably Dr. Paul Marik of EVMS who has treated thousands of COVID patients. If you googled “EVMS COVID protocol” as late as May of this year you were treated to a long form PDF about inpatient and outpatient care authored by Marik claiming that there was significant benefit to using ivermectin to treat COVID. I tried to find the document to link here and I noticed that the old one referencing ivermectin has been conspicuously removed sometime in the last few months. So it seems like the lesson here is that once bad information gets out it’s really hard to change it. It’s not like this trend started by Dr. Oz or unqualified Youtubers or as some uncoordinated misinformation campaign. Actual qualified doctors that we should be listening to were claiming for a long time that it could help people. And now that we know that’s not the case it’s really hard to take that back.

nradov 5y ago
We don't know that that's not the case. There have been many studies so far, some of which showed significant positive results and others which showed no benefit. The science remains unclear. That's why the NIH has prioritized ivermectin for a large scale clinical trial. https://www.nih.gov/research-training/medical-research-initiatives/activ/covid-19-therapeutics-prioritized-testing-clinical-trials#activ6 https://www.nih.gov/research-training/medical-research-initi...