4 ms·

Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require hospitalization, and 99%+ at pre

Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require hospitalization, and 99%+ at preventing death? Covid-19 prevention and treatment is basically a solved problem. My limited understanding of other's reality suggests to me that people have connected deeply with a community (through identity poltics or... fun) that is no longer relevant in a post-covid world leading towards a mania where vaccines are somehow bad is the only thing that makes sense.

off_sounder 5y ago
I'm skeptical about the efficacy of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine over longer periods of time. I've still not heard a reasonable explanation about why this vaccine is expected to work long-term when the flu shot clearly does not. Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. Can anyone give me an explanation of why vaccines are touted for fast-evolving viruses like the flu and SARS-CoV-2?
- grepfru_it 5y ago
  > Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. The SARS-cov-2 proofreading mechanism would like to have a word with your horribly inaccurate point
- mikem170 5y ago
  >Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. This doesn't jive with what I have heard, that SARS-CoV-2 mutates rather slowly, like other coronaviruses. And that the flu is completely different, having the ability to recombine parts, which is why we have a different strain every years, aka H1N1, H2N1, H2N2, etc. Every year they have to guess which one will be prevalent, therefore the yearly flu shots. SARS-CoV-2 has not mutated into a different strain (variants are not strains), and is not expected to. Immune system response for other coronaviruses has been observed to be long lasting (17 years for SARS-CoV-1).
- kazinator 5y ago
  There cannot be a the vaccine; obviously, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will have to be updated. People will need boosters. > I've still not heard a reasonable explanation about why this vaccine is expected to work long-term when the flu shot clearly does not I don't think anyone in their right mind claims or believes such a thing, or believes that the health authorities are trying to convince them of such a thing. Depending on what we mean by "long term". > SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137987/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137987/ "Compared with other RNA viruses such as HIV and influenza virus, SARS-CoV-2 accumulates mutations much more slowly (15, 28)." So that would by why you can expect more mileage from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.
ErikVandeWater 5y ago
You do realize the Covid vaccine is extremely expensive in many parts of the world and not everyone will be vaccinated, correct? It is frightening how people will apply no common sense before attacking any group of people that isn't 100% on board with their solution to a problem.
- jowsie 5y ago
  The FDA website isn't targeting the third world. It's directed at people living in America, where they are able to get the vaccine for free.
  - ErikVandeWater 5y ago
    And there will be obviously be people in the USA who do not get the vaccine for various reasons who will die if better treatments are not found.
RattleyCooper 5y ago
>Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin Probably because Ivermectin has gone through the rigorous process of testing/approval required for use in humans, that we haven't had time to do with the vaccine. I mean, it's completely understandable why people would seek out well-tested drugs, that are more predictable due to the scientific scrutiny they've been under, than a vaccine that got rushed into production. Are people honestly surprised by this? I mean, sure Ivermectin probably isn't a good covid treatment but if there aren't negative side-effects and it has a chance of helping then I don't see a problem with taking it under doctor supervision. I mean, we want to stop the pandemic, right? What's the big issue with looking to well-tested, scientifically-scrutinized medications as possible treatments for people who already have covid?
- dham 5y ago
  It looks like the whole "treatment plan" is only to scare more people into getting vaccines by letting people die. When I had Covid I went to urgent care to get tested. They sent me home with a paper that said I had Covid and told me to take Tylenol. Everyone I know that has contracted Covid has received the same "treatment" no matter the age. This is why some people are dying. Compare that with someone like Trump or Joe Rogan. It's not even a money thing, you have to convince doctors to even treat you for this thing. By the time you got to ER Ivermectin (or whatever the antiviral flavor of the month is) or monoclonal antibodies aren't that effective.
  - hnburnsy 5y ago
    That stinks. Florida is offering free Monoclonal Antibody Treatments for all... https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/monoclonal-antibody-therapy/mab-locator/ https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/monoclonal-antibody-therapy... >Individuals 12 years and older who are high-risk, that have contracted or been exposed to COVID-19, are eligible for this treatment. Treatment is free and vaccination status does not matter.
    - dham 5y ago
      I assume I'm not high-risk. One of the people I know that got it was probably considered high risk because he was overweight. Not obese but overweight.
dham 5y ago
We need a backup plan. While there a lot of drugs being developed for the treatment of Covid-19, it's easier to use a drug that has already been around for a while because the safety profile is pretty much known. Spray and pray drug development led to our most useful drugs we use today and in the past.
- jleyank 5y ago
  Actually, I don’t think there are any drugs developed to fight COVID. Yeah, there are monoclonal antibodies developed from the initial cohort of symptomatic patients, and various anti inflammatories that have been effective in reducing the intensity of a cytokine storm. There are small molecule efforts, but these things take time. There is a delta specific vaccine in initial clinical trials but it’s bloody hard to get a placebo group together anymore. The vaccines (of which there are both traditional and novel delivery mechanisms and payloads) represent the best way of reducing the impact of the infection. There is only a short window in most people in which there is an active COVID infection. The problem starts with the aftermath - those with a strong, active immune system zap their lungs or other organ systems. Hence the anti inflammatories. Viruses aren’t fully alive and they lack many/most of the biological features typical drugs affect. Thus, unless there’s a fortunate side effect, the risk to the human > risk to the virus.
  - dham 5y ago
    I assume everyone was working on treatments. My sibling works at Pfizer as a Sas programmer / manager (mostly cancer trials) and they're working on a study with an old HIV drug. That's just one small team in a huge company. Edit: Just got clarification it's PF-07321332. I think it's related to ritonivir? Not super sure
mdp2021 5y ago
> Why is anyone seriously talking about [x] when the [y] vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms They may be reluctant towards the latter product because their goal may be exactly to avoid damages, and they had acquaintances which suffered the potential Severe Adverse Events, which made these SAE a reality to fit properly in their "world model", and they may be confused by a strong clash between the evidence of those acquaintances and some circulating narrative according to which those cases are "anecdotal" (as if irrelevant), plus another which speaks of "safety" in relative terms instead of the closer-to-absolute terms one may intend (B says "safe" for "less dangerous than atrocilinusomethingmazipan", while A with "safe" would intend "substantially non dangerous"). They probably are the kind of people that do not consider the job done until the SAE are explained, including what is to be done to minimize them statistically (as in, "more risky for those with blue eyes") or prevent them. Some people get hurt, so you have to understand why. Those of them who can reason about risk comparison (and know the risks of the main other option) will have taken precautions (whatever they are: some managed to achieve considerable isolation). About explanation of the damages, some steps are being done, but it is slower than desirable: on the 9th an article came out about an autoimmune response against ACE2 as a possible cause of long COVID. Maybe something similar will be understood about the exceptional but still consideration worthy sufferers of post-vaccine SAE? See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28486930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28486930
nradov 5y ago
Vaccine effectiveness is down to about 90% with the Delta variant. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/09/covid-19-vaccines-protect-against-severe-illness-during-delta https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/09/covid-19... That's still good, but there will continue to be many hospitalizations and deaths. So more effective antiviral treatments are still needed. That's why the NIH is sponsoring a large clinical trial of ivermectin and other drugs. 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...

off_sounder 5y ago

I'm skeptical about the efficacy of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine over longer periods of time. I've still not heard a reasonable explanation about why this vaccine is expected to work long-term when the flu shot clearly does not. Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. Can anyone give me an explanation of why vaccines are touted for fast-evolving viruses like the flu and SARS-CoV-2?

grepfru_it 5y ago
> Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. The SARS-cov-2 proofreading mechanism would like to have a word with your horribly inaccurate point
mikem170 5y ago
>Especially since SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. This doesn't jive with what I have heard, that SARS-CoV-2 mutates rather slowly, like other coronaviruses. And that the flu is completely different, having the ability to recombine parts, which is why we have a different strain every years, aka H1N1, H2N1, H2N2, etc. Every year they have to guess which one will be prevalent, therefore the yearly flu shots. SARS-CoV-2 has not mutated into a different strain (variants are not strains), and is not expected to. Immune system response for other coronaviruses has been observed to be long lasting (17 years for SARS-CoV-1).
kazinator 5y ago
There cannot be a the vaccine; obviously, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will have to be updated. People will need boosters. > I've still not heard a reasonable explanation about why this vaccine is expected to work long-term when the flu shot clearly does not I don't think anyone in their right mind claims or believes such a thing, or believes that the health authorities are trying to convince them of such a thing. Depending on what we mean by "long term". > SARS-CoV-2 mutates faster than the flu virus. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137987/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8137987/ "Compared with other RNA viruses such as HIV and influenza virus, SARS-CoV-2 accumulates mutations much more slowly (15, 28)." So that would by why you can expect more mileage from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

ErikVandeWater 5y ago

You do realize the Covid vaccine is extremely expensive in many parts of the world and not everyone will be vaccinated, correct? It is frightening how people will apply no common sense before attacking any group of people that isn't 100% on board with their solution to a problem.

jowsie 5y ago
The FDA website isn't targeting the third world. It's directed at people living in America, where they are able to get the vaccine for free.
- ErikVandeWater 5y ago
  And there will be obviously be people in the USA who do not get the vaccine for various reasons who will die if better treatments are not found.

RattleyCooper 5y ago

>Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin Probably because Ivermectin has gone through the rigorous process of testing/approval required for use in humans, that we haven't had time to do with the vaccine. I mean, it's completely understandable why people would seek out well-tested drugs, that are more predictable due to the scientific scrutiny they've been under, than a vaccine that got rushed into production. Are people honestly surprised by this? I mean, sure Ivermectin probably isn't a good covid treatment but if there aren't negative side-effects and it has a chance of helping then I don't see a problem with taking it under doctor supervision. I mean, we want to stop the pandemic, right? What's the big issue with looking to well-tested, scientifically-scrutinized medications as possible treatments for people who already have covid?

dham 5y ago
It looks like the whole "treatment plan" is only to scare more people into getting vaccines by letting people die. When I had Covid I went to urgent care to get tested. They sent me home with a paper that said I had Covid and told me to take Tylenol. Everyone I know that has contracted Covid has received the same "treatment" no matter the age. This is why some people are dying. Compare that with someone like Trump or Joe Rogan. It's not even a money thing, you have to convince doctors to even treat you for this thing. By the time you got to ER Ivermectin (or whatever the antiviral flavor of the month is) or monoclonal antibodies aren't that effective.
- hnburnsy 5y ago
  That stinks. Florida is offering free Monoclonal Antibody Treatments for all... https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/monoclonal-antibody-therapy/mab-locator/ https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/monoclonal-antibody-therapy... >Individuals 12 years and older who are high-risk, that have contracted or been exposed to COVID-19, are eligible for this treatment. Treatment is free and vaccination status does not matter.
  - dham 5y ago
    I assume I'm not high-risk. One of the people I know that got it was probably considered high risk because he was overweight. Not obese but overweight.

dham 5y ago

We need a backup plan. While there a lot of drugs being developed for the treatment of Covid-19, it's easier to use a drug that has already been around for a while because the safety profile is pretty much known. Spray and pray drug development led to our most useful drugs we use today and in the past.

jleyank 5y ago
Actually, I don’t think there are any drugs developed to fight COVID. Yeah, there are monoclonal antibodies developed from the initial cohort of symptomatic patients, and various anti inflammatories that have been effective in reducing the intensity of a cytokine storm. There are small molecule efforts, but these things take time. There is a delta specific vaccine in initial clinical trials but it’s bloody hard to get a placebo group together anymore. The vaccines (of which there are both traditional and novel delivery mechanisms and payloads) represent the best way of reducing the impact of the infection. There is only a short window in most people in which there is an active COVID infection. The problem starts with the aftermath - those with a strong, active immune system zap their lungs or other organ systems. Hence the anti inflammatories. Viruses aren’t fully alive and they lack many/most of the biological features typical drugs affect. Thus, unless there’s a fortunate side effect, the risk to the human > risk to the virus.
- dham 5y ago
  I assume everyone was working on treatments. My sibling works at Pfizer as a Sas programmer / manager (mostly cancer trials) and they're working on a study with an old HIV drug. That's just one small team in a huge company. Edit: Just got clarification it's PF-07321332. I think it's related to ritonivir? Not super sure

mdp2021 5y ago

> Why is anyone seriously talking about [x] when the [y] vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms They may be reluctant towards the latter product because their goal may be exactly to avoid damages, and they had acquaintances which suffered the potential Severe Adverse Events, which made these SAE a reality to fit properly in their "world model", and they may be confused by a strong clash between the evidence of those acquaintances and some circulating narrative according to which those cases are "anecdotal" (as if irrelevant), plus another which speaks of "safety" in relative terms instead of the closer-to-absolute terms one may intend (B says "safe" for "less dangerous than atrocilinusomethingmazipan", while A with "safe" would intend "substantially non dangerous"). They probably are the kind of people that do not consider the job done until the SAE are explained, including what is to be done to minimize them statistically (as in, "more risky for those with blue eyes") or prevent them. Some people get hurt, so you have to understand why. Those of them who can reason about risk comparison (and know the risks of the main other option) will have taken precautions (whatever they are: some managed to achieve considerable isolation). About explanation of the damages, some steps are being done, but it is slower than desirable: on the 9th an article came out about an autoimmune response against ACE2 as a possible cause of long COVID. Maybe something similar will be understood about the exceptional but still consideration worthy sufferers of post-vaccine SAE? See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28486930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28486930

nradov 5y ago

Vaccine effectiveness is down to about 90% with the Delta variant. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/09/covid-19-vaccines-protect-against-severe-illness-during-delta https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/09/covid-19... That's still good, but there will continue to be many hospitalizations and deaths. So more effective antiviral treatments are still needed. That's why the NIH is sponsoring a large clinical trial of ivermectin and other drugs. 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...