4 ms·

Ivermectin was invented to combat parasites--worms. Not viruses. It is not an anti-viral or even anti-antirheumatic. It is the latest in a class of ignorant fol

by titzer 5y ago

Ivermectin was invented to combat parasites--worms. Not viruses. It is not an anti-viral or even anti-antirheumatic. It is the latest in a class of ignorant folk remedies emerging from who-knows-what dark place on the internet, and it will join Hydroxychloroquine as a total failure at treating COVID. The only double standard here is that, for once, the media isn't suffering the latest idiotic conspiracies with "both sides" nonsense but is appropriately putting them in the "eating crayons" box. For once, the media is actually taking public health seriously. As for proof, you know, propose a treatment, get approvals, run trials, analyze data. Zero people are doing that with Ivermectin. It's flat-Earther crackhead territory and I have absolutely no qualms about dismissing it out of hand. Meanwhile, vaccines have billions of data points that aren't just correlations, they are causative, and there's an entire sum of human knowledge of biology behind them, instead of some vague superstitious belief that magic potion kills one bad thing in your body, therefore it must kill other bad things. Also, people are eating tubes of topical Ivermectin. You have got to be freaking kidding me. What a shitshow.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hunterb123 5y ago
Not so fast, like many drugs, it has multiple uses, not just what it was invented for. Ivermectin, like HCQ, has antiviral properties and prevents binding of some viruses, like the dengue virus and covid-19. You use it as a prophylactic to prevent replication of the virus. Details how Ivermectin prevents Covid19 from binding: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5/figures/1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5/figures/1 There have been many studies showing it's effective at preventing serious infections of Covid-19. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19 https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19
- titzer 5y ago
  Well, given it's from Nature, I actually gave your link a fair shake to see what it's about. This is not a "details on how it works" article. It's an article that is basically "brainstorming on how it might work". There is no epidemiological study, no controlled trial here, no proposed specific mode of action. A huge shotgunning of potential pathway interactions that might affect some portion of the virus's interaction with host cells. In fact, the conclusion from TFA itself: > Considering the urgency of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, simultaneous detection of various new mutant strains and future potential re-emergence of novel coronaviruses, repurposing of approved drugs such as Ivermectin could be worthy of attention. This is their conclusion. Not a sample of their conclusion. Their entire conclusion. Not "It is effective." Not "It works like this." Not "Here are studies that show it works". This article is "hey, some drugs have crossover effects, we should look at them." I mean, they literally wrote that. I will repeat, again. Ivermectin is not an approved anti-viral medication. There are all kinds of things that have "anti-viral properties". Like UV light and bleach. These are not treatments for COVID. Meanwhile there is a fricking vaccine. It's a scientifically designed, as-close-to-perfectly engineered solution to active your own immune response to respond to exactly the spike protein, has been administered to billions of people worldwide and has overwhelming data that it fucking works. They're not even in the same league. People who are taking Ivermectin, and people who are advocating it widely can be dismissed without further evidence. Otherwise, just show up to a pharmacy and pick a random drug off a back shelf. Drugs do weird things, sometimes they interact with viruses! Ship it? No. Please do Science, not whatever the fuck is behind the Ivermectin craze right now. Should it be studied? I mean, sure. But it is so clearly not even a decent treatment, we should probably move on from it.
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    > There are all kinds of things that have "anti-viral properties". Like UV light and bleach. From "TFA": In principle, a molecule can act as an anti-viral drug if it “inhibits some stage of the virus replication cycle, without being too toxic to the body’s cells [21].” Bleach doesn't quite meet that standard. Ivermectin helps according to the clinical trials, and that lines up according this study. It's not their opinion, it's backed by evidence. Yes we have the "fricking vaccine", but the spike protein is the problem as its toxic. Whether the vaccine's spike protein is toxic is up in the air, like Covid, the long term effects of mRNA "vaccines" are unknown entirely. If something works better that we've been putting in humans for a lot longer, why not look into it? Why dismiss it as dewormer? Calm down and stop running to the opposite side of the ring.
Izkata 5y ago
> As for proof, you know, propose a treatment, get approvals, run trials, analyze data. Zero people are doing that with Ivermectin. Here's an aggregate of 63 studies, almost all of which show benefit to using Ivermectin: https://c19ivermectin.com/ https://c19ivermectin.com/

by titzer 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hunterb123 5y ago

Not so fast, like many drugs, it has multiple uses, not just what it was invented for. Ivermectin, like HCQ, has antiviral properties and prevents binding of some viruses, like the dengue virus and covid-19. You use it as a prophylactic to prevent replication of the virus. Details how Ivermectin prevents Covid19 from binding: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5/figures/1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5/figures/1 There have been many studies showing it's effective at preventing serious infections of Covid-19. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19 https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19

titzer 5y ago
Well, given it's from Nature, I actually gave your link a fair shake to see what it's about. This is not a "details on how it works" article. It's an article that is basically "brainstorming on how it might work". There is no epidemiological study, no controlled trial here, no proposed specific mode of action. A huge shotgunning of potential pathway interactions that might affect some portion of the virus's interaction with host cells. In fact, the conclusion from TFA itself: > Considering the urgency of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, simultaneous detection of various new mutant strains and future potential re-emergence of novel coronaviruses, repurposing of approved drugs such as Ivermectin could be worthy of attention. This is their conclusion. Not a sample of their conclusion. Their entire conclusion. Not "It is effective." Not "It works like this." Not "Here are studies that show it works". This article is "hey, some drugs have crossover effects, we should look at them." I mean, they literally wrote that. I will repeat, again. Ivermectin is not an approved anti-viral medication. There are all kinds of things that have "anti-viral properties". Like UV light and bleach. These are not treatments for COVID. Meanwhile there is a fricking vaccine. It's a scientifically designed, as-close-to-perfectly engineered solution to active your own immune response to respond to exactly the spike protein, has been administered to billions of people worldwide and has overwhelming data that it fucking works. They're not even in the same league. People who are taking Ivermectin, and people who are advocating it widely can be dismissed without further evidence. Otherwise, just show up to a pharmacy and pick a random drug off a back shelf. Drugs do weird things, sometimes they interact with viruses! Ship it? No. Please do Science, not whatever the fuck is behind the Ivermectin craze right now. Should it be studied? I mean, sure. But it is so clearly not even a decent treatment, we should probably move on from it.
- hunterb123 5y ago
  > There are all kinds of things that have "anti-viral properties". Like UV light and bleach. From "TFA": In principle, a molecule can act as an anti-viral drug if it “inhibits some stage of the virus replication cycle, without being too toxic to the body’s cells [21].” Bleach doesn't quite meet that standard. Ivermectin helps according to the clinical trials, and that lines up according this study. It's not their opinion, it's backed by evidence. Yes we have the "fricking vaccine", but the spike protein is the problem as its toxic. Whether the vaccine's spike protein is toxic is up in the air, like Covid, the long term effects of mRNA "vaccines" are unknown entirely. If something works better that we've been putting in humans for a lot longer, why not look into it? Why dismiss it as dewormer? Calm down and stop running to the opposite side of the ring.

Izkata 5y ago

> As for proof, you know, propose a treatment, get approvals, run trials, analyze data. Zero people are doing that with Ivermectin. Here's an aggregate of 63 studies, almost all of which show benefit to using Ivermectin: https://c19ivermectin.com/ https://c19ivermectin.com/