25 ms·

Note that Ivermectin is used to treat parasitic diseases. Covid-19 is a virus and so Ivermectin is not used to treat it and nor should it be used.

moloch-hai 4y ago
People infected with COVID and beset with parasites do better if their parasite load is brought under control. This is a serious consideration in many tropical countries. For the rest of us, not.
leereeves 4y ago
The article disagrees: > Today, ivermectin is continuing to surprise and excite scientists, offering more and more promise to help improve global public health by treating a diverse range of diseases, with its unexpected potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent being particularly extraordinary. ... > Recent research has confounded the belief, held for most of the past 40 years, that ivermectin was devoid of any antiviral characteristics.
- someNameIG 4y ago
  > antiviral Not covid though
  - leereeves 4y ago
    That's still being researched. Some studies say no, some say yes. > Our systematic review indicated that ivermectin may be effective for mildly to moderately ill patients. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35800451/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35800451/ (June, 2022) But it's certainly not a miracle cure. Edit: To be clear, I'm not "pushing ivermectin". I'm just against people treating science as a political football and taking an anti-Invermectin position simply because Trump mentioned it.
    - someNameIG 4y ago
      Preprint but newest I can find: > Conclusions Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo did not improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.15.22283488v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.15.22283488v... And from Oct 2022: >Conclusions and Relevance Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483 No one of any credibility is pushing ivermectin, I really don't get why many are still hanging on.
      - collyw 4y ago
        Do you judge credibility by who doesn't get silenced?
        someNameIG 4y ago
        I'm a biologist, I judge heavily people doing and pushing subpar science for their grift.
        collyw 4y ago
        Subpar science for their grift seems to sum up the entire covid response. Surely as a biologist you must have asked some questions about the actual response. - Easily manipulated case numbers from variable PCR cycle thresholds. - The way the gold standard PCR test was designed. - Barely tested vaccines rushed out and coerced onto the entire population. - Every attempt possible to remove the control group. - No decrease in all cause mortality in the Pfizer 6 month follow up. - Very little effort made in monitoring adverse effects. - Vaccination for previously infected people. - Vaccinations pushed for healthy children, despite them being incredibly low risk for covid. - Endless boosters suggested with no idea about potential long term effects. - Zero effort to actually get people to be healthy through nutrition exercise and vitamin supplementation. - Everything within 28 days of a positive test is a covid death. - Two doses + 13 days is unvaccinated in most reports. - Censorship of opposing ideas from big tech and corporate media
marcbarbosa 4y ago
The article is mentioning the antiviral facet of ivermectin though. Acting against HIV, dengue and encephalitis for example. I'm very skeptical about this drug, but I'm not even close from being someone that knows this stuff.
- gus_massa 4y ago
  During peak Ivermectin I read a few of the papers. Most of them that are not statistically significant, and I'm just ignoring them. Reading the ones that are statistically significant, most are horrible, very horrible. They don't have a control group, or the control group is an unrelated bunch of guys in another city, or they have weird exclusion rules, or weird calculation that make no sense. From the list in one of the meta sites, I found only one that is not horrible. There were like 30 studies, so if Ivermectin has no effect, the flukes would produce like 2 or 3 "lucky" studies with a p<.05. So I'm not impressed. And that's with Covid-19, that was under the spot and I expect studies to be more careful. So... can you post your favorite study that shows that Ivermectin is a good medicine against HIV, dengue or encephalitis. I'll try to take a look and post me comment about it. I didn't read any of them, but my guess is that they are horrible or not statistically significant.
Khelavaster 4y ago
Ivermectin is strongly effective against single-stranded RNA viruses as well. It's just unused for them...

moloch-hai 4y ago

People infected with COVID and beset with parasites do better if their parasite load is brought under control. This is a serious consideration in many tropical countries. For the rest of us, not.

leereeves 4y ago

The article disagrees: > Today, ivermectin is continuing to surprise and excite scientists, offering more and more promise to help improve global public health by treating a diverse range of diseases, with its unexpected potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent being particularly extraordinary. ... > Recent research has confounded the belief, held for most of the past 40 years, that ivermectin was devoid of any antiviral characteristics.

someNameIG 4y ago
> antiviral Not covid though
- leereeves 4y ago
  That's still being researched. Some studies say no, some say yes. > Our systematic review indicated that ivermectin may be effective for mildly to moderately ill patients. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35800451/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35800451/ (June, 2022) But it's certainly not a miracle cure. Edit: To be clear, I'm not "pushing ivermectin". I'm just against people treating science as a political football and taking an anti-Invermectin position simply because Trump mentioned it.
  - someNameIG 4y ago
    Preprint but newest I can find: > Conclusions Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo did not improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.15.22283488v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.15.22283488v... And from Oct 2022: >Conclusions and Relevance Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483 No one of any credibility is pushing ivermectin, I really don't get why many are still hanging on.
    - collyw 4y ago
      Do you judge credibility by who doesn't get silenced?
      - someNameIG 4y ago
        I'm a biologist, I judge heavily people doing and pushing subpar science for their grift.
        collyw 4y ago
        Subpar science for their grift seems to sum up the entire covid response. Surely as a biologist you must have asked some questions about the actual response. - Easily manipulated case numbers from variable PCR cycle thresholds. - The way the gold standard PCR test was designed. - Barely tested vaccines rushed out and coerced onto the entire population. - Every attempt possible to remove the control group. - No decrease in all cause mortality in the Pfizer 6 month follow up. - Very little effort made in monitoring adverse effects. - Vaccination for previously infected people. - Vaccinations pushed for healthy children, despite them being incredibly low risk for covid. - Endless boosters suggested with no idea about potential long term effects. - Zero effort to actually get people to be healthy through nutrition exercise and vitamin supplementation. - Everything within 28 days of a positive test is a covid death. - Two doses + 13 days is unvaccinated in most reports. - Censorship of opposing ideas from big tech and corporate media

marcbarbosa 4y ago

The article is mentioning the antiviral facet of ivermectin though. Acting against HIV, dengue and encephalitis for example. I'm very skeptical about this drug, but I'm not even close from being someone that knows this stuff.

gus_massa 4y ago
During peak Ivermectin I read a few of the papers. Most of them that are not statistically significant, and I'm just ignoring them. Reading the ones that are statistically significant, most are horrible, very horrible. They don't have a control group, or the control group is an unrelated bunch of guys in another city, or they have weird exclusion rules, or weird calculation that make no sense. From the list in one of the meta sites, I found only one that is not horrible. There were like 30 studies, so if Ivermectin has no effect, the flukes would produce like 2 or 3 "lucky" studies with a p<.05. So I'm not impressed. And that's with Covid-19, that was under the spot and I expect studies to be more careful. So... can you post your favorite study that shows that Ivermectin is a good medicine against HIV, dengue or encephalitis. I'll try to take a look and post me comment about it. I didn't read any of them, but my guess is that they are horrible or not statistically significant.

Khelavaster 4y ago

Ivermectin is strongly effective against single-stranded RNA viruses as well. It's just unused for them...