4 ms·

I don’t think the media caused the psychology replication crisis. The media plays a part in all this, but the scientific institutions shouldn’t crumble to media

I don’t think the media caused the psychology replication crisis. The media plays a part in all this, but the scientific institutions shouldn’t crumble to media or political pressure. See the FDA’s advice on Ivermectin: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19 https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul... “Ivermectin has not been shown to be safe or effective for these indications,” but fail to mention that there is no evidence that it is not safe for this particular indication. This implies it wasn’t banned for safety reasons. It was banned because many associated it with Trump and right wing conspiracy theories. There was no science used to justify banning it to begin with, and we are now years later, with a potential mechanism for the benefit and it is still banned! One more link to prove I’m not completely insane: the AMA and other mainstream medical bodies recommended not using it for Covid https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-apha-ashp-statement-ending-use-ivermectin-treat-covid-19 https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-aph...

tuatoru 3y ago
Ivermectin is known to be an anthelminthic: it kills worms. That's what it's approved for. It is not known to have antiviral activity, so it's not approved for that use. It is acknowledged to be an official medicine for humans, not just an animal remedy as you claimed. Please keep to the point.
- brutusborn 3y ago
  Oh I’m well aware of that, I think you may have missed my point: ivermectin was banned in many countries due to political reasons. Many doctors reported good outcomes when using it for Covid. We now know that the places that Ivermectin worked best for Covid were places where parasitic infections are more common. So although it wasn’t approved for Covid, it helped reduce harm because it allowed people to fight Covid without fighting a parasite simultaneously. But since it was ‘not known to have antiviral activity’ and trump said it worked well, it was banned. It’s a disgrace that authorities have punished doctors who did the right thing and have now been vindicated. It is absurd to have to wait for an authority to approve something you have good evidence will help your patients. This is why people have lost faith in health institutions. They make terrible decisions like this and then have the audacity to pontificate to the population.

tuatoru 3y ago

Ivermectin is known to be an anthelminthic: it kills worms. That's what it's approved for. It is not known to have antiviral activity, so it's not approved for that use. It is acknowledged to be an official medicine for humans, not just an animal remedy as you claimed. Please keep to the point.

brutusborn 3y ago
Oh I’m well aware of that, I think you may have missed my point: ivermectin was banned in many countries due to political reasons. Many doctors reported good outcomes when using it for Covid. We now know that the places that Ivermectin worked best for Covid were places where parasitic infections are more common. So although it wasn’t approved for Covid, it helped reduce harm because it allowed people to fight Covid without fighting a parasite simultaneously. But since it was ‘not known to have antiviral activity’ and trump said it worked well, it was banned. It’s a disgrace that authorities have punished doctors who did the right thing and have now been vindicated. It is absurd to have to wait for an authority to approve something you have good evidence will help your patients. This is why people have lost faith in health institutions. They make terrible decisions like this and then have the audacity to pontificate to the population.