Ivermectin: balance of evidence shows no benefit against Covid-19

[lumeer]

I know you think that's funny but it's actually really stupid and shows your total bias and lack of impartiality.

It's like saying if you think toothpaste is so good for your teeth why did you not use it to treat the fungus infection on your penis?

The thing is, Swa said the other day that one is more likely to die from flu than from Covid. I countered this claim with data on flu deaths from the CDC. Swa responded that the data is wrong. How can I reason with such folks?

 

[pouroverguy]

I know people on this forum hate this guy, because he's an expert epidemiologist and they aren't able to actually argue with his points - but here he is yet again doing a proper critique of the Peru IVM study that was repeatedly used as an example of why it works by the pro-IVM crew.

Here you go:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1424525769242406915

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Any idea where? Or could you link me to it? You’ve obviously done your own research.

And why are you ignoring the disclaimer from FLCCC website? Kinda blows every single thing you and your fellow contrarians are saying out of the water. Not so? Or does the truth not matter and you only want to win an argument?

You're never going to get an admission from the Ivermectin crowd. They've made up their minds and nobody is going to tell them otherwise. It's like the religious.

But here's the disclaimer again:

Welcome to https://covid19criticalcare.com, the website of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (“FLCCC”). This Disclaimer contains important information that FLCCC (“our,” “us” or “we”) need to share with you (“user”) and for you to understand. By continuing to use this Website you are agreeing to all parts of this Disclaimer.

No treatment, however, including Ivermectin or the Mask+ Protocol, has been accepted by our public health system as proven to prevent, mitigate or treat COVID-19.

Public Health Notice

The Ivermectin/Mask+ Protocol is not a substitute for preventive measures. Patients using the preventive protocols should follow all measures recommended by public health authorities, including social distancing, masking and vaccinations as appropriate.

 

[SoldierMan]

Any idea where? Or could you link me to it? You’ve obviously done your own research.

And why are you ignoring the disclaimer from FLCCC website? Kinda blows every single thing you and your fellow contrarians are saying out of the water. Not so? Or does the truth not matter and you only want to win an argument?

Look through the thread for the info.

Of course they have to say that on their website because IVM and their protocols has not been accepted by the public health system yet.

That doesn't mean it doesn't work, surely you can see that?

That's like saying because Vitamin D supplements have "Not intended to treat disease or act as medicine" on the bottle (in America anyway) that Vitamin D is not vital for your immune system to function properly and without it you would not be able to fight off infection properly.

There are many instances where medication or a substance was used to treat disease but wasn't officially recognised. Or where drugs have been repurposed for use in a different context where it was not first used.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Look through the thread for the info.

Of course they have to say that on their website because IVM and their protocols has not been accepted by the public health system yet.

That doesn't mean it doesn't work, surely you can see that?

That's like saying because Vitamin D supplements have "Not intended to treat disease or act as medicine" on the bottle (in America anyway) that Vitamin D is not vital for your immune system to function properly and without it you would not be able to fight off infection properly.

There are many instances where medication or a substance was used to treat disease but wasn't officially recognised. Or where drugs have been repurposed for use in a different context where it was not first used.

Vitamin D you say? Tell me how vit D gets into your body? Let's see what you know about medical issues. Careful now, I WILL embarrass you again like I did here when you said Ivermectin was used on humans before animals. I notice you never respond when proven wrong?

Talking kak as usual:

By 1986, ivermectin was registered for use in 46 countries and was administered massively to cattle, sheep and other animals. Ivermectin was approved for human use in 1988.

Sources -

Ōmura S, Crump A (December 2004). "The life and times of ivermectin - a success story". Nature Reviews. Microbiology. 2 (12): 984–9. doi:10.1038/nrmicro1048. PMID 15550944. S2CID 22722403.

Fox LM (December 2006). "Ivermectin: uses and impact 20 years on". Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 19 (6): 588–93. doi:10.1097/QCO.0b013e328010774c. PMID 17075336. S2CID 19269027.

 

[Howdy]

But you have to invest R99 in a plant and research. Dumb economics.

Dumb is as dumb says. Perhaps you need to read up on operation Lightspeed, Warp Speed ... it's called O.P.M.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Dumb is as dumb says. Perhaps you need to read up on operation Lightspeed, Warp Speed ... it's called O.P.M.

Perhaps you need read up on the incorrect stuff you upvote?

 

[semaphore]

I posted a video yesterday and in that interview the doc (he was interviewing Dr Chetty) says he as had no hospitalisations or deaths. He said he uses it profusely.

So one doctor now accounts for every single doctor in the world? I know you believe in fantasies, but come on that's just crazy.

 

[SoldierMan]

So one doctor now accounts for every single doctor in the world? I know you believe in fantasies, but come on that's just crazy.

That's not what I said at all. Don't read stuff into things that aren't there, read what I said.

There were two doctors referenced in the video interview with Dr Chetty that had 100% success with IVM.

 

[Geoff.D]

To be fair Geoff nobody is going on about how those other medicines are some kind of miracle prophylaxis or treatment specifically for COVID. This is why there is a 'campaign' against IVM - because there is specifically a large body of people that are saying stuff like we dont need a vaccine because we have IVM, and there is not enough evidence to support that view at all. Maybe it works and has a positive effect at some dosage and for some duration of time, but its damaging to position it as a wonder-drug against IVM in place of vaccines. I appreciate that not everyone is doing that, but that specific narrative is popular and is the reason for the anti-IVM campaign.

But those on this forum in support of allowing doctors to prescribe any drug incl IVM have NEVER pushed that line. We have consistently stated our position that it is NOT an either or debate. Yet every time new evidence surfaces the above debate starts all over again.
To the point where blatantly false claims are made about IVM.
No one wants to acknowledge for one second anything positive about IVM.
When evidence is posted about its safety as a medication for human use the evidence is not accepted. When evidence is posted that there have been no deaths related to IVM use that is rejected etc.

 

[Geoff.D]

How can you actually believe that nonsense? That would make Ivermectin the most effective drug EVER.

Maybe it is. Maybe it a combination of drugs that does it.
Maybe it is because you interpret what 100% means incorrectly?

In most cases the % claims are about 100% keeping people out of hospital, getting severely sick and death, recovering instead.
Ultimately, it is our own immune system that finally overwhelms the virus. There are no miracles ever been found, not one. No vaccine is 100% effective either.
But because it is not getting to the point where a proper trial is being run, it cannot be shown just how effective it is.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

That's not what I said at all. Don't read stuff into things that aren't there, read what I said.

There were two doctors referenced in the video interview with Dr Chetty that had 100% success with IVM.

Two doctors now? Wow, a 100% increase in those promoting Ivermectin. Why isn't the Indian government or WHO listening to these future Nobel Medicine Prize winners?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Maybe it is. Maybe it a combination of drugs that does it.
Maybe it is because you interpret what 100% means incorrectly?

In most cases the % claims are about 100% keeping people out of hospital, getting severely sick and recovering.
Ultimately, it is our own immune system that finally overwhelms the virus. There are no miracles ever been found, not one. No vaccine is 100% effective either.
But because it is not getting to the point where a proper trial is being run, it cannot be shown just how effective it is.

So, according to you, nobody taking Ivermectin has landed in hospital nor died yet?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

But those on this forum in support of allowing doctors to prescribe any drug incl IVM have NEVER pushed that line. We have consistently stated our position that it is NOT an either or debate. Yet every time new evidence surfaces the above debate starts all over again.
To the point where blatantly false claims are made about IVM.
No one wants to acknowledge for one second anything positive about IVM.
When evidence is posted about its safety as a medication for human use the evidence is not accepted. When evidence is posted that there have been no deaths related to IVM use that is rejected etc.

Because there is no evidence of Ivermectin's efficacy against Covid...

The title of this thread...

 

[Cosmik Debris]

But because it is not getting to the point where a proper trial is being run, it cannot be shown just how effective it is.

Yet, without a proper trial and you not being a researcher nor even medically qualified, you know that Ivermectin is effective against Covid?

 

[SoldierMan]

Two doctors now? Wow, a 100% increase in those promoting Ivermectin. Why isn't the Indian government or WHO listening to these future Nobel Medicine Prize winners?

Some states in India are using IVM and are seeing great results.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Some states in India are using IVM and are seeing great results.

They are? Any corroborated evidence you can post? Not from your debunked FLCCC website which disclaims its own claims please...

 

[Geoff.D]

Yip, this part -


Describes you, Geoff and Soldier to a T.

Just another demonstration of your propensity towards personal attack and cyber bullying and your personal inability to comprehend what you read.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Just another demonstration of your propensity towards personal attack and cyber bullying and your personal inability to comprehend what you read.

Yoh, the irony. Talk about a personal attack and cyber bullying...

 

[Howdy]

Perhaps you need read up on the incorrect stuff you upvote?

Okay, okay - you win ...

Spoiler: Reality

...Not!

What is this obsession you have with arguing, trying to browbeat everybody into submission?

Go argue with the people at Merck etc.

Animal usage was the byproduct of a process in the search for a drug for human usage. It was tested on cows because the world had moral issues testing it on Chimps.

In reality, ivermectin’s role in human medicine effectively began in April 1978 inside the Merck company, several years before the drug emerged on the Animal Health market. The highly potent bioactivity of a fermentation broth of an organism isolated by the Kitasato Institute in Tokyo, which had been sent to Merck’s research laboratories in 1974, was first identified in 1975. The active compounds were identified by the international multidisciplinary collaborative team as the avermectins, with the subsequently-refined ivermectin derivative being designated the optimal compound for development. Merck scientists, under the direction of Dr William Campbell, found that the drug was active against a wide range of parasites of livestock and companion animals.10) The informed foresight of a Merck researcher, Ms. L.S. Blair, resulted in the discovery that the drug was effective against skin-dwelling microfilariae of Onchocerca cervicalis in horses. These did not actually cause clinical disease and so the finding was of little commercial ...

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective

Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You are welcome.