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

capd

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
1,703
And one day we will all be dead
Round and round we go

Selfish and short-sighted. The perfect recipe for enriching elites and ensuring our future generations live on subscriptions and/or government handouts.

And still responding!
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,432
This may help to explain clinicians scepticism of the flccc group right from the start of this entire debacle.

Have you any opinion about the HAT protocol and particularly, the benefits of intravenous vitamin C therapy you are prepared to share here or via a PM?
This issue comes a long way considering that the trial referred to dates all the way back to 2017.
 

TysonRoux

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,177
India, the horse meds COVID capitol of the world.

India stopped recommending the use of ivermectin for the management of the virus in September, citing a lack of scientific evidence of its benefits. Researchers at the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) did not find enough evidence for Ivermectin and Hydroxycholoquine as potential therapeutics targeted against COVID-19.*



India-ganga-river-pollution.jpg
 

TysonRoux

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,177
Trumps gonna win the 2024 elections because all his opponents would have died by taking the vaccine. They all going to die in 2 years.

Wait...

He also took it. (Now what????)
Taking the evil vaccine that he developed single-handedly at warp speed wont faze the anti-vaxxer redneck MAGA voters.

'I Could ... Shoot Somebody, And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters'​


 

OhYeah84

Expert Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2022
Messages
2,216
Taking the evil vaccine that he developed single-handedly at warp speed wont faze the anti-vaxxer redneck MAGA voters.

'I Could ... Shoot Somebody, And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters'​


He did? Sure of your facts and sure it wasn't J&J or Pfizer...
 

r00igev@@r

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
8,768
Taking the evil vaccine that he developed single-handedly at warp speed wont faze the anti-vaxxer redneck MAGA voters.

'I Could ... Shoot Somebody, And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters'​


We he grabs by the pussy he gets more votes...

BTW: Remember to take your IVM so that you don't die! Plus also just flush it down with the stuff you use in fish tanks.
 

PsyWulf

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
13,896
In another totally surprising turn of events,another Placebo control study - ACTIV6 - again finds no benefit to Ivermectin
 

PsyWulf

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
13,896
Here we go: Pre-print but i'm quite sure nothing will be changing post-review,this was actually a gold-standard double-blind randomized placebo-controlled national study

Exerpt
ACTIV-6 has several notable strengths. Many of the prior studies of ivermectin were conducted largely outside of the United States, thus data from a high-income country with associated healthcare system were lacking. ACTIV-6 is a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled national study with enrolling sites in 28 states and a call center able to recruit participants from the remainder of the United States. This ivermectin arm of the ACTIV-6 platform trial enrolled rapidly due to the delta and omicron variant surges and included both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, thus representing a highly relevant study population. The trial also has limitations. Due to the broad study population, including almost 50% reporting vaccination, few participants progressed to severe COVID-19, limiting the power to study the treatment effect on relevant clinical outcomes like hospitalization and death. Due to the remote nature of the trial and constraints related to timing of randomization, the average time from start of symptoms to receipt of study drug was 6 days, which is later in the disease course than recent antiviral trials.1,2 However, there was no benefit observed for those who started treatment earlier (≤3 days) versus later (>3 days) in the subgroup analysis.
 

Venator

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
1,534
Here we go: Pre-print but i'm quite sure nothing will be changing post-review,this was actually a gold-standard double-blind randomized placebo-controlled national study

Exerpt

288002810_586857896369827_6726200540193580602_n.jpg
WHY DON’T FACTS CHANGE OUR MINDS?
Have you ever found yourself wondering, “How in the world can someone believe something so strange?” And then thought, “Surely, this evidence will change their mind!”
If so, I have bad news.
Many of us think “facts” are incontrovertible.
But facts are never neutral. Taken out of context, misrepresented, or cherry picked, “facts” can tell whatever story we want them to.
We’re particularly motivated to defend beliefs that are important to our identity and our social standing. And the more we’ve sacrificed and/or publicly staked our reputation on a belief, the less willing we are to concede defeat.
Instead, we act like lawyers trying to win our case and search for evidence to prove ourselves right. Not only do we not change our mind, we double down.
In other words, we deceive ourselves because it feels better than admitting we were wrong.
In 1954, psychologist Leon Festinger was fascinated by a cult that expected to be saved from a global flood by aliens on December 21. So he and his team infiltrated the group to see what would happen on December 22. Would they change their minds when they weren’t rescued by aliens in flying saucers?
From “When Prophecy Fails”: “Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.”
I’m often reminded of Festinger’s study these days. While we certainly all believe things that aren’t true, some beliefs are clearly more wrong than others. Yet, when presented with incontrovertible evidence they’re wrong, and the proverbial aliens aren’t saving them from global destruction, too many refuse to change their minds.
The importance of Festinger’s study cannot be overstated. It’s a lesson all of us would do well to heed.


It’s also an incredibly interesting and entertaining story: https://thinkingispower.com/the-person-who-lies-to-you-the-most-is-you/
 

surface

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
22,429
View attachment 1330130
WHY DON’T FACTS CHANGE OUR MINDS?
Have you ever found yourself wondering, “How in the world can someone believe something so strange?” And then thought, “Surely, this evidence will change their mind!”
If so, I have bad news.
Many of us think “facts” are incontrovertible.
But facts are never neutral. Taken out of context, misrepresented, or cherry picked, “facts” can tell whatever story we want them to.
We’re particularly motivated to defend beliefs that are important to our identity and our social standing. And the more we’ve sacrificed and/or publicly staked our reputation on a belief, the less willing we are to concede defeat.
Instead, we act like lawyers trying to win our case and search for evidence to prove ourselves right. Not only do we not change our mind, we double down.
In other words, we deceive ourselves because it feels better than admitting we were wrong.
In 1954, psychologist Leon Festinger was fascinated by a cult that expected to be saved from a global flood by aliens on December 21. So he and his team infiltrated the group to see what would happen on December 22. Would they change their minds when they weren’t rescued by aliens in flying saucers?
From “When Prophecy Fails”: “Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.”
I’m often reminded of Festinger’s study these days. While we certainly all believe things that aren’t true, some beliefs are clearly more wrong than others. Yet, when presented with incontrovertible evidence they’re wrong, and the proverbial aliens aren’t saving them from global destruction, too many refuse to change their minds.
The importance of Festinger’s study cannot be overstated. It’s a lesson all of us would do well to heed.


It’s also an incredibly interesting and entertaining story: https://thinkingispower.com/the-person-who-lies-to-you-the-most-is-you/
Indeed. It is very difficult to get rid of world view that one held for most of one's lives (religion in my case) but it is possible.


"People have a certain worldview; [then] they’re confronted with evidence that conflicts with the worldview, so they have dissonance, conflict in their minds," Nye says. "[So] instead of changing your worldview, which you may have held your entire life, you dismiss the evidence—and along with that you dismiss the authorities that may have provided the evidence."
 
Top