Would you take Ivermectin for Covid?

Would you take Ivermectin for Covid?

  • Yes - I have

    Votes: 15 4.5%
  • Yes - I would

    Votes: 99 29.6%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 61 18.3%
  • No

    Votes: 150 44.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 2.7%

  • Total voters
    334

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
3,713
I will reiterate. There is no scientifically and factual proof of substance including review that indicates that ivermectin is effective in the treatment of covid. Seeking authorization to administer it based on initial and mostly subjective findings is imho premature.


I wasn’t responding to you nor had I read your response as I was typing still when I responded to Johnstarr. It’s bizarre to me that you don’t value due process. Just so you know the authorization being sought is usually to assist in instances where a drug has been approved for a particular application but not as yet in ZA and a patient requires it’s prescription for it’s approved use. Ivermectin not only is not approved for covid treatment but is has not been approved even for emergency use in the US.
I was also called an idiot (if I remember correctly; I tend to discount fanatics), so welcome to the club.
Geoffy is 1 of the 2 guys who are punting ivermectin with select information on hand. Not qualified in any medical field; just using Google, emotions and a lack of understanding for processes and pharmacology in general.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
You seem to have a lot of faith in your local doctor?
I can assure you that the average doctor has not read the full publication of a research paper in the last year.

One has to only look at the prescribing habits of some of my colleagues wrt steroids in Covid to see the superficial understanding of the evidence.

Have you had a look at who makes up the SAHPRA board?


I feel quite confident that those persons are qualified and competent to assess Ivermectin's current and future role in Covid 19.
1. I pick my doctors with care.
2. I make sure I know WHAT a doctor prescribes for me and my family BEFORE I fill a prescription. Hence why I have quite a bit of the regs available on hand and hopefully up to date.

(Not for nothing did my mom work for a chemist). Learnt plenty about how a pharmacist works.

I take responsibility for my own and my family's well being much more seriously than most, and will not hesitate to challenge a doctor if I don't agree with his prescribed treatment.

Besides, in this case, no one knows what the H to do to treat patients with Covid 19. Everyone is bumbling along until they find something that works.

We saw that during the early days last year when the Pulmonologists were very conservatively resisting so many oxygen treatment proposals, even when presented with at the time pretty thin evidence of what works and what does not. We saw the same noise being generated then as now with the repurposed drugs search.

as to SAHPRA? Well, what we don't know is how much political interference is taking place.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
28,516
You have a lot of catching up to do.
Start with a program on TV tomorrow night e TV CH, 22:30 calls Devi.
I've done quite a bit of reading on the studies for it, posted in the other thread about it, all cases of it "helping" are either fraud or not conclusive.
Feel free to post actual links rather than saying TV, I don't watch TV.
You seem to have a lot of faith in your local doctor?
I can assure you that the average doctor has not read the full publication of a research paper in the last year.

One has to only look at the prescribing habits of some of my colleagues wrt steroids in Covid to see the superficial understanding of the evidence.

Have you had a look at who makes up the SAHPRA board?


I feel quite confident that those persons are qualified and competent to assess Ivermectin's current and future role in Covid 19.
I can assure you that I know quite a few doctors that have read full publications within the last month. I can also assure you that near all of them are in contact with other doctors about diseases including profs that write those papers.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,499
The only one that matters is our regulator.
As of the 6th January 2012. SAHPRA claimed they had no applications for a trial of Ivermectin in SA on hand and that there were no outstanding section 21 applications on hand. yet almost immediately quite a few sources stated that this was not so. Later it was reported in the media that SAHPRA would review an application of a trial received from UFS and committed to review existing section 21 applications received from doctors in the country to administer Ivermectin to patients suffering from Covid 19.

Such applications are supposed to be processed within 48-72 hours. Yet it took a court application from Afriforum over the weekend to get things moving. SAHPRA was given till today to respond to the courts in response to Afriforum's action.
Suddenly out of the blue this morning, the Minister in an interview on TV, stated that SAHPRA will approve the trial and that Section 21 applications on hand will be processed.

We await the outcome of the Court Application that will be heard tomorrow to see what has transpired.

In the meantime, this is a document released by SAHPRA on the 6th January 2021.

In it with the usual long drawn out preamble about Ivermectin SAHPRA committed to:



It is the failure of SAHPRA to honour that commitment that led to the Afriforum Court action.
I’ll just state the obvious that a court would be overstepping their boundaries should they make any declaratory order on the safety of a drug in the treatment of covid. They can force the authorities to but that doesn’t mean the authorities are forced to do anything except process the application accordingly.

Until such time as a proper clinical trial is concluded it would be reckless to provide such authorization. On what basis could they? This doesn’t change regardless of “feelings” or “promising results”.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
I've done quite a bit of reading on the studies for it, posted in the other thread about it, all cases of it "helping" are either fraud or not conclusive.
Feel free to post actual links rather than saying TV, I don't watch TV.

I can assure you that I know quite a few doctors that have read full publications within the last month. I can also assure you that near all of them are in contact with other doctors about diseases including profs that write those papers.
As you please. I have also read all the papers. And my assessment is that doctors are so sh't scared of court cases and malpractice suits that many have turned into useless protocol-bound wimps.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
I’ll just state the obvious that a court would be overstepping their boundaries should they make any declaratory order on the safety of a drug in the treatment of covid. They can force the authorities to but that doesn’t mean the authorities are forced to do anything except process the application accordingly.

Until such time as a proper clinical trial is concluded it would be reckless to provide such authorization. On what basis could they? This doesn’t change regardless of “feelings” or “promising results”.


That is all Afriforum is asking for.
So, IF you are unfortunate to get covid 19 then follow the advice in the other thread and "eat beetroot" and see if that helps.
 

Rosaudio

First Officer
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
21,807
Surely people would want robust measures in place to safeguard against medical malpractice, or am I missing something?
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,499
So, IF you are unfortunate to get covid 19 then follow the advice in the other thread and "eat beetroot" and see if that helps.
I’m not sure that would do much besides the nutritional value and whatever that nutrition may contribute in whatever way to your own body and health. It’s still way less problematic than advising the consumption in undetermined quantities of a drug that could be dangerous and could have no efficacy whatsoever for the sake of seeing if it helps.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
I’m not sure that would do much besides the nutritional value and whatever that nutrition may contribute in whatever way to your own body and health. It’s still way less problematic than advising the consumption in undetermined quantities of a drug that could be dangerous and could have no efficacy whatsoever for the sake of seeing if it helps.
Clearly you don't see the joke.
 

Gerry

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
534
I was also called an idiot (if I remember correctly; I tend to discount fanatics), so welcome to the club.
Geoffy is 1 of the 2 guys who are punting ivermectin with select information on hand. Not qualified in any medical field; just using Google, emotions and a lack of understanding for processes and pharmacology in general.

no fighting spirit in you, you softy

I am the other guy - remember that.
 

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
3,713
Surely people would want robust measures in place to safeguard against medical malpractice, or am I missing something?
Some of us do. 1 or 2 feel like we should be able to do what we want, prescribe meds here by stating their dosages, or informing people what the act can't cover (like importing your own meds). These are the worst of the worst. Don't belong here in what should have been a decent debate.
Instead they're pushing their agendas, resorting to grade 2 name calling when they can't get around valid points, and are completely unhelpful in any route.
The dangers of being a Google couch doc (they know who they are).
 

Rosaudio

First Officer
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
21,807
b34.jpg
 

etienne_marais

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
9,230

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
Yes, it has been posted before and there is a thread for this article somewhere. Having said that it is very timely to remind everyone why this whole issue around Ivermectin is so important and why our own regulator SAHPRA needs to be taken to task over their thoughtless actions, and failure years ago to place this drug on SAs own essential list of medication and ensured it was correctly listed in the regulations. The drug is so safe that it should be freely available over the counter (S0) for a well-defined list of conditions and then listed S2 for other conditions. It should not even be necessary for the drug to be only available as a prescription medication, but that would be preferable to a stupid denial and banning.

Thankfully, the first step in this process has been taken with today's, grudging announcement by SAHPRA.

See this thread for the details. SAHPRA will hopefully get around to publishing their announcement on the own website sometime, together with the process.

Updated: Possible coronavirus drug identified (Ivermectin) | Page 24 | MyBroadband Forum
 

WorldWarII

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2019
Messages
1,367
people are tearing each other a new one for the stuff... Ive heard of people paying 1400 rand for a strip of 10. Scum of the earth.
 

JohnStarr

Expert Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
3,713
people are tearing each other a new one for the stuff... Ive heard of people paying 1400 rand for a strip of 10. Scum of the earth.
Yep, you see people like this and those pushing this as the miracle drug will drive the price up for the rest of us. And farmers. So, they can pat themselves on their collective backs and say: well done!
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
19,305
people are tearing each other a new one for the stuff... Ive heard of people paying 1400 rand for a strip of 10. Scum of the earth.
SAHPRA is totally responsible for creating this black market. They need to find themselves under investigation by the competition commission.
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
5,499
Yes, it has been posted before and there is a thread for this article somewhere. Having said that it is very timely to remind everyone why this whole issue around Ivermectin is so important and why our own regulator SAHPRA needs to be taken to task over their thoughtless actions, and failure years ago to place this drug on SAs own essential list of medication and ensured it was correctly listed in the regulations. The drug is so safe that it should be freely available over the counter (S0) for a well-defined list of conditions and then listed S2 for other conditions. It should not even be necessary for the drug to be only available as a prescription medication, but that would be preferable to a stupid denial and banning.

Thankfully, the first step in this process has been taken with today's, grudging announcement by SAHPRA.

See this thread for the details. SAHPRA will hopefully get around to publishing their announcement on the own website sometime, together with the process.

Updated: Possible coronavirus drug identified (Ivermectin) | Page 24 | MyBroadband Forum
Your understanding of the scheduling of drugs is flawed. The reason why Ivermectin has not been made available for human consumption is because there are alternative, safer drugs with better efficacy for the treatment of parasitic infections. I think I've stated enough times now that there is no clinically scientific and reviewed data to support ivermectin's effectiveness against covid and the hype and frenzy around it is ridiculous until there is such evidence. What I do know is that this is not the first "cure" and it won't be the last.
 
Top