Posts: 273
Threads: 200
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
56
The lengths that big science will go to to keep ivermecting down!
Ivermectin didn't protect people from COVID-19, study showsSource: CBS Marketwatch
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebrities such as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffective against Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
Is this thing on?
Lol.
As the CDC quietly adjusts its "science" and removes a large chunk of covid deaths. The covid cult just won't quit. Didn't you get the memo that the democrats defeated covid? Yes, there was an actual memo. You should check on that.
Quote: @greediron said:
Lol.
As the CDC quietly adjusts its "science" and removes a large chunk of covid deaths. The covid cult just won't quit. Didn't you get the memo that the democrats defeated covid? Yes, there was an actual memo. You should check on that.
Sorry I thought we would stay on topic.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
The lengths that big science will go to to keep ivermecting down!
Ivermectin didn't protect people from COVID-19, study showsSource: CBS Marketwatch
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebrities such as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffective against Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
There are currently 151 studies studying the efficacy of Ivermectin vs Covid-19. 102 peer-reviewed (ostensibly, a better quality study, all things equal).
Here they are
Those of us in primary health care (front-lines, as it were) take in all available studies/info, and formulate a treatment plan, and modify treatments based on the peer-reviewed studies and the peer-supplied anecdotal advice.
Your op is a nice bit of reportage, (thank you!) , but this is hardly the "final decision' on Ivermectin.
Personally, I'm awaiting what I think is the gold-standard study, the U of Oxford PRINCIPLE study.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-rep...ives/96194
^^ but it's apparently on hold. Due to a Ivermectin (readily available) "shortage". LOL.
Interesting, that this news is " ballyhooed" (ala Mike's OP) before.... "Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.".... the medical journal (CAN'T FIND/REFERENCE THE JOURNAL!/NOT LISTED) BUT, I'm sure it's a biggie, lol. WAY bigger than the other 150 pending studies.
Quote: @savannahskol said:
@ Mike Olson said:
The lengths that big science will go to to keep ivermecting down!
Ivermectin didn't protect people from COVID-19, study shows Source: CBS Marketwatch
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebrities such as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffective against Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
There are currently 151 studies studying the efficacy of Ivermectin vs Covid-19. 102 peer-reviewed (ostensibly, a better quality study, all things equal).
Here they are
Those of us in primary health care (front-lines, as it were) take in all available studies/info, and formulate a treatment plan, and modify treatments based on the peer-reviewed studies and the peer-supplied anecdotal advice.
Your op is a nice bit of reportage, (thank you!) , but this is hardly the "final decision' on Ivermectin.
Personally, I'm awaiting what I think is the gold-standard study, the U of Oxford PRINCIPLE study.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-rep...ives/96194
^^ but it's apparently on hold. Due to a Ivermectin (readily available) "shortage". LOL.
Interesting, that this news is " ballyhooed" (ala Mike's OP) before.... "Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.".... the medical journal (CAN'T FIND/REFERENCE THE JOURNAL!/NOT LISTED) BUT, I'm sure it's a biggie, lol. WAY bigger than the other 150 pending studies.
Don't you suppose some of the positive Ivermectin results from 3rd world countries could be traced to people actually having parasites of some sort? Kill the parasite and give the body extra ammunition to fight covid.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
The lengths that big science will go to to keep ivermecting down!
Ivermectin didn't protect people from COVID-19, study showsSource: CBS Marketwatch
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebrities such as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffective against Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
Lots of studies already out there Mike. The early consensus is that Inververmectin is very effective for Covid if treated early.
https://journals.lww.com/americantherape..._of.7.aspx
Not sure how or why therapeutics for Covid is such a political issue but I guess that's the way it is in this hyperpolitical world we live in these days. After the success of Operation Warp Speed, we took our eye off the prize...namely funding / developing/ qualifying / expediting drugs that can minimize the effects of Covid if taken early. It seems like politics took over. I'm guessing you started this thread because of politics...not because you're disappointed that a potential lifesaving drug might not be effective... Lack of therapeutics / prophylactic drugs that are readily available OTC when you're tested positive for Covid has killed a lot of people and burdened our healthcare system. Take politics out of medicine, identify the drugs that are most effective at keeping Covid effects minimal and get them broadly distributed to supplement our "vaccines" which, unlike real vaccines, don't actually prevent the virus...just minimize the effects. Should have been done by now.
If covid was truly a deadly pandemic to the extent the media hyped it, then any and every solution would be considered. But since it was more about funding for the mega pharma, treatments had to be shut down so they could get emergency vaccines pushed through.
So keep gnawing on that bone Mike, but as I said, please read the memo. Covid has been defeated.
Quote: @greediron said:
If covid was truly a deadly pandemic to the extent the media hyped it, then any and every solution would be considered. But since it was more about funding for the mega pharma, treatments had to be shut down so they could get emergency vaccines pushed through.
So keep gnawing on that bone Mike, but as I said, please read the memo. Covid has been defeated.
Corona virus has been around in cattle since the beginning of time. Ivermectin has been around almost as long (~1970s). If there was any and I mean ANY therapeutic benefit for worming cattle who were suffering from Corona virus, farmers would have figured that bad boy out decades ago.
Quote: @badgervike said:
@ Mike Olson said:
The lengths that big science will go to to keep ivermecting down!
Ivermectin didn't protect people from COVID-19, study shows Source: CBS Marketwatch
Researchers testing repurposed drugs against Covid-19 found that ivermectin didn’t reduce hospital admissions, in the largest trial yet of the effect of the antiparasitic on the disease driving the pandemic.
Ivermectin has received a lot of attention as a potential treatment for Covid-19 including from celebrities such as podcast host Joe Rogan. Most evidence has shown it to be ineffective against Covid-19 or has relied on data of poor quality, infectious-disease researchers said. Public-health authorities and researchers have for months said the drug hasn’t shown any benefit in treating the disease. Taking large doses of the drug is dangerous, the Food and Drug Administration has said.
The latest trial, of nearly 1,400 Covid-19 patients at risk of severe disease, is the largest to show that those who received ivermectin as a treatment didn’t fare better than those who received a placebo.
“There was no indication that ivermectin is clinically useful,” said Edward Mills, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of health sciences at Canada’s McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. Dr. Mills on Friday plans to present the findings, which have been accepted for publication in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, at a public forum sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.
Lots of studies already out there Mike. The early consensus is that Inververmectin is very effective for Covid if treated early.
https://journals.lww.com/americantherape..._of.7.aspx
Not sure how or why therapeutics for Covid is such a political issue but I guess that's the way it is in this hyperpolitical world we live in these days. After the success of Operation Warp Speed, we took our eye off the prize...namely funding / developing/ qualifying / expediting drugs that can minimize the effects of Covid if taken early. It seems like politics took over. I'm guessing you started this thread because of politics...not because you're disappointed that a potential lifesaving drug might not be effective... Lack of therapeutics / prophylactic drugs that are readily available OTC when you're tested positive for Covid has killed a lot of people and burdened our healthcare system. Take politics out of medicine, identify the drugs that are most effective at keeping Covid effects minimal and get them broadly distributed to supplement our "vaccines" which, unlike real vaccines, don't actually prevent the virus...just minimize the effects. Should have been done by now.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Did you even read the Erratum? Its literally right below the study you posted.
The Editor of the American Journal of Therapeutics hereby issues an Expression of Concern
for Bryant A, Lawrie TA, Dowswell T, Fordham EJ, Mitchell S, Hill SR,
Tham TC. Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A
Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to
Inform Clinical Guidelines. Am J Ther. 2021;28(4): e434-e460.
The decision is based on the evaluation of
allegations of inaccurate data collection and/or reporting in at least 2
primary sources of the meta-analysis performed by Mr. Andrew Bryant and
his collaborators.1,2
These allegations were first made after the publication of this
article. The exclusion of the suspicious data appears to invalidate the
findings regarding the ivermectin's potential to decrease the mortality
of COVID-19 infection.2 The investigation of these allegations is incomplete and inconclusive at this time.
This Expression of Concern
does not imply that the methodology used by Mr. Andrew Bryant and his
collaborators was incorrect. The use of summary data published by others
is a generally accepted approach in biomedical metanalytic research.1
The American Journal of Therapeutics is
steadfastly committed to upholding truth in science and the highest
standards in publication ethics. We will update our decision regarding
this work should more information become available.
American Journal of Therapeutics.
29(2):e232,
March/April 2022.
|
