Ivermectin: Yes, No or Maybe

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Clydesdale said:

No breakthrough required. Apparently the long available and relatively cheap Ivermectin is an effective treatment. 

The editors of Frontiers in Pharmacology have taken down an article about the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin in COVID-19 patients. The paper, which was written by members of an organization called the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), had been provisionally accepted and posted in abstract form by the journal in January, but was ultimately rejected this Monday (March 1). The editors determined that it contained unsubstantiated claims and violated the journal’s editorial policies.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/frontiers-removes-controversial-ivermectin-paper-pre-publication-68505

[mtls2005]

3 hours ago, Clydesdale said:

No breakthrough required. Apparently the long available and relatively cheap Ivermectin is an effective treatment. 

 

There you go.

 

I don't trust big pharma, scientists, doctors, the media so I'll jump on the interwebs and take medical advice from people I don't know.

 

 

That it comes from someone (a person?) with the handle Clydesdale just reinforces my confidence.

 

 

Worm-free for 35 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HappyExpat57]

3 hours ago, lks7689 said:

Ivermectin was only recently singled out yesterday by both WHO and CDC as a no go due to high risk of poisoning and lack of sufficient data from those optimistic "research". 

Even Merck, ivermectin's manufacturer, states the following:

 

- No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies; 

- No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and; 

- A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

 

You will still have stubborn anti-science, anti-vaccine people argue with you until they are blue in the face for thinking this way.

 

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

[Clydesdale]

4 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

There you go.

 

I don't trust big pharma, scientists, doctors, the media so I'll jump on the interwebs and take medical advice from people I don't know.

 

 

That it comes from someone (a person?) with the handle Clydesdale just reinforces my confidence.

 

 

Worm-free for 35 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It seems Ivermectin has worked for some and I personally know of a case in Thailand where someone recovered from being very sick with covid-19 after taking the drug. I am not giving medical advice: find your own solutions.

[mtls2005]

7 minutes ago, Clydesdale said:

It seems Ivermectin has worked for some

I love the scientific lingo...it's so precise, and repeatable.

 

"It seems" (or the oft-used "apparently") like, magic.

 

"has worked"

 

"for some"

 

And of course, the personal, semi-first-hand "non recommendation"...

 

9 minutes ago, Clydesdale said:

I personally know of a case in Thailand where someone recovered

 

 

10 minutes ago, Clydesdale said:

I am not giving medical advice: find your own solutions.

Rest easy big fella, I won't be taking advice from you.

 

[Clydesdale]

5 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Rest easy big fella, I won't be taking advice from you.

 

Resting easy.

[lks7689]

1 hour ago, samtam said:

 

Ivermectin has been used as a drug for humans for 40 years. The US media is having a field day about use of horse shi8 for humans. And indeed some in the US are getting their Ivermectin from animal medical centres because it is not available in the human dosage form. Clearly taking medicine with dosage sizes designed for a horse is not a good idea for a human being.

 

 

The clinical trials are not on the scale that is recognised by WHO & CDC, but it begs the question: a clinical trial that would meet these criteria can only be carried out by an organisation with the heft and wealth of WHO & CDC or a large pharma like Pfizer, Moderna, AZ J&J etc. Currently they have another solution which they are pushing, albeit without that pesky clinical trial criteria they consider to be so vital, (and hence vaccines are being used "for emergency use" and with CYA exemptions regarding liability).

 

To be clear, I am in favour of vaccines, but I think it is disingenuous to rule out the possibilities of an added benefit from a drug that has been used successfully and without harm on humans.

Malaysia started a trial on ivermectin in june and though still ongoing, the health director general has said so far the results are inconclusive because positive results from test tubes did not yield the same from tests on living organism. And another issue is it require a high dosage to have the desired anti viral effect and the full implications and complications from such is another matter for consideration. Final results should be available in September. 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, samtam said:

Good to hear. It would be nice to have something more definitive. Unfortunately there are too many big money interests involved in not pursuing proper trials. I want all the best available safe treatments used as quickly as possible, so that the world gets out of this mess. Another year of chaotic variations, (treatments, including a vaccine that's ok in country x, but not y, a quarantine that's 21 days in Hong Kong only if you have permanent residency, and self-isolation in UK, but only if you're a UK national, is a tad inconvenient to say the least, when one has been following protocols to the "T", but not safe enough because there are insufficient vaccinations...etc, etc). At some stage, (are we there yet?), tolerance levels will evaporate, in many respects because of economics, (the economic order collapses).

In fact, fluoxamine, a generic and low cost antidepressant is now in a large scale clinical trial to determine its effectiveness against covid-19 symptoms.

How a cheap antidepressant emerged as a promising Covid-19 treatment

In a large, randomized clinical trial conducted with thousands of patients over the past six months, researchers at McMaster University tested eight different Covid-19 treatments against a control group to figure out what works.

One drug stood out: fluvoxamine, an antidepressant that the Food and Drug Administration has already found to be safe and that’s cheap to produce as a generic drug.

These new results follow some promising findings in small-scale trials last year. 

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22619137/fluvoxamine-covid-ivermectin-together-study-mcmaster

 

[Jeffr2]

8 hours ago, lks7689 said:

Malaysia started a trial on ivermectin in june and though still ongoing, the health director general has said so far the results are inconclusive because positive results from test tubes did not yield the same from tests on living organism. And another issue is it require a high dosage to have the desired anti viral effect and the full implications and complications from such is another matter for consideration. Final results should be available in September. 

And in the end, it's been proven ineffective. It's for animals. Not humans.

 

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/23/covid-warning-treatment-ivermectin-fda-mississippi/8244302002/

 

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/08/23/covid-warning-treatment-ivermectin-fda-mississippi/8244302002/

Edited August 30, 2021 by Jeffr2

[cdemundo]

16 hours ago, Clydesdale said:

No breakthrough required. Apparently the long available and relatively cheap Ivermectin is an effective treatment. 

Sure for a Clydesdale, but what about humans?

[FridgeMagnet1]

17 hours ago, VBF said:

Like you I'm in favour of vaccines and science in general. I also agree that we should be leaving no stone unturned in the search for both vaccines and cures. I have had 2 x AZ vaccines defined as  "for emergency use" as have most people of my age (and many younger) here in UK.

Part of the reason they are defined as  "for emergency use" is that the testing WAS carried out, but it was done by short-circuiting the usual administration procedures. If you can, watch this https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000qdzd/panorama-the-race-for-a-vaccine

 

It would seem that a major problem with Ivermectin is the amount of misinformation and conspiracy that abounds on the 'net.

 

I hope (!) this is considered a reputable source  Flawed ivermectin preprint highlights challenges of COVID drug studies and if so, seems to go a good way to explaining the current confusion.

No, the major problem with Ivermectin is that there is no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies.

 

do you understand this?

[FridgeMagnet1]

These Ivermectin loons absolutely terrify me

There is no evidence whatsoever that this thing has any effect on COVID-19.

 

yet look at them here

[mtls2005]

18 hours ago, samtam said:

Unfortunately there are too many big money interests involved in not pursuing proper trials.

 

How many is "too many"? 

 

And who/what are these "interests"?

 

18 hours ago, samtam said:

At some stage, (are we there yet?), tolerance levels will evaporate, in many respects because of economics, (the economic order collapses).

So ivermectin can prevent a collapse of "economic order"?

 

4 hours ago, FridgeMagnet1 said:

These Ivermectin loons absolutely terrify me

They're just like a cult, hopefully if we leave them alone they'll fade away. But they do like to recruit new members. Bring your own Kool-Aid.

 

 

[Danderman123]

23 hours ago, samtam said:

 

Ivermectin has been used as a drug for humans for 40 years. The US media is having a field day about use of horse shi8 for humans. And indeed some in the US are getting their Ivermectin from animal medical centres because it is not available in the human dosage form. Clearly taking medicine with dosage sizes designed for a horse is not a good idea for a human being.

 

 

The clinical trials are not on the scale that is recognised by WHO & CDC, but it begs the question: a clinical trial that would meet these criteria can only be carried out by an organisation with the heft and wealth of WHO & CDC or a large pharma like Pfizer, Moderna, AZ J&J etc. Currently they have another solution which they are pushing, albeit without that pesky clinical trial criteria they consider to be so vital, (and hence vaccines are being used "for emergency use" and with CYA exemptions regarding liability).

 

To be clear, I am in favour of vaccines, but I think it is disingenuous to rule out the possibilities of an added benefit from a drug that has been used successfully and without harm on humans.

You don’t seem to understand how clinical trials work.

 

Yes, there have been large clinical trials for Ivermectin. In fact, the larger and more rigorous the trial, the less Ivermectin works. This reminds me of the Cold Fusion experiments back in the day, where Cold Fusion only worked in crappy labs.

[Danderman123]

3 minutes ago, samtam said:

Do you have the source papers for the clinical trial for Ivermectin's use against Covid 19?

Merck, an ivermectin manufacturer, avers that there is “no meaningful evidence for clinical activity or efficacy in patients with Covid-19.”

[placeholder]

23 hours ago, Clydesdale said:

It seems Ivermectin has worked for some and I personally know of a case in Thailand where someone recovered from being very sick with covid-19 after taking the drug. I am not giving medical advice: find your own solutions.

"Post hoc ergo propter hoc"

Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informal fallacy that states: "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." 

Post hoc is a particularly tempting error because correlation appears to suggest causality. The fallacy lies in a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors potentially responsible for the result that might rule out the connection.^[2]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc}

[Neeranam]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Merck, an ivermectin manufacturer, avers that there is “no meaningful evidence for clinical activity or efficacy in patients with Covid-19.”

They also make billions from the sale of Covid vaccines. 

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

They also make billions from the sale of Covid vaccines. 

Please share with us the name of the vaccine that Merck manufacturers. Or may just stop making things up.

 

In a major setback, Merck to stop developing its two Covid-19 vaccines and focus on therapies

Merck said Monday it will stop developing both of the current formulations of the Covid-19 vaccines the company was working on, citing inadequate immune responses to the shots.

Work will continue on at least one of the vaccines, which is being developed in partnership with the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI), to see if using a different route of administration would improve how effective it is.

The announcement marks a shocking setback for one of the most storied vaccine makers, and will raise tensions around readouts expected soon from other companies, including Johnson & Johnson and the upstart NovaVax.

 

https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/25/in-a-major-setback-merck-to-stop-developing-its-two-covid-19-vaccines-and-focus-on-therapies/

 

[Jeffr2]

16 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

They also make billions from the sale of Covid vaccines. 

And could make billions from other drugs, if they worked.

[mtls2005]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Or may just stop making things up.

ivermectineers are long on "imaginary facts".

 

 

 

 

[Neeranam]

 

Why wouldn't you take invermectin, especially if in a high-risk category? 

Edited August 31, 2021 by Neeranam

[mtls2005]

32 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

 

Why wouldn't you take invermectin, especially if in a high-risk category? 

Medicine-cabinet roulette.

 

 

Why not just take everything?

 

 

 

 

[xr399]

On 6/8/2021 at 10:29 AM, Harry Om said:

 

I'm not a Dr, this is not medical advice, etc etc....

 

But if I run out of my current supply, and I can't get any more, that's probably what I'll do.

 

In theory, it should be identical, but it depends on the source, and may not go through the same rigorous standards of testing. But if it's okay for your dog to take, it's probably okay for you to take.

 

But best to get from a pharmacy if possible, IMO. I'm not sure how hard that is to do in Thailand.

Very easy. Shopee and Lazad have it.

Also many pharmacies 12 pack of 6 mg tabs was something like 800 baht in Kanchanaburi

[Bkk Brian]

Ivermectin: Horse deworming tablets dangerous for humans and not approved COVID-19 treatment

 

After a recent resurgence in several states, health officials are warning residents to be aware of a dangerous of an unauthorized “treatment” for COVID-19 — often being taken with dangerous consequences.

It’s called ivermectin and it’s used to treat and prevent parasites in animals, the Food and Drug Administration explains. The tablets are not FDA approved for treatment of COVID-19 in humans and isn’t even an anti-viral drug — meaning it has no impact on the coronavirus. And because the large-concentration tablets are intended for large animals, these can be treacherous for humans.

 

On Friday, the Mississippi Department of Health was forced to send out a warning to residents about the dangers of the drug after several poisonings.

 

https://kfor.com/news/ivermectin-horse-deworming-tablets-dangerous-for-humans-and-not-approved-covid-19-treatment/

[Rimmer]

Unattributed claim and replies removed

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, samtam said:

Thanks. Seems to confirm that no clinical trials of the sort to which you refer, have been carried out.

If you believe that, I am so sorry for you.

 

The FDA, WHO, AMA and others say not to take Ivermectin for Covid.

 

Some guy on Facebook tells you it’s good stuff.

 

This is a sanity test, please try harder to pass it.

[transam]

On 8/30/2021 at 12:15 PM, Clydesdale said:

It seems Ivermectin has worked for some and I personally know of a case in Thailand where someone recovered from being very sick with covid-19 after taking the drug. I am not giving medical advice: find your own solutions.

......and was seen galloping back home, though he did have the trots when he got there, I hear he is stable now, but hay, at least he ain't saddled with C19...........????

[VBF]

8 hours ago, FridgeMagnet1 said:

No, the major problem with Ivermectin is that there is no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies.

 

do you understand this?

Obviously!  If you'd bothered to read my post to which you replied, I said "It would seem that a major problem with Ivermectin is the amount of misinformation and conspiracy that abounds on the 'net."

Not THE major problem you notice.

 

Misinformation....no scientific basis....same, same.

 

I then posted a link which (hopefully) explains it. If you're going to reply, at least offer the courtesy of reading and understanding before you hit "Quote"

Edited August 31, 2021 by VBF
Spelling

[Old Croc]

CDC_HAN_449.pdf

[Chomper Higgot]

On 8/31/2021 at 12:41 PM, Neeranam said:

 

Why wouldn't you take invermectin, especially if in a high-risk category? 

Because I’m not a lunatic and I get my medical advice from my Doctor.