Efficacy of Ivermectin Debunked in New Controlled Study

[placeholder]

Here's the conclusion of that study:

  In this randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, ivermectin treatment during early illness did not prevent progression to severe disease. The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2789362

 

As a forensic peer reviewer noted, the studies that support Ivermectin are based on shoddy research. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/10/ivermectin-research-problems/620473/

 

A related topic addressed here

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/scicheck-evidence-still-lacking-to-support-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19/

was the bizarre support given by John Campbell to 2 dubious studies that support the use of Ivermectin. Ultimately he withdrew his support of one of them, since it's authors withdrew it due to methodological failures. Still that left one which came from no one else but Dr. Pierre Kory and associates. If you are familiar with the dubious and dishonest history of America's Front Line Doctors, you'll know who he is.

Factcheck asked Campbell to explain his support this dubious work. He didn't reply.

 

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

A related topic addressed here

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/scicheck-evidence-still-lacking-to-support-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19/

was the bizarre support given by John Campbell to 2 dubious studies that support the use of Ivermectin. Ultimately he withdrew his support of one of them, since it's authors withdrew it due to methodological failures. Still that left one which came from no one else but Dr. Pierre Kory and associates. If you are familiar with the dubious and dishonest history of America's Front Line Doctors, you'll know who he is.

Factcheck asked Campbell to explain his support this dubious work. He didn't reply.

With 2.28 million subscribers to his youtube channel John Campbell is making a tidy sum promoting this false belief that it helps prevent/cure Covid

Edited March 16, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[mtls2005]

 

22 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Factcheck asked Campbell

That clown walks like a duck.

 

 

These two say ivermectin works for them...

Edited March 16, 2022 by mtls2005

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

That clown walks like a duck.

 

 

These two say ivermectin works for them...

While there is no good evidence that Ivermectin is effective against Covid, it's unfair to characterize it as somehow being primarily a veterinary medicine.

" For most of this century, some 250 million people have been taking it annually to combat two of the world’s most devastating, disfiguring, debilitating and stigma-inducing diseases, Onchocerciasis and Lymphatic filariasis. Most of the recipients live in remote, rural, desperately under-resourced communities in developing countries and have virtually no access to even the most rudimentary of medical interventions. Moreover, all the treatments have been made available free of charge thanks to the unprecedented drug donation program."

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Edited March 16, 2022 by placeholder

[mtls2005]

26 minutes ago, placeholder said:

While there is no good evidence that Ivermectin is effective against Covid, it's unfair to characterize it as somehow being primarily a veterinary medicine.

Who said "primarily"? I mean other than you.

 

Two legs? Check.

 

Four legs? Double-check.

 

 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, mtls2005 said:

Who said "primarily"? I mean other than you.

 

Two legs? Check.

 

Four legs? Double-check.

 

 

Then why use a photo of horses to debunk claims about it being effective against covid? Its use in veterinary medicine is utterly irrelevant.

[cdemundo]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Then why use a photo of horses to debunk claims about it being effective against covid? Its use in veterinary medicine is utterly irrelevant.

Using the horses was intended to be funny. 

It made me laugh.

In the USA it is apparently mostly sold in in feed stores so that is why it has become associated with veterinary use.

Unfair?, fairness be damned, let's have some laughs.

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, cdemundo said:

Using the horses was intended to be funny. 

It made me laugh.

In the USA it is apparently mostly sold in in feed stores so that is why it has become associated with veterinary use.

Unfair?, fairness be damned, let's have some laughs.

 

It's easy to get cheap laughs. Legitimate ones are harder to come by. If humor is used, at the very least it shouldn't help perpetuate false ideas. Even better if it actually sheds some light on the issue..

[LarrySR]

4 hours ago, cdemundo said:

Using the horses was intended to be funny. 

It made me laugh.

In the USA it is apparently mostly sold in in feed stores so that is why it has become associated with veterinary use.

Unfair?, fairness be damned, let's have some laughs.

 

Exactly. Doctors won't prescribe it so they go to buy the horse stuff at a feed store.