Ivermectin not effective in treating Covid-19, joint Mahidol-Oxford study shows

[JBChiangRai]

11 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19

"The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals."

...

Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19.

...

There’s a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay to take large doses of ivermectin. It is not okay."

 

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

 

 

Ivermectin through a series of clinical trials has been shown to have a negligible efficacy on treating Covid.

 

There have been no clinical trials that prove or disprove its efficacy in preventing Covid.  It's better not to draw a conclusion without scientific evidence, so we simply cannot say it does or doesn't work in preventing Covid.

[Bkk Brian]

2 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

Ivermectin through a series of clinical trials has been shown to have a negligible efficacy on treating Covid.

 

There have been no clinical trials that prove or disprove its efficacy in preventing Covid.  It's better not to draw a conclusion without scientific evidence, so we simply cannot say it does or doesn't work in preventing Covid.

There have been plenty of clinical trials to evaluate whether Ivermectin can help in preventing covid. Aside from fraudulent trials or extremely bias ones, no evidence has yet been found it helps in any way.

 

Ivermectin for the prevention of COVID-19: addressing potential bias and medical fraud

Results
Four studies were included in the meta-analysis. One was rated as being potentially fraudulent, two as having a high risk of bias and one as having some concerns for bias. Ivermectin did not have a significant effect on preventing RT–PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection. Ivermectin had a significant effect on preventing symptomatic COVID-19 infection in one trial with some concerns of bias, but this result was based on post hoc analysis of a multi-arm study.

https://academic.oup.com/jac/article/77/5/1413/6534008

 

There remains no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating or preventing COVID-19 infection, state the authors of an updated Cochrane Review(link is external)(opens in a new tab), which now contains 11 trials across 3409 people.

https://www.lstmed.ac.uk/news-events/news/ivermectin-for-covid-19-review-update-11-trials-and-no-evidence-of-benefit-shown

 

We found no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. The evidence base improved slightly in this update, but is still limited.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD015017/INFECTN_ivermectin-preventing-and-treating-covid-19

 

[JBChiangRai]

2 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

Ivermectin through a series of clinical trials has been shown to have a negligible efficacy on treating Covid.

 

There have been no clinical trials that prove or disprove its efficacy in preventing Covid.  It's better not to draw a conclusion without scientific evidence, so we simply cannot say it does or doesn't work in preventing Covid.

 

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

There have been plenty of clinical trials to evaluate whether Ivermectin can help in preventing covid. Aside from fraudulent trials or extremely bias ones, no evidence has yet been found it helps in any way.

 

Ivermectin for the prevention of COVID-19: addressing potential bias and medical fraud

Results
Four studies were included in the meta-analysis. One was rated as being potentially fraudulent, two as having a high risk of bias and one as having some concerns for bias. Ivermectin did not have a significant effect on preventing RT–PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection. Ivermectin had a significant effect on preventing symptomatic COVID-19 infection in one trial with some concerns of bias, but this result was based on post hoc analysis of a multi-arm study.

https://academic.oup.com/jac/article/77/5/1413/6534008

 

There remains no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating or preventing COVID-19 infection, state the authors of an updated Cochrane Review(link is external)(opens in a new tab), which now contains 11 trials across 3409 people.

https://www.lstmed.ac.uk/news-events/news/ivermectin-for-covid-19-review-update-11-trials-and-no-evidence-of-benefit-shown

 

We found no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. The evidence base improved slightly in this update, but is still limited.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD015017/INFECTN_ivermectin-preventing-and-treating-covid-19

 

 

I discounted the clinical trials that claimed to prove Ivermectin effective in preventing Covid because the scientific community found them flawed.

 

One of your references stated "No study investigated ivermectin for prevention of infection or compared ivermectin to an intervention with proven efficacy"

 

The cochrane reference states they simply reviewed existing trialsto prevent or treat COVID-19and found no evidence to support Ivermectin.  I submit there have been NO trials to test for Ivermectin as a prophylaxis as one of your references confirmed.

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

 

I discounted the clinical trials that claimed to prove Ivermectin effective in preventing Covid because the scientific community found them flawed.

 

One of your references stated "No study investigated ivermectin for prevention of infection or compared ivermectin to an intervention with proven efficacy"

 

The cochrane reference states they simply reviewed existing trialsto prevent or treat COVID-19and found no evidence to support Ivermectin.  I submit there have been NO trials to test for Ivermectin as a prophylaxis as one of your references confirmed.

Well you claimed:

 

"There have been no clinical trials that prove or disprove its efficacy in preventing Covid"

 

And that is simply untrue

 

[JBChiangRai]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Well you claimed:

 

"There have been no clinical trials that prove or disprove its efficacy in preventing Covid"

 

And that is simply untrue

 

 

That statement is true.  There have been NO clinical trials that prove or disprove it's efficacy in preventing Covid.

 

There are clinical trials that prove nothing.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

26 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I submit there have been NO trials to test for Ivermectin as a prophylaxis as one of your references confirmed.

 

So you're talking about whether there have been any RCTs that have shown ivermectin has any value in preventing people from becoming infected with the coronavirus -- as opposed to clearly having been shown to have no value in treating COVID disease?

 

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

That statement is true.  There have been NO clinical trials that prove or disprove it's efficacy in preventing Covid.

 

There are clinical trials that prove nothing.

To the best of our knowledge, this was the first large, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial to determine the safety and efficacy of ivermectin for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 in the same outpatient setting. A high dose of ivermectin (400–600 µg/kg/d) for 3 days did not show a significant benefit for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219629/

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

To the best of our knowledge, this was the first large, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial to determine the safety and efficacy of ivermectin for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 in the same outpatient setting. A high dose of ivermectin (400–600 µg/kg/d) for 3 days did not show a significant benefit for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219629/

 

So that's an interesting Thai study...and it seems as though they ran two different studies within the same study -- one on preventing COVID infection, and the other on treating confirmed COVID infection.

 

At the outset of the study, to get into the prevention part of the study, participants had to have a negative RT-PCR test for COVID, to ensure they weren't already infected.

 

"The primary outcome of the prevention study was the proportion of participants with a positive RT-PCR within 14 days after enrollment among those with a negative RT-PCR result at enrollment in the mITT population."

 

"Participants in the prevention study were instructed to collect an NP swab for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen ... on Day 14 and whenever they developed new symptoms suggestive of COVID-19."

 

"A high dose of ivermectin (400–600 µg/kg/d) for 3 days did not show a significant benefit for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection."

 

[JBChiangRai]

50 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

To the best of our knowledge, this was the first large, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial to determine the safety and efficacy of ivermectin for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 in the same outpatient setting. A high dose of ivermectin (400–600 µg/kg/d) for 3 days did not show a significant benefit for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219629/

 

I stand corrected, my research did not find that study.

[PremiumLane]

On 2/24/2023 at 10:28 AM, samuttodd said:

Um hmm,  worked for me without giving me a Heart attack or Myocarditits, or a stroke, or even an embolism. 

 

 

Ahh yes, personal anecdotes, that is always high up in the hierarchy of scientific evidence. And you know if we ask for evidence of all these heart attacks, myocarditis and strokes you will fold like a cheap suit, or link to debunked studies. 

[PremiumLane]

A great guide, with link and sources that debunks the bs that Ivermectin works for Covid

 

https://onepagericu.com/blog/debunking-ivermectin-a-complete-guide

 

[PremiumLane]

From October 21, 2022 study, Effect of Ivermectin vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19
A Randomized Clinical Trial

 

In this double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial conducted in the US during a period of Delta and Omicron variant predominance, and that included 1591 adult outpatients with COVID-19, the posterior probability of improvement in time to recovery in those treated with ivermectin vs placebo had a hazard ratio of 1.07, with a posterior probability of benefit of .91. This did not meet the prespecified threshold of posterior probability greater than .95.

[eisfeld]

2 minutes ago, positivevibes said:

Doctors are free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID-19, a lawyer representing the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said this week.

“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

 

They are also free to prescribe water to treat COVID-19. Doesn't mean it makes sense.

[Bobthegimp]

Then why withhold Ivermectin from people? 

 

The injections have turned out to be a sick joke, the proof of which is the pudding.  Booster uptake is less than 3 percent in the U.S.  At best, it is useless. No need to rattle on about excess deaths because that problem is self limiting.  

 

Please, all of you who took the shots, continue getting boosted.  Boost long, deep, and often. Let the terror of a common cold course through your spirit.  Be sure to inject your children first, and often, because children have always had heart attacks whilst playing in the schoolyard. 

 

Most importantly, leave the rest of us the hell alone.  I'm still waiting for my winter of death.  My guess is that it will come at the hands of a Thai motorist. 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

14 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

Then why withhold Ivermectin from people? 

 

The injections have turned out to be a sick joke, the proof of which is the pudding.  Booster uptake is less than 3 percent in the U.S.  At best, it is useless. No need to rattle on about excess deaths because that problem is self limiting.  

 

Please, all of you who took the shots, continue getting boosted.  Boost long, deep, and often. Let the terror of a common cold course through your spirit.  Be sure to inject your children first, and often, because children have always had heart attacks whilst playing in the schoolyard. 

 

Most importantly, leave the rest of us the hell alone.  I'm still waiting for my winter of death.  My guess is that it will come at the hands of a Thai motorist. 

 

 

Paranoia set in Bob

[KanchanaburiGuy]

Anecdotal Evidence:

 

I have been taking one or two "doses" of the enclosed treatment every day since I returned to Thailand, 35 months ago. I have never had Covid.

 

I pay roughly 50 baht for 12 "doses."

 

The "proof" that my treatment worked for ME......

...Is exactly the same as the "proof" that Ivermectin users have......

...that their treatment worked for THEM.

 

I repeat: I have never had Covid.

 

Such is the value of "Anecdotal Evidence."

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by KanchanaburiGuy

[eisfeld]

2 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Paranoia set in Bob

 

He's just a member of the Bob Troll Club and trying to stir things up. Not really worth replying.

[DudleySquat]

On 2/24/2023 at 10:13 AM, webfact said:

The study that was published on the peer-reviewed eLife medical journal found that high doses of the drug ivermectin, controversially recommended by some high-profile political and media figures during the pandemic, is ineffective at treating the virus.

 

High-doses. There is your nugget. Who was taking high doses? 

 

Another article is maligning one of the safest drugs in the world, according to the WHO. 

 

Oh, that reminds me to take some Ivermectin. 

 

And a note: Ivermectin is back on Pharmacy shelves. I wonder why they ever removed it in the first place. 

[ozimoron]

Just now, DudleySquat said:

 

High-doses. There is your nugget. Who was taking high doses? 

 

Another article is maligning one of the safest drugs in the world, according to the WHO. 

 

Oh, that reminds me to take some Ivermectin. 

 

And a note: Ivermectin is back on Pharmacy shelves. I wonder why they ever removed it in the first place. 

 

Because it's ineffective

 

High-dose ivermectin was safe but did not show efficacy to reduce viral load.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8734085/

[ozimoron]

Higher ivermectin dose, longer duration still futile for COVID, trial finds

 

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/higher-ivermectin-dose-longer-duration-still-futile-covid-trial-finds

[DudleySquat]

We have been lied to for the past 4 years. Why should I believe any of these studies? 

[BritManToo]

On 2/24/2023 at 10:13 AM, webfact said:

The study that was published on the peer-reviewed eLife medical journal found that high doses of the drug ivermectin, controversially recommended by some high-profile political and media figures during the pandemic, is ineffective at treating the virus.

A bit like the masks and vaccines then!

[DudleySquat]

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

A bit like the masks and vaccines then!

Exactly. I have no more trust in doctors here or anywhere else. 

 

This entire thread is designed to make Ivermectin look unsafe. I call bull <deleted> and shenanigans.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

A bit like the masks and vaccines then!

 

Disinformation BS

[DudleySquat]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

Disinformation BS

What is disinformation? It seems to me, Sir, that you were quick on the draw. 

 

What is your agenda?

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, DudleySquat said:

What is disinformation? It seems to me, Sir, that you were quick on the draw. 

 

What is your agenda?

 

My agenda is calling out lies about masks and covid vaccines.

[DudleySquat]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

My agenda is calling out lies about masks and covid vaccines.

 

Be specific if you can. 

[ozimoron]

Just now, DudleySquat said:

 

Be specific if you can. 

 

That has been done for the past 3 years on this board. Take your crap elsewhere.

[DudleySquat]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

That has been done for the past 3 years on this board. Take your crap elsewhere.

 

You are afraid to debate me. I understand.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, DudleySquat said:

 

You are afraid to debate me. I understand.

 

It's all been done and countless links to evidence provided to prove that you are trolling or spreading misinformation. I'm not going to go beyond calling out that misinformation. It's been litigated to death. Enough of your QANON garbage.