Ivermectin: How false science created a Covid 'miracle' drug

[Jilly_in_VA]

For some years ivermectin has been a vital anti-parasitic medicine used to treat humans and animals.

But during the pandemic there has been a clamour from some proponents for using the drug for something else - to fight Covid and prevent deaths.

The health authorities in the US, UK and EU have found there is insufficient evidence for using the drug against Covid, but thousands of supporters, many of them anti-vaccine activists, have continued to vigorously campaign for its use.

Members of social media groups swap tips on getting hold of the drug, even advocating the versions used for animals.

The hype around ivermectin - based on the strength of belief in the research - has driven large numbers of people around the world to use it.

Campaigners for the drug point to a number of scientific studies and often claim this evidence is being ignored or covered up. But a review by a group of independent scientists has cast serious doubt on that body of research.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58170809

[budkin]

1. It works! I saw on Facebook! /s

[Jilly_in_VA]

6. Well when you get sick

just go see Dr. Facebook and quit cluttering up the ER!

[budkin]

10. Did you miss both my sarcasm tags?

[Jilly_in_VA]

14. Not at all

That's why my smilie was the guitar guy. I guess you missed that.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

2. I wonder if the NIH is going to get around to taking this article off their website now

If you're wondering how so many 'nut jobs' have this crazy idea about ivermectin ... you see, looking this sort of thing over falls under what they call 'their own research'.

They see this stuff on a US Government website, and they don't really understand it ... but they THINK they do.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8203399/

The mechanisms of action of Ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2: An evidence-based clinical review article

This evidence-based review article aims to discuss the mechanism of action of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 and summarizing the available literature over the years. A schematic of the key cellular and biomolecular interactions between Ivermectin, host cell, and SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 pathogenesis and prevention of complications have been proposed.

(snip)

As per data available on 16 May 2021, 100% of 36 early treatment and prophylaxis studies report positive effects (96% of all 55 studies). Of these, 26 studies show statistically significant improvements in isolation. Random effects meta-analysis with pooled effects using the most serious outcome reported 79% and 85% improvement for early treatment and prophylaxis respectively (RR 0.21 [0.11–0.37] and 0.15 [0.09–0.25]).

(snip)

Statistically significant improvements were seen for mortality, ventilation, hospitalization, cases, and viral clearance. 100% of the 17 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) for early treatment and prophylaxis report positive effects, with an estimated improvement of 73% and 83% respectively (RR 0.27 [0.18–0.41] and 0.17 [0.05–0.61]), and 93% of all 28 RCTs.

The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive for the 55 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 23 trillion (p?=?0.000000000000043). The consistency of positive results across a wide variety of cases has been remarkable. It is extremely unlikely that the observed results could have occurred by chance [8].

[ProfessorGAC]

4. That Last Paragraph Is A Red Flag!

No scientist worth a darn would include the probability of that p value except to reinforce a preexisting agenda.
There is no way the data actually supports a 1 in 23 trillion chance of error.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

5. I really hope NIH takes that down, it gets cited all over Cult45 fantasy world (nt)

[Hav]

9. Well, it obivously turned out to be bs

It's funny that this review article emphasized how low the probability was that all these positive results happened by chance when in fact the reason was simply data tampering, fraud and poor studies.

[NickB79]

12. A good example of a metastudy gone haywire

https://www.sciencealert.com/meta-studies-like-those-on-ivermectin-promote-poorly-done-research-scientists-argue

Compiling a bunch of bad studies just creates a bad metastudy.

[Solly Mack]

3. All these so-called "freedom" fighters and "patriots" are nothing more than fear driven

cowards.

They yell about everyone else being afraid or living in fear but that's pure projection.

It's intelligent to fear a deadly disease. It's intelligent to mitigate the devastation of a deadly disease through vaccines and other measures that can cut down on transmission - thereby reducing the number of deaths and any permanent disabilities.

It's whistling past the graveyard to embrace alternative measures that have nothing to do with combating a deadly disease but only serve to make the coward feel like they are being brave and to feel better about their ignorance.

They tell themselves they are "doing something" but they are doing nothing more than causing harm.

Their fear and their ignorance endangers everyone else.

They're not brave. They're not preserving freedom. They're not helping themselves or anyone else.

They are just plain stupid.

[abqtommy]

7. It's a sad commentary on the human race that some unethical people are

making lots of money off the stupid cultists who are willing to choose to die. That's
how you thin your own herd.

[Hav]

8. Great article. Bookmarked as Ivermectin will likely remain a topic

with repeated references to these same studies and that quack Kory who has a direct financial interest to push his Ivermectin treatment.

[andym]

11. Here was my explanation: misunderstanding preliminary scientific results

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215800393

[LetMyPeopleVote]

13. Major study of Ivermectin, the anti-vaccine crowd's latest COVID drug, finds 'no effect whatsoever'

The RWNJ sites are really pushing this quack cure. This medicine is for horse deworming

Link to tweet

Ivermectin, the latest supposed treatment for COVID-19 being touted by anti-vaccination groups, had “no effect whatsoever” on the disease, according to a large patient study.

That’s the conclusion of the Together Trial, which has subjected several purported nonvaccine treatments for COVID-19 to carefully designed clinical testing. The trial is supervised by McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada, and conducted in Brazil.....

Among the 1,500 patients in the study, he said, Ivermectin showed “no effect whatsoever” on the trial’s outcome goals — whether patients required extended observation in the emergency room or hospitalization.

“In our specific trial,” he said, “we do not see the treatment benefit that a lot of the advocates believe should have been” seen.....

The findings on Ivermectin are yet another blow for advocates promoting the drug as a magic bullet against COVID-19. Ivermectin was developed as a treatment for parasitical diseases, mostly for veterinarians, though it’s also used against some human parasites.

The science is clear and this drug does not work in the real world despite the crap claims of the RWNJs