The Ivermectin discussion

You'd think that would be definitive, yet it turns out that almost every study on that list has issues, it's 30 tweets long, so grab a cup of tea.

And just digging in a little bit to the website hosting the studies itself and it looks like there's a whole web of misinformation and crackpot remedies behind it.

This Twitter feed is a perfect example of what I mentioned earlier - 'flooding the zone with sh*t' as a disinformation tactic.

The Twitter feed brings up lots of alleged Covid treatments in quick order: Aspirin, Niclosamide, Melatonin, Ivermectin, Vitamin D, Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, along with claims that masks are useless, paranoia about information suppression (while posting this very 'information' on flipping Twitter..), all your familiar conspiracy BS.

It also mentions scientific studies, to give itself an air of legitimacy and competence, while deliberately misrepresenting the content of the same studies.

a) That website is part of a disinformation ring of various treatments and conspiracies, no professionals involved

b) The person who was checking all the studies is an epidemiologist, which is exactly the type of professional you want to review those studies

But sure, if you want to go ahead and analyse and show where it's wrong, be our guest.

You've lost me, most of the studies linked aren't full trials or aren't proclaiming the efficacy of Invermectin, the person who collated them took small parts of data from each one to try and support the narrative they're trying to push, I doubt the authors know they're being used this way.

Also meanwhile...someone is lying and it seems rolling stone is spreading misinformation. I'm sure this correction will gain widespread coverage, right?

https://nhssequoyah.com/

Without the requisite regulatory approval there is a very strong risk of quackery and these people need to go from claiming to proving. More papers, interviews, YouTube videos or just shouting will not do that.

One key goal of creating all this noise and the paranoia talk of suppressed information is to distract from obvious, common sense questions.

When you use Ivermectin as a dewormer, the chemical mechanisms that make it effective as a dewormer are known in detail, and well documented.

When it comes to the use of Ivermectin as an antiviral for SARS-COV-2, there are not even basic ideas of how it is supposed to work on a chemical level, much less any studies that provide detail of the exact mechanisms.

Like I said, lots and lots of noise, to distract from asking basic questions of how it is supposed to be effective with SARS-COV-2.

Bringing up effectiveness for a fundamentally different virus that is transmitted via insect bites is not relevant - except when the goal is to create a distraction.

The fact that all of your links are not leading to the studies you mention, but to just one that describes - as brought up 100 times before - that Ivermectin inhibits SARS-COV-2 viral replication in vitro - when used in doses 100x as high as safe in human use, without explaining the chemical mechanism of how it can work as antiviral in humans, makes my point.

After reading this, I have to check road traffic signals. Red might be green by now, not even mentioning orange one..

Covid is an RNA virus, the link beside that is covid specific.

I'm neither for nor against ivermectin btw, if somebody says drinking petrol helps, I couldn't give a fiddlers, let them try it.

I think it's a bit disingenuous to suggest there is not even a basic idea of how it would work, a quick googling of the mechanism shows at least a few potential mechanisms. Maybe you're looking for more detailed chemical formulas or something, but if I found that I wouldn't even know what I'm looking at.

It's a human drug, with known safe human doses, if I had some handy when I get covid, would I take it? Sure. Why wouldn't you? Do you have a mechanism for how it could hurt?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8203399/

moot!

You're seeing what you want to see here.

You said that being on this list is proof that ivermectin works.

Logically then, being taken off this list must mean the opposite, ie that those drugs don't work. Right?

But they've removed atenolol, which millions of people take for blood pressure. They've removed ethinylestradiol and norethisterone, a common birth control.

These drugs haven't stopped working, they just don't need to control the price anymore.

Conversely, this isn't evidence that ivermectin works, it just means that the Indian government doesn't want to be paying through the nose for it.

It works against parasites - proven.

People are buying it hoping it works against covid - which in unproven.

But which pushes up demand.

To claim its place on the list is proof it works against covid is utterly without foundation from what you have posted so far.

Ah cool So if your diet is good you have little to fear from Covid. If not and your diet is **** take quercetin vit d vit c zinc and you will be fine.

The article lists the essential medicines added and I have copied and pasted this from the article.

"Ivermectin (anti-parasitic)"

Its has been on the WHO list of essential meds for years before Covid for that reason. Seems important to ensure in India it is still available for that proven purpose.

"Further validation may be required to confirm a direct, causal link between diet and COVID-19 illness severity"

You could probably do a survey that smart phone users are less likely to end up with severe illness, or Xbox & PS users or people who vape... basically when you take a trend that mainly favors young people you will see a less likely severe covid outcome. Did you know that people who witnessed the moon landings are more prone to severe covid outcome than those who witnessed 9/11?