[HN Gopher] Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Preven...
___________________________________________________________________
Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent Covid-19
Author : _Microft
Score : 26 points
Date : 2021-09-13 18:33 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.fda.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.fda.gov)
| [deleted]
| kazinator wrote:
| Where did this cockamamie idea originate of using an
| antiparasitic product for a viral infection?
|
| The National Geographic has a summary here:
|
| https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/the-shaky...
|
| Under "What triggered the ivermectin frenzy".
|
| Firefox Reader Mode vanquishes the nag dialog.
| jpadkins wrote:
| pretty biased article. Didn't cite the many doctors who are
| using it in their treatment regimen, Japan health minister's
| endorsement, or the population studies in India and Africa that
| show pretty compelling evidence. Also they didn't cover the
| early treatment vs. late stage when discussing the study
| results (ivermectin doesn't help people with high viral load
| already in the ICU, but apparently does help people who just
| got the virus).
| skuhn wrote:
| The person in Japan who endorsed ivermectin is not a
| government minister. [1]
|
| If you're referring to the Elgazzar paper from Egypt (as the
| "population studies in [..] Africa"), then it has been
| withdrawn from pre-print distribution. [2]
|
| And, in general, the studies that have been performed are not
| sufficient to support ivermectin use among the general public
| at this time. [3]
|
| [1] https://factcheck.afp.com/http%253A%252F%252Fdoc.afp.com%
| 252...
|
| [2] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-
| study-s...
|
| [3] https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/ivermectin-
| still-...
| hitpointdrew wrote:
| The governments of Japan and India disagree.
| ulfw wrote:
| No they wouldn't.
|
| https://today.rtl.lu/news/fact-check/a/1783705.html
| bob229 wrote:
| It's pretty unlikely that invermectin has any protective effect
| but also why would any listen to anything a government agency
| says when they lie repeatedly and transparently
| DebtDeflation wrote:
| It seems like just yesterday the people who are now pushing
| Ivermectin as the miracle cure were pushing Hydrochloroquine. You
| don't hear much about that from them any more. What happened?
| panny wrote:
| HCQ is still considered effective for early treatment, but
| Ivermectin appears effective in later stages of treatment. You
| can read all the peer reviewed science for yourself at
| c19ivermectin.com and c19hcq.com
|
| A good infograph of the two are on the front pages if you cycle
| through the images, but I'll link them here,
|
| ivm: https://c19ivermectin.com/plot/ispae2.png
|
| hcq: https://c19hcq.com/plot/spae2.png
|
| You can see that in early stage treatment HCQ is effective, but
| not as much in later stage treatments. Also, Ivermectin doesn't
| have side effects as strong as HCQ from what I understand.
| TheFreim wrote:
| > Ivermectin tablets are approved by the FDA to treat people with
| intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis, two conditions
| caused by parasitic worms. In addition, some topical forms of
| ivermectin are approved to treat external parasites like head
| lice and for skin conditions such as rosacea.
|
| I wish people would stop making the claim that it's "just a horse
| dewormer" when even the FDA says it has _some_ uses in humans.
| Whether or not it is effective against COVID19 is a valid issue,
| but trying to portray the whole drug as something else just makes
| your opponents jump to conclusions when they find it does
| actually work in certain situations /diseases.
| p_l wrote:
| The big problem is that the pills people are obtaining _are_ _"
| just a horse dewormer"_. The specification is different, the
| dosages are different, and the active ingredients differ (drug
| delivery is frighteningly complex area).
|
| Meanwhile people made enough run on ivermectin-based _horse
| dewormer_ that people had trouble getting it for livestock.
| jbotz wrote:
| > the dosages are different, and the active ingredients
| differ
|
| Neither the dosages nor the active ingredients are different.
| Both for humans and for animals, the recommended dose of
| Ivermectin to treat parasites is 200 micrograms per kilogram
| of body weight. The "active ingredients" are Ivermectin,
| period.
|
| I have a bottle of injectable Ivermectin intended for cattle
| here, and it says it's pure Ivermectin in propylene glycol
| (typical carrier for injectables even for humans). I got it
| to treat Histomoniasis in our turkeys, which is btw an off-
| label use, because officially Ivermectin is not supposed to
| be effective against protozoa, but Histomoniasis is almost
| 100% fatal in turkeys and I haven't lost one since starting
| to give them Ivermectin as soon as I notice they have it.
| I've found that if I give them 600 micrograms/kg body weight
| every other day 3 times, they recover fully. What does this
| have to do with Covid? Only that a) Ivermectin works for some
| things other than those for which it's officially "blessed",
| b) at least in turkeys a much larger than normal dose doesn't
| seem to have any ill effects. As for the dose, I decided that
| it was probably safe for our turkeys because I read a paper
| where they gave that dosage to humans to combat malaria by
| making those humans lethally toxic to the mosquitos. The
| paper said the dose was "well tolerated". If they can do that
| to their human patients I can do it with my turkeys.
|
| I'm not planning to inject myself with my veterinary
| Ivermectin even if I did come down with Covid... because I
| agree that so far the evidence that it's helpful isn't very
| strong. But I also think that this article is quite
| laughable... basically it says "Why You shouldn't use
| Ivermectin to treat or prevent Covid: because, uh... because
| we haven't said it's OK to do so." Sorry CDC, but your
| credibility just isn't /that/ high. And going to a hospital
| for /anything/ is also really dangerous... almost certainly
| more so than a couple of doses of Ivermectin.
| undersuit wrote:
| I call horse paste eaters horse paste eaters, those actually
| getting prescribed Ivermectin by their doctors aren't the ones
| calling poison control.
| aaron695 wrote:
| > when even the FDA says it has some uses in humans.
|
| Billions of dosages have been used by humans. 250 million
| people take it annually, and that's still to low.
|
| It's a critical part of the developing world.
|
| And once again the vile Left have shown their colors and proved
| all they care about is hurting people. Hurt the Rich, hurt the
| Republicans, hurt the low IQ'ed.
|
| While stigmatising a vital drug used by the real poor. The Left
| are awful human beings to treat the poor so badly, we should be
| outraged.
|
| Ivermectin is a very safe drug. Part of the reason some call it
| a super drug is you can use in with low amounts of training in
| developing countries. And when used on livestock it's very safe
| for consumption compared to alternatives. Its not by numbers
| used by rich peoples horses, the Left has weaponized this idea.
|
| This is the fake Polio vaccines all over again.
| habanany wrote:
| https://youtu.be/RAJrgCig3o8
| RobLach wrote:
| Why is anyone seriously talking about Ivermectin when the Moderna
| vaccine is 96%+ effective at preventing symptoms that require
| hospitalization, and 99%+ at preventing death?
|
| Covid-19 prevention and treatment is basically a solved problem.
|
| My limited understanding of other's reality suggests to me that
| people have connected deeply with a community (through identity
| poltics or... fun) that is no longer relevant in a post-covid
| world leading towards a mania where vaccines are somehow bad is
| the only thing that makes sense.
| Cycl0ps wrote:
| Would it be unethical to start dosing Ivermectin with the Pfizer
| vaccine? Sort of like hiding your dog's pills in a rolled up
| piece of ham. The anti-vaxxers get to think they pulled one over
| on "them" (whoever that may be this week) and I get to leave the
| country again. Everyone wins!
| jjeaff wrote:
| There are some studies indicating that ivermectin may be helpful
| in treating covid. But those studies are small, not statistically
| strong, and not all necessarily trustworthy. There are a few
| larger, more mainstream studies that don't look too promising.
| But ivermectin is still a candidate and deserves further study
| (and there are larger studies underway).
|
| All that being said, this whole situation is basically an
| amplification of a problem that we already have in the US, which
| is the ability of pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly
| to the public. Social media and right wing news outlets are
| basically giving medical treatment recommendations to the public
| and at best, this information is being delivered for the most
| part by fringe doctors without direct expertise in treating
| respiratory diseases and without any knowledge of the individuals
| they are mass suggesting receive this treatment.
|
| This talking directly to the public about Rx only treatment is
| what has led to people self medicating with the livestock version
| of the drug.
| jhallenworld wrote:
| This Ivermectin study has all the same problems you mentioned:
|
| https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/articles/effects-of-...
|
| But then I don't know why you would pick one bad study over
| another to make your decisions, so I say talk about it. I bring
| this up specifically because of fears about vaccines and
| sterility.
| logicalmonster wrote:
| Sick people trying the human doses of Ivermectin should be the
| easiest risk-management decision in the history of humanity.
|
| You have a drug that is safe in human doses, cheap, and reported
| to have a positive effect. You lose nothing by trying it and
| gaining more data.
| browningstreet wrote:
| Also, Merck itself still doesn't recommend it, citing:
|
| "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."
|
| https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use...
|
| Cynically, you could say they should be motivated to support this
| trend, as it would be more $ for them. But that hasn't happened
| yet.
| _-david-_ wrote:
| Merck is going to receive money ($1.2 billion) from the
| government for an alternative treatment. There are generics of
| Ivermectin so even if it does work Merck would want to push
| their new drug instead of Ivermectin.
|
| If this was not related to covid nobody here would be trusting
| Merck due to this conflict of interest.
|
| https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-13 23:02 UTC)