So, after folks started using Ivermectin, doctors started seeing that it was having beneficial effects on cancer patients.
Enter a video floating around of a doctor explaining that it would appear that ‘parasitic clusters’ are being misdiagnosed as ‘tumors’. Hence, the anti-parasitic effects of Ivermectin are working to rid folks of these ‘clusters’(tumors).
Of course, Big Pharma would fight to the death, any attempt at research into this hypothesis as it would mean no more chemotherapy drugs for many.
Yeah, but you have to inject Drano into your body before that hydro stuff works. I’m pretty sure CDC gave us the heads up on this stuff three years ago.
This “study” is extremely weak, at best. It is a retroactive look at records in a database. Actual details of patient care are lacking.
Because of the nature of statistics, an analysis which finds that A correlates with B is actually a spurious result. “Spurious” means it isn’t real.
Physicians who are not trained in research theory and methodology love to do these kinds of studies, as it does not involve actually designing a rigorous controlled study. All they have to do is comb through databases and hand over the numbers to the statistician to crunch. If the statistician finds a correlation between any two variables in the numbers, the physician has something to publish. And these studies are just about worthless.
Only a randomized clinical trial (RCT) can demonstrate a real cause-and-effect relationship. In the drug development world, that clinical trial typically does not happen until the candidate drug has been shown to have therapeutic effect in animals, although someone might be able to ethically justify doing a trial of HCQ in humans. The Medical Xpress article even says this.
Given that the development of NAFLD only occurs in 1.86% of RA patients, the RCT would have to enroll a large number of participants.
There are other issues with this retrospective crunching of numbers from a registry, as well. For example, only 399 people out of 41,791 were recorded as having developed NAFLD. Obesity, NSAID use, and prednisolone use were all associated with development of NAFLD. These are probably more valid associations than the association of HCQ with decrease of NAFLD. This is because 399 NAFLD patients were being compared against a huge background of 41,392 patients who did not develop NAFLD. But the converse, trying to compare 41,392 patients who did not develop NAFLD against a background of 399 who did is problematic.
My VA doc is gonna flip.
this would be especially interesting if hcq could reduce fatty liver disease in people who did not have rheumatoid arthritus. Most— but not all— people with pot bellies have some kind of fatty liver disease.