It sounds like you are monitoring oxygen saturation with a pulse-oximeter, and that is good. Even a mild case of COVID can be rough. Like a really bad flu. The next few days will probably suck, but you are going to be OK. Call your Doctor or the hospital, keep them apprised and follow their advise. Use the pulse-oximeter a few times a day. If things get worse, go to the hospital.
Do NOT listen to internet doctors. Ivermectin is not proven effective. The last 2 independent Random Controlled Trials showed no benefit.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389
“Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 476 patients, the duration of symptoms was not significantly different for patients who received a 5-day course of ivermectin compared with placebo
Meaning: The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand effects on other clinically relevant outcomes.”
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5
“Ivermectin had no significant effect on preventing hospitalization of patients with COVID-19. Patients who received ivermectin required invasive MVS earlier in their treatment. No significant differences were observed in any of the other secondary outcomes.”
Ivermectin manufactured in South America? Questionable. Ivermectin content should have been evaluated by a first-world laboratory. OTOH, if it was cocaine, you’d be assured of premier quality.
Erroneous conclusion from the study’s own data, and the study itself could have been better.
Reading the abstract of the Argentina study, 5.6% (14/250) of ivermectin recipients required hospitalization, while 8.4% (21/251) of placebo recipients required same. Simple math says it reduced hospitalization by 33%.
Also note the wide standard deviation (SD) in the study participants’ ages (SD=15.5 years on a mean of 42). With a small sample, randomization can still leave differences in comorbidities and age that would skew results. No comorbidity information was included.
The sample groups also explicitly excluded patients who got a positive COVID test and were admitted to hospital, which would skew the study to those least likely to require treatment for the disease. You can see this in the “good news” stat that less than 10% of both groups required hospitalization. Also note that I saw no where in the study details (I READ THEM) that any participant died. So out of 500 people, no deaths - good news if you are within 1 SD of age 42!
Finally, a very interesting item you may have missed is the Exclusion Criteria Number 10 (N*10) was the use of Ivermectin within the previous 7 days - that number was 12,356 people of the 22,533 patients assessed for eligibility. That means more than 50% of patients were already taking Ivermectin - I guess Argentina didn’t get the Fauci/WHO memo.
Ah, but the devil is in the details. I would imagine that when a drug company (which stands to make a lot of money from a vaccine), gives money to the doctors conducting the drug trial for ivermectin, an unfavorable outcome is to be expected.-
From the JAMA article, down at the bottom-
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr López-Medina reported receiving grants from Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen and personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur during the conduct of the study. Dr López reported receiving grants from Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen and personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur during the conduct of the study. Dr Oñate reported receiving grants from Janssen and personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Gilead outside the submitted work. Dr Torres reported receiving nonfinancial support from Tecnoquímicas unrelated to this project during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.