Replies

I've read well over sixty research studies on the efficacy of ivermectin in treatment of Covid-19. Four or five of them report no effect (including the one in The Lancet that was withdrawn because it was based on fake date). The other sixty plus well design research studies indicate a positive efficacy ranging from the high fifty percents to near ninety percent. My qualifications: I have a PhD in biology and spent most of my adult life as a research scientist. Before getting my PhD I spent four years abstracting scientific article in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean for a federal agency. I've read and analyzed a lot of scientific papers in my life. What are your qualifications justifying your opinion?

I familiar with Dr Ahmed Elgazzar’s Egyptian study at Benha University, on the efficacy and safety of the parasitic drug ivermectin in treating Covid-19. It was published on the Research Square website but was pulled when Jack Lawrence, a medical student in London, was among the first to uncover serious concerns about the integrity of the study. It was found to be plagiarized from various sources and had false data. It gave me concern that in the frenzy to find an easy therapy for COVID, clinical studies would also falsify their results.

I give you this article that tells of the Dr Ahmed study:

Ivermectin study results show it to be ineffective:

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/scicheck-ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19/

I give you this summary that gives more confirmation of my thinking that ivermectin is just another snake oil remedy to capitalize on a inexpensive product:

The dubious rise of ivermectin as a Covid-19 treatment, explained:

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22663127/ivermectin-covid-treatments-vaccines-evidence

Finally, this is one commentary about the dosage showing the ignorance of those who are trying to self-medicate after getting their pills from people like Frontline Doctors:

“The human prescription is a tablet that is swallowed. Ivermectin is labeled for a single-use dosage in both humans and animals. Whether treating a person for river blindness or a horse for worms, it’s intended to be given once and not multiple times. It stays active in the body for a length of time. If someone takes ivermectin day after day or week after week, as one might with an anti-viral or antibiotic, the dosage builds up in the body to toxic levels. Even with the human form, if someone takes one dose for 10 days in a row, they end up with 10 times the recommended dose, which can certainly cause toxic effects and overdosing.”

From:

https://news.illinois.edu/view/6367/737643427

Here we go:

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted?s=r

LONG post, but the author digs into many of the studies at that time (November 2021). Interesting writing style.

His conclusions:

* Ivermectin doesn’t reduce mortality in COVID a significant amount (let’s say d > 0.3) in the absence of comorbid parasites: 85-90% confidence
* Parasitic worms are a significant confounder in some ivermectin studies, such that they made them get a positive result even when honest and methodologically sound: 50% confidence
* Fraud and data processing errors are of similar magnitude to p-hacking and methodological problems in explaining bad studies (95% confidence interval for fraud: between >1% and 5% as important as methodological problems; 95% confidence interval for data processing errors: between 5% and 100% as important)
* Probably “Trust Science” is not the right way to reach proponents of pseudoscientific medicine: ???% confidence