Covid-19: MedinCell Publishes an Extensive Ivermectin Safety Expert Analysis

Yahoo Finance ^

[SeekAndFind]

No safety concern is anticipated that would prevent health authorities from assessing the use of Ivermectin against Covid-19 as a new indication

The expert review written by a prominent toxicologist is an assessment of ivermectin medical safety profile

It is based on an extensive analysis of over 350 articles plus clearly identified and accessible web sources

The analysis will be submitted shortly by the author for peer review to an internationally acknowledged journal

MedinCell is making this review available immediately at www.medincell.com/ivermectin

"Publications over the last few months show a significant body of clinical data and scientific knowledge supporting the efficacy of ivermectin at therapeutic dose against Covid-19, for both curative and prophylactic purpose", says Christophe Douat, CEO of MedinCell.

"Safety is also critical to decide on the approval and use of a drug. An exhaustive analysis of existing ivermectin medical safety scientific literature was missing. MedinCell mandated its international toxicology expert to conduct this analysis to contribute to the global momentum to assess the use of ivermectin to fight the Covid-19 pandemic."

"The conclusion of the expert analysis is clear: no safety concern is anticipated that would prevent health authorities from assessing the use of Ivermectin against Covid-19 as a new indication."

The analysis has been performed by Pr. Jacques Descotes^*, MD, PharmD, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Claude Bernard University of Lyon (France), a world-known toxicologist with a 40-year track as an independent consultant for the pharmaceutical industry as well as an advisor to regulatory bodies worldwide.

[M Kehoe]

Hi.

Did the article mention the dose/regime for a healthy male 180 lbs and 67 yrs old?

Asking for a friend.

5.56mm

[Alter Kaker]

I’ll defer to JAMA on the science: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389

[Alter Kaker]

Did the article mention the dose/regime for a healthy male 180 lbs and 67 yrs old?

Why would you take an anti-parisitic drug if you're a healthy male without parisites?

[SeekAndFind]

This site will tell you about the dosage that you need:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/i-mask-prophylaxis-treatment-protocol/

It is from the The Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance was created by highly published critical care specialists from major academic medical centers with collectively over 1,000 medical publications.

[M Kehoe]

If it is efficacious against the Rona?

Just like a Z pack, HQL and zinc.

Just adding to the knowledge base.

5.56mm

[M Kehoe]

Thanks.

5.56mm

[Alter Kaker]

When Can Taking Ivermectin Be Unsafe?

There’s a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay to take large doses of ivermectin. That is wrong.

Even the levels of ivermectin for approved uses can interact with other medications, like blood-thinners. You can also overdose on ivermectin, which can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hypotension (low blood pressure), allergic reactions (itching and hives), dizziness, ataxia (problems with balance), seizures, coma and even death.

Source: US Food and Drug Administration https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

[Alter Kaker]

If it is efficacious against the Rona?

It isn't. The vaccine however is free and very effective.

[M Kehoe]

Thanks for the additional information.

5.56mm

[P-Marlowe]

These are the same publications that would not tolerate any pediatrician claiming that there are only two genders.

If Twitter and Facebook censor it, it has to be true.

[painter]

Alright Mr. Expert we need to have Proof of your experience to make statements like that!

I have a friend who is a Dt. That does Carona virus research for a pharmaceutical Co. He treats his patients that have Covid with Ivermetin with a 100% success rate!

[Uncle Miltie]

Microscopic sample size compared to my post.

[Uncle Miltie]

That’s 44 studies, 15,000 patients for me, 1 study 400 patients for you?

Orders of magnitude, dude.

[TigersEye]

You might want to add an apple. Or some apple sauce.

[TigersEye]

$3.50 per tube here

[Jane Long]

I see you’ve been most appropriately told, for your absurd post.

[Jane Long]

Why would you take an anti-parisitic drug if you’re a healthy male without parisites?

——-

Better than taking an EXPERIMENTAL, unproven mNRA agent for something that is 95++% survivable.

And, easily preventable, and treatable with longtime, safe, effective drugs.

[TigersEye]

Questions about the JAMA study of ivermectin TRIALSITE NEWS - March 6, 2021

On March 4, JAMA published “Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19;A Randomized Clinical Trial” by Eduardo López-Medina et al. The main finding of the study was:

“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…”

The authors self-reported a change to the original primary endpoint after the initiation of the study. They also acknowledged that the study was not designed to detect a difference in the hazards ratio between the intervention and the control arms of less than 1.4. Other limitations they acknowledged were the lack of virological assessment, serum plasma measurement and observable differences between the treatment drug and the placebo during a part of the trial. The authors also self-report an incident during the trial in which study participants were given the study drug instead of the placebo.

However, other questions are raised by the publication, that may be more significant:

1) On page 27 and 28 of Supplement 1 attached to the publication, the final secondary outcomes of the trial are listed. One of those outcomes is “The duration of supplemental oxygen in each arm of the study.” This outcome dose not appear in Table 2 “Outcomes in the Primary Analysis Population” or in Supplement 2 attached to the publication. Why was this outcome omitted from the publication?

2) The study protocol was amended 4 times. The changes to the protocol at each amendment is given on page 43 of Supplement 1 attached to the publication. The changes are listed for amendments 2–4 but not for amendment 1. Were there substantive changes to the protocol with the first amendment?

3) The final title to the protocol was “Double blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial to investigate the effectiveness of the D11AX22 molecule in adult subjects from Valle Del Cauca with initial stages of infection by SARS CoV2/COVID 19.” Were the subjects in this study informed that the purpose of the trial was to determine the effectiveness of ivermectin in COVID-19?

[xzins]

Clearly you understand the difference between a study of ivermectin’s safety record, and a study of ivermectin speeding recovery from covid.

Those are 2 different issues entirely.

Even had I been wrong, which I’m not, I would be puzzled why I should be ashamed at reading an article. I don’t think you should be ashamed just because you misread it.

[Alter Kaker]

Take 10,000 low quality observational studies and put them next to one well designed double blind study with randomized controlled trials and the one good study invalidates the others. Sorry for hurting your feelings.