Posted on 06/21/2021 9:16:09 AM PDT by Texas Fossil
Abstract
Background:
Repurposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials.
Areas of uncertainty:
We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in reducing mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemoprophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, COVID-19 infection.
Data sources:
We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
-remainder of the Abstract at the link-
(Excerpt) Read more at journals.lww.com ...
“gene therapy” is definitionally incorrect.
There is nothing wrong with your gene that needs “therapy”.
The jab is “genetic engineering” which proactively monkeys with your RNA.
After which you become a Genetically Modified Organism (GMO).
Gotta keep the lingo straight! :-)
That is very frustrating.
It works and with few side effects
Read the study itself.
Just to the left of the Title is a block named “Download” to view the entire 27 page study.
He is not a doctor and he did not read the 27 page study and he did not respond to my question to him.
Says he has been here since 1998, but I never saw him until today.
What make me angry is the number of lives that could have been saved, but for the lies of the “experts”.
It is all about the agenda.
Big Bucks driving it. Subjection of the world is their goal. I hope they choke on their attempt.
He said it was a little know 3rd world study, but I am sure ne never saw the download block and he did not read my description of how to find it.
I tried to copy the download link, but could not make that work. There are ways to prevent copying the link. Have seen that before. Don’t blame them for it.
I was catching up on some old Bannon War Room episodes. Baris says that 25% of the population will never take the cv19vx under any circumstances. Of the other 75% who have either taken it, or intend to, he seemed to think that about 75% of them would actually take the shot. Praying those numbers of cv19vaxxed stay lower.
600,000 deaths later
but at least they got rid of orange man bad
No. I ended up getting the disease itself before I was able to get the jab. The ED doctor I saw to get the Eli Lily antibody therapy (bamlanivimab only) gave me a prescription for Ivermectin which I took. Just to give full disclosure. That is why I am not against people taking Ivermectin under a doctor's supervision. I knew it was not a well studied drug in the situation I was taking it. But I weighed side-effects of the drug and potential risks of taking it. I knew that Ivermectin had poor statistical evidence that it worked.
I also took vitamin C, zinc, quercetin, Vitamin D, melatonin and a multivitamin that has Thiamine in its formulation.
My adult children did not receive Ivermectin. I waited to see the effects on myself and their own response to the virus. They recovered on their own and did not need any extra treatment. Had they taken a turn for the worse I would likely have brought them to their doctor to discuss the use of Ivermectin.
I am not against people taking Ivermectin. I am against people overstating the evidence that Ivermectin works. My conclusion from this present study. We need a large trial of Ivermectin either here or in Europe or both to see if Ivermectin deserves widespread use.
As an example of how difficult these types of decisions are. The largest study (in terms of number of patients) included in the analysis of this study, that is the topic for this thread, was done in Columbia (the country not the university):
Lopez-Medina E. et al JAMA. 2021 Apr 13;325(14):1426-1435. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.3071. Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial
"Conclusion and relevance: Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes."
This study was done in laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19 and was double blinded and placebo controlled. It shows no effect over placebo.
This is the opposite of what the meta-analysis report concludes.
This underscores the importance of doing a large clinical trial to get the evidence we all hope will show a positive benefit for Ivermectin.
What would that matter if I was a Doctor.
The fact is the studies are all from 3rd world countries. You need a large study done in the US, Canada, or Europe to prove a benefit.
I am not against people taking ivermectin, I took it when I got COVID-19 (see my post 29).
I am against people overstating the evidence on Ivermectin. To date the only study published from the US was the Broward Health Study that found a benefit in hospitalized patients. The study was small. It needs to be replicated on a larger scale.
Yes I took Ivermectin, but I did so with the approval of the Doctor I saw. I did so also knowing there is little evidence it would be effective.
The current study points to the need for a larger study to determine effectiveness. At this point in time with dwindling cases in the United States we may never get that large study.
In a disease that the death rate in people under 65yo is about 0.5% you will need to study 20,000 people with confirmed disease just to get to an expected 100 deaths. That is a big study. Unless you get buy in from the federal government for funding who is going to perform that study?
He is not gone yet. He will be a force in the Midterm and the GOPe knows it. The public is still in his camp, with or without him as a candidate. I would not blame him if he steps totally out. But he won’t.
This is ours to win or lose. And I still believe that God’s hand will turn the tide if we do the right thing.
He has given me far more than I deserved in my life. And this is still Texas where I live. smile. God’s Country.
Yes, I do too. There is no way to know how bad the damage from the mRNA treatment really is. The advocates laugh at us, but they also are working very hard to silence any criticism. That is because of their agenda. This did not happen in a vacuum.
As was tweeted: GAME OVER FOR THE IVERMECTIN DENIERS...
You did not read the .pdf
I have no interest in arguing this crap with you. You can think whatever you like.
Won’t change anything.
End Trans.
There is a 27 page document that I suggest you download.
The “Download” block for the .pdf is to the left of the Title at the source article.
Discussion:
The findings indicate with moderate certainty that ivermectin treatment in COVID-19 provides a significant survival benefit. Our certainty of evidence judgment was consolidated by the results of trial sequential analyses, which show that the required IS has probably already been met. Low-certainty evidence on improvement and deterioration also support a likely clinical benefit of ivermectin. Low-certainty evidence suggests a significant effect in prophylaxis.
Overall, the evidence also suggests that early use of ivermectin may reduce morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. This is based on (1) reductions in COVID-19 infections when ivermectin was used as prophylaxis, (2) the more favorable effect estimates for mild to moderate disease compared with severe disease for death due to any cause, and (3) on the evidence demonstrating reductions in deterioration.
From your post:
“The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes.”
And as taken from the paper. But note specifically “for the treatment of MILD COVID-19”. This is a important differentiation!
I had the same issue. I read about the .pdf, but could not figure where to go for the link. Just tried the Download (radio button) and it worked.
It is not casual reading and not intended to be.
I think this will go a long way to stopping the nuttiness about Ivermectin use.
I don't know how safe it was..but ALL military personnel that went to Viet Nam were issued a 30 day supply of hydroxychloroquine when they entered the country ..and I'm starting to think one of the side effects of it is 99% of them became conservatives....No wonder it isn't safe for covid patient's....../s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.