Posted on 02/19/2022 9:51:12 AM PST by brookwood
CNN vs Ivermectin
CNN says study shows Ivermectin does not work -- but the study shows that it DOES work ! I posted essentially the same analysis twice, but Igor Chudov has a better presentation with screen shots from the study. So, the study showed that, for Ivermectin vs control group:
4 vs 10 were placed on mechanical ventilation
3 vs 10 died (so 3 Ivermectin patients died, vs 10 without Ivermectin).
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/cnn-vs-ivermectin?utm_source=url
This is completely twisted and picked-over view of the study.
You are helping no one with this silliness. The overall point is, from 490 patients TOTAL, there is hardly any difference between Ivermectin and “non-treated”.
This is what it ACTUALLY SAYS:
“Results Among 490 patients included in the primary analysis (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.7] years; 267 women [54.5%]), 52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80; P = .25). For all prespecified secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 (1.7%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13-1.30; P = .17), intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.4%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27-2.20; P = .79), and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09). The most common adverse event reported was diarrhea (14 [5.8%] in the ivermectin group and 4 [1.6%] in the control group).”
This was printed in your “substack” but only a couple things were brought out - your 4 vs 10 and 3 vs 10.
Seeing THOSE numbers I thought this was a very weak study, with only maybe 20 patients. BUT, I find it’s just part of many more patients.
The proof is that about the same (some more for Ivermectin) rates of “severe” disease in the hospital.
Your tiny numbers actually are mostly proof of what many of us said all along: THIS IS A MINOR DISEASE as far as death (and even “hospitalization”). Heck, the 490 are ALREADY classified as “co-morbid”! 14 out of 490 is what? 3%. Out of “co-morbid” patients. Big deal!
The entire PREMISE that this disease is so awful should be shot down. Forget vaxes and alternatives, mostly YOU’LL BE JUST FINE.
But please don’t do ridiculous things with data - it makes your side look stupid at best and duplicitous at worst.
YOU are correct.
Read the thing.
It seems the dude who picked this out for his blog did not ingest it, maybe just “read” and picked out what he liked - which was minor.
Here it is as used in the original report in JAMA network:”The ivermectin dosage for each patient in the intervention arm was calculated to the nearest 6-mg or 12-mg whole tablets (dosing table in the study protocol)”
Thank you.
You let me see the truth, rather than this strawman silliness.
Clearly Ivermectin showed positive effect, 3 vs 10 deaths is a huge benefit.
~~~~
Ivermectin is especially beneficial if you are one of the seven people who would have died without ivermectin.
JAMA, Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
How many hospital administrators and doctors will read beyond the headline!
You overlook the fact that the main reason for suppressing the “alternatives” is to 1. scare, 2. shame 3. coerce 4. force everyone to get the vaccine. You ally yourself with Trudeau.
What dosages were used?
( without having to search the entire study)
And, like HCQ, IVM is actually used in a combo protocol with ZINC and Docycyline. But I’m betting thats not how they ran the trials.
They would rather kill people than save them and discredit the “ vaxx only” approach taken by the USG
“Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention group receiving oral ivermectin (0.4 mg/kg body weight daily for 5 days) plus standard of care or the control group receiving the standard of care alone....The ivermectin dosage for each patient in the intervention arm was calculated to the nearest 6-mg or 12-mg whole tablets (dosing table in the study protocol,”
What occurs to me, and I will have to look at the article, maybe they truncated the study when the trend to show fewer deaths began to separate toward significance.
This is a randomized but not blinded study. Therefore the study participants , if they think the same way I do in Malaysia, go home, and look stuff up on the internet. “I’m on ivermectin for COVID, what else should I be dong? “ Pretty soon I run into the protocols with vitamin D, zinc, etc. maybe word gets around;maybe the additional components really begin to favor the intervention. Looks like the study is confounded at least.
Thanks…
.4 mg per kg is close, though with Delta and severe disease, the Frontline Drs upped the dosage to .6 mg per kg. Higher dose, combined in a multi drug regimen
Lower dose for prophylaxis
I don’t care about THIS study, good or bad.
The PROOF is out there! EVERYWHERE!
It cannot be denied that Ivermectin WORKS!
So all these clowns should just give up. The FACTS are KNOWN!
I just received my 100 tablets, 12 mg each, today!
14 days from order to my mailbox. $80 + $30 shipping = total of $110 from Singapore. NO PRESCIPTION. Paid with PayPal.
I shouldn’t need it (got it for the wife). I take Quercetin + zinc, D3, C, and many other supplements. I also have on hand the Xlear Nasal Spray.
Xlear Nasal Spray COVID-19: Studies Conclude Xlear KILLS SARS-COV-2 AND EFFECTIVE AGAINST NEW VARIANTS...
https://www.aestheticsadvisor.com/2021/09/xlear-nasal-spray-covid-19-study.html
The collaborative study concludes: “Because there are no risk factors in using the X/GSE combination therapy, and [Xlear] nasal spray is over the counter available without prescription, and [Xlear] allows for comfortable long term mask wearing, adoption of this preventive anti-viral therapy should be encouraged.”
Someone here on FR turned me on to this website. I wish I could remember who so I could thank them.
THANK YOU! (you know who you are).
bkmk
https://rumble.com/vlpecw-the-story-of-ivermectin.html%3CBR%3EThe
.
Here is the FLCCC Covid-19 protocol that includes Ivermectin:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Alliance-I-MASKplus-Protocol-ENGLISH.pdf
It’s a shame so many lazy people never bothered to research this drug.
No I ally with truth
Just because you don’t want vax and want some medication isn’t free rein to play loose with some facts.
And besides this disease is not the big boogie man everyone makes it out to be. You don’t need ivermectin. Even before all this vax and alt ideas it was still highly survivable. Saying you need it implies COVID is highly dangerous which is what the commies want.
Now you make a good point.
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.