Posted on 03/01/2022 11:02:40 AM PST by Red Badger
Deep State, Big Pharma, and Big Med have blood on their hands.
Ivermectin is a miracle drug except it is too cheap for Big Pharma.
While I agree with your title, and do think that the AMA is compromised, you need to read the article in entirety, which repudiates the title of this article.
The article hot-links to the source report:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2789362
Read through and note this conclusion:
“Conclusions-—In this randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, ivermectin treatment during early illness did not prevent progression to severe disease. The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.”
Note: DID NOT prevent progression to severe disease
Your article is faulty.
Bkmkzz
BTTT
The Queen herself got Ivermectin just last week. Its all the rage!!
Cancelling JAMA commences in 3,...2,.....
Didn’t TRUMP suggest Ivermectin and that is why it is hated and and not used?
Rand Paul undecided on Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, says hatred of Trump hinders research
I had Covid (2nd time) about 6-7 weeks ago, lost 30 pounds in the process. Went to my doctor, he prescribed IVM and HCQ on a Tuesday.
Although I was still weak, I was back to work the following Monday. I was fully recovered ten days later.
The conclusion was not supported by the actual data in the study. Read the article, it is all explained.
Did Camilla, too?...................................
Good enough for the Queen - but not the commoner?
Ivermectin, on all accounts, is very effective against covid. However, if someone believes they are getting ill from the virus what is the proper dosage of Ivermectin. I’ve seen pills at 3mg. Any websites to reference?
Your comprehension is faulty. There was a significant reduction in death rates for the Ivermectin group.
Try reading more closely or reading Dr. Kory’s analysis:
https://pierrekory.substack.com/p/the-disinformation-campaign-against?utm_source=url
Where does the risk of death being 0.2% come from?
That would be a huge number of deaths.
Read the article instead of the fualty conclusion. The study’s conclusion has been highly critized for not properly represetning the data. Look at the data youself and you will see. The data shows it was very effective. Thier conclusion was based on not being able to have statistical reliability due to sample size. Something they intentionally set up. One might even think they tried to make the study fail.
Was the hypothesis “Ivermectin did work” making the null “Ivermectin didn’t work?” If the p is lower than .05 (or whatever they used), then the null is rejected, thus supporting Ivermectin did work. Did I get that, right?
Hmmm....comparing Ivermectin patients to control:
“Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 patients (1.7%) in the ivermectin group vs 10 (4.0%) in the control group (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.30; P = .17)”
So small numbers but 4 ivermectin patients needed ventilation versus 10 in the control group.
“and intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.5%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27 to 2.20; P = .79).”
ICU = 6 ivermectin vs 8 control.
“The 28-day in-hospital mortality rate was similar for the ivermectin and control groups (3 [1.2%] vs 10 [4.0%]; RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09 to 1.11; P = .09),”
So 28-day mortality was 3 for ivermectin versus 10 in the control....
“as was the length of hospital stay after enrollment (mean [SD], 7.7 [4.4] days vs 7.3 [4.3] days; mean difference, 0.4; 95% CI, −0.4 to 1.3; P = .38).”
In the study, the quoted parts are all one paragraph. These are listed as secondary effects versus measuring the primary goal. Okay...BUT IT LOOKS GOOD FOR IVERMECTIN TO ME!
The biggest problem is the trial involved so few people that the confidence interval essential says “impossible to know”. When I did testing for the military, I’d ask “How many runs will we need for statistical significance?” And the answer was always 10,000+...which was impossible to do in the real world. So we had to accept statistical uncertainty and buy multi-Billion dollar acquisitions based on “more likely than not”.
Looking at this trial, I feel OK about taking horse paste when I had COVID. The tube cost me $6 and I didn’t even use 1/2 of the tube for 3 doses. No diarrhea, no upset tummy. Pretty much NO DOWNSIDE AT ALL. But no statistical certainty, either.
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.