It's easy for you to claim that - after the fact. And you talk about others that do so.”
Ivermectin is extremely safe given the billions of doses given. why do you thing it is distributed widely to 3rd world people, albeit for River Blindness, to take unsupervised.
Here is the LD50 for Ivermectin.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17234315/
Comparative evaluation of acute toxicity of ivermectin by two methods after single subcutaneous administration in rats
“
Abstract
Ivermectin was evaluated for its acute toxicity after single subcutaneous (s/c) administration by ‘Acute Toxic Class’ method as per OECD 423 and by conventional acute toxicity test using probit analysis in rats. ‘Acute toxic class’ method yielded LD(50) in category 2 i.e. between 5 and 50mg/kg which was comparable with conventional method where it was found to be 51.5mg/kg. Post mortem lesions were observed in the form of congestion of liver, which showed centrilobar necrosis and hemorrhages on histopathological analysis in both the methods. This study suggests, ‘Acute Toxic Class’ method may be used instead of conventional method to study acute toxicity of injectable preparations. Similarly the LD(50) of around 50mg/kg indicated a wide margin of safety (250x) considering therapeutic dose of ivermectin as 200microg/kg.”
I am assuming you can convert micrograms to milligrams. The therapeutic referenced is .2mg/kg or 200 microgram/kg.
The levels recommended by the FLCC is .4mg/kg to .6mg/kg
or 400 micrograms/kg to 600 micrograms.kg
The LD50 is considered to be between between 5 and 50mg/kg or 5000 micrograms/kg to 50,000/kg.
You would have to drink an entire 500 ml bottle at 10mg/ml all at once to even approach the lower accepted LD50 level. You would probably throw it up due its bad taste.
Re: 46 - I don’t question ivermectin decisions that people make. People can use it if they want. Their call.
I used it, in consultation with a health care professional.
I object to and if possible expose claims that are without merit or misrepresent what ivermectin can do and not do and then parrot those claims to a wider audience.
Looking at pretty graphs at https://c19ivm.org/meta.html glosses over questions about clinical trials being rigorous, accounting for confounders, and detecting outright fraud, p-hacking, etc.