-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on 05/18/2021 7:10:34 AM PDT by Petrosius
Some self-described medical people here say they would not prescribe Ivermectin either, even if the patient was not responding to their protocol and nearing death. And that even includes if their patients requested it.
There you go again. Pretending to have knowledge and training you don’t have, and trying to shut the rest of us up.
Ivermectin works. Everywhere it is tried, it works.
I’m on it now.
https://www.worldtribune.com/frontline-doctors-prescribe-ivermectin-to-treat-covid-19/
https://medicalupdateonline.com/2021/04/how-ivermectin-works-and-how-this-plays-out-in-practice/
Etc.
LOL. For months people here were saying India's relatively low Covid numbers were because of the widespread use of HCQ and Ivermectin.
Then there was the surge and they shut up.
Now that the rate's dropping they're trying to get back on the train by pointing to a minor advisory change for asymptomatic people.
Ivermectin has a broad range of application, among which are as an antiparasitic.
.....
From the abstract preface of
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32533071/
.....
“In this comprehensive systematic review, antiviral effects of ivermectin are summarized including in vitro and in vivo studies over the past 50 years. Several studies reported antiviral effects of ivermectin on RNA viruses such as Zika, dengue, yellow fever, West Nile, Hendra, Newcastle, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, chikungunya, Semliki Forest, Sindbis, Avian influenza A, Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome, Human immunodeficiency virus type 1, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Furthermore, there are some studies showing antiviral effects of ivermectin against DNA viruses such as Equine herpes type 1, BK polyomavirus, pseudorabies, porcine circovirus 2, and bovine herpesvirus 1. Ivermectin plays a role in several biological mechanisms, therefore it could serve as a potential candidate in the treatment of a wide range of viruses including COVID-19 as well as other types of positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses.”
First, as noted above, talk to your doctor and see what he/she thinks.
You can do some research here as well:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-plus-protocol/
Personal anecdote: i discussed this with my doctor for prophylaxis for occupational exposure in January, and he was not willing to prescribe. I called around, found a different doctor who had been keeping up with this, and got a scrip. His advice was to get a blood panel and check liver enzymes after a month. Everything checked out fine, and I didn’t get the ‘Rona despite being exposed.
When the vax was made available, I took it, and discontinued the ivm prophylaxis, but still have enough for a course of treatment in the event the vax doesn’t work.
Your mileage may vary. But the safety profile is very good, and there is strong circumstantial evidence of efficacy, at least at the population level.
Myself, I would not use a veterinary compound of ivm or anything else, as some have advocated here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One should take anything that Jim Hoft with far more than a grain of salt. Perhaps an entire pillar.
And your point about population level data and correlation with ivermectin use is certainly not wrong, but there are counter-examples (eg Uttar Pradesh, Goa, Mexico City). It seems to me that the most that can be said is that the current epidemiological data relative to ivm effectiveness are indeterminate.
Here’s my question: in your view, what are we to make of the meta-analyses produced by Tess Lawrie et al. in the UK, Pierre Kory et al. in the US, and Dr. Andrew Hill’s report from December of last year, all independently finding statistically significant beneficial effects of ivermectin therapy? The effect is not small, which would make very large trials less necessary to determine “if” there is an effect. The question, according to those experts, is only “how big is the effect”, and “what is the correct dose”?
It seems that we should not casually dismiss those people or their work: they’re not Jim Hoft level kooks, but are serious, highly credentialed academics with significant publication histories.
I’m asking with the sincere hope that you can shed some light on this, as this topic is likely to remain relevant for some time to come.
The article and the comments here are valuable information.
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.