Posted on 04/01/2022 1:11:54 PM PDT by semimojo
CONCLUSIONS Treatment with ivermectin did not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19.
(Excerpt) Read more at nejm.org ...
Searched for “zinc” in the entire article - no matches. Again.
Ivermectin had to do with being an ionophore allowing the body’s cells to absorb zinc. If taking zinc with the ivermectin is not part of the study it is worthless.
The already ill given only a three-day treatment.
Haven’t seen that sliver of a protocol promoted anywhere.
Same sort of designed-to-fail studies they did on HCQ.
Patients received either ivermectin at a dose of 400 μg per kilogram for 3 days or placebo beginning on the day of randomization, once per day.
Only 3 days? This study was designed to fail.
Let’s hear it for the latest big-pharma backed, designed-for-failure study that pushes suckers into ventilation and remdesivir.
Woohoo!
Gosh, maybe zinc was too expensive to include in their ‘comprehensive’ study.
Probably an April FOOLS thread post.
So another study designed to fail. Kaus’s check is in the mail.
.
Yeppers.
650 people received Ivermectin - this is a tiny, irrlevant studdy. Small, even in comparison with a Phase II corrupt pharma ‘vaccine’ trial.
The medication was administered without zinc and AZ; why do they NEVER test the protocol that’s actually in use saving lives?
The course of medication was too short (3 days, when Zelenko and others use it 5 - 7 days). Why so few days?
The dosage is on the low side if dealing with high risk, at .4 per kg when Zelenko goes .4 to .6 as needed.
The design of the experiment is too vague - they were testing if the people did or did not return for hospitalization within 28 days. They could have another illness by then, given the ‘Covid’ test has a high number of false positives - these could be untreated pneumonia cases.
Anyone sincerely testing efficacy would have tested known protocols with a larger group and a clearly designed ‘outcome’ not just hospitalization within 28 days!
Of course mojo isn’t tired yet.
CS Lewis:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good, will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Bullshake. I’ll see that “study” and point to more than 50 more that show the opposite.
semimojo wrote: “Latest large scale study.”
Which will be totally rejected by the ‘Ivermectin is all you need’ crowd because it doesn’t support the COVID is a conspiracy narrative.
If it didn't work they wouldn't have tried so hard to ban it.
Everybody knows Ivermectin is ONE element of the cocktail prescribed.
The problem is, Ivermectin has not been proven as a zinc ionophore. We know the HCQ was called a zinc ionophore and it failed in clinical studies.
Maybe by reading completely this article, it will help:
This study seems to prove that patients who have experienced symptoms for up to 7 days before treatment begins don’t get a measurable benefit.
I thought the drug needed to be given as soon as symptoms are detected.
That’s the study I’d like to see.
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.