The study has 3 deaths in the ivermectin group and 10 deaths in the comparably sized control group. The sample size (about 250 people in each group) was not large enough to conclude that ivermectin was responsible for the lower death rate. So we can only be 90 percent sure ivermectin saved these 7 people from death. To be “significant” you have to be 95 percent confident. The study provides evidence that ivermectin works .The weasel word is “statistically” significant. Combine this study with the 60 other positive ivermectin studies and there is a 99.99 percent chance ivermectin works.
Below is a direct copy from the study: The fact they say there is NO improvement is patently ridiculous!! In every statistic, the Ivermectin group out-performed the control group. And are we to believe the control group got NO treatment??
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).