It has become almost an article of Faucist faith that Ivermectin must be proven at every turn utterly useless and ineffective against COVID-19, and that no opportunity should be lost to bash the drug.
Thus we get this latest study published in JAMA claiming that Ivermectin offers little benefit for people with mild to moderate COVID-19 symtpoms
Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48  years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]).
Still, one has to admire the logical audacity of the study’s authors. The Ivermectin group had fewer cases of pneumonia, and far fewer instnces of venous thromboembolism, yet the conclusion is that the drug offers zero benefit against COVID-19.
That audacity is increased when one considers that the “Conflict of Interest” statement is almost as long as as the “Discussion” section of the paper. Nothing screams “bias” quite as much as massive funding by Big Pharma and the Faucist-dominated NIH. Although we should give the authors credit at least for the integrity to be honest about their mercenary approach to their profession.
Personally, if I were stricken with COVID-19, spending no more than $10 on a series of Ivermectin doses to avoid pneumonia and blood clots while shaking off the bug strikes me as quite beneficial.
Naggie S, Boulware DR, Lindsell CJ, et al. Effect of Ivermectin vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. Published online October 21, 2022. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.18590
The inclusion criteria is off.
“ Sites verified eligibility criteria including age 30 years or older, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 10 days, and 2 or more symptoms of acute COVID-19 for 7 days or less from enrollment. ”
Those who were confirmed with SARS 10 days ago were eligible, when the outcome is a resolution qualified as 3 consecutive days without symptoms after starting the treatment (or placebo).
Without details on the mean “starting point” of both groups (ie how many days from first symptoms), these findings are meaningless. The inclusion criteria needed to be within three days of initial symptoms AND a positive SARS test.
Inclusion/exclusion criteria is the easiest way to cheat a clinical study, and that’s what they did. Frustrating.
I'm not sure how much good it does, but I've gotten some satisfaction from antagonizing Faucist supporters by calling them horse paste liberals. They get livid.
PNK, did you see this from Ann Barnhardt?
"Mailbag Bombshell: The NFL is giving their players IVERMECTIN as a prophylactic AND to prevent “positive” Covid tests"
The hypocrisy of the elites. I doubt that many professional sportsball players in the US are jabbed. The fact that we’re not seeing players dropping dead of “Suddenly” the way it’s happening amongst soccer players in Europe (HUNDREDS of soccer players have been killed by the injections), and among high school and college athletes in the US tells me that the American professional sports team owners protected their “assets” by lying to the public about their players being injected AND making sure that the players are using Ivermectin. But really, the most compelling datum is the fact that if the NFL players were actually injected, THEY’D ALL BE SICK NOW, because the injections cause Antibody Dependent Enhancement – they fry your immune system and turbocharge viruses.
This letter comes from a long-time physician reader and monthly donor. I’ve redacted this heavily because multiple celebrities are named. I haven’t followed sports in nearly fifteen years, and even I knew the name and exactly who the NFL player in the letter below is. I don’t want the player to get in dutch, as he is doing nothing wrong in distributing Ivermectin to his friends and family. I’ve been distributing Ivermectin 1% liquid for nearly two years now. The problem is the dripping, elitist hypocrisy. -AB
(See the physician's letter on her site.-Edwin)
I have two problems with the study. (1) Ivermectin is supposed to be initiated at the first sign of symptoms - not up to 7 days later. and (2) Ivermectin should be used for 5 days or until symptoms resolve - not just for 3 days. These trials are always set up for failure!