Posted on 08/04/2021 4:43:38 PM PDT by gas_dr
This is from the most recent Cochrane analysis of a topic many people have opinions on. I am posting the data without comment. I am sure the comments will come later.
The data show low level confidence that Ivermectin helps on one hand. On the other hand, the authors to point to several studies in process which I think will be important to analyze as the data become available.
In other CoVID news, Regeneron (monoclonal antibodies) have been approved for post-exposure prophylaxis in the unvaccinated and for high risk populations such as SNF or LTAC patients to be infused monthly — monoclonals continue to demonstrate high efficacy in treatment, and now hopefully another pathway to prophylaxis in those who exercise their choice to remain unvaccinated.
I am sure the usual donnybrook will ensue.
Blessings to all this evening.
Heretic! You’ll smoke a turd in hell for posting this! /s
Top Kek.
Look at the width of the 95% confidence interval: a factor of 18 between the top & bottom.
That's even worse than the factor of 10 error bar on the supposed background rate of youngsters getting myocarditis or whatever.
Sounds like you're feeling the heat, troll-boi.
I am not feeling the heat — I am posting a Cochrane analysis which is generally the gold standard. Please also note that I accept and published that further analysis may move the needle — but these are the data as of today.
“I am posting a Cochrane analysis which is generally the gold standard”
Hummm...where have I heard that before, oh yes “The Lancet is the gold standard”
A Cochrane analysis is a specific statistical analysis not a journal — so I respectfully submit you are comparing apples to oranges.
Thanks guy. It is interesting as opposed to anecdotal reports.
You’re full of crap.
Anytime I hear “the gold standard” it means the field doesn’t KNOW the answer and goes by consensus.
Which is not science, no matter how much cargo-cultists try to pretend that it is.
I’m sure liking my apple flavored horse paste. Yum-Yum.
The famous Communist, Walter Cronkite, who lost the Vietnam War.
"And that's the way it is..."
You need to realize that your gold standard is iron pyrite, if it openly says of all the studies (look at the leading paragraphs again) "very low-quality evidence".
And one of the studies pretended to have "randomization" with just 14 patients. Nice error bars from that one, I bet.
On the other hand, at least the trolls sure to swarm your post won’t have worms!
Why would anyone take HCQ or Ivermectin when the gold standard prevents 99.8% of the deaths. This was a fine thing to consider pre-vaccine. and yes, it might even help with breakthrough cases..
Any cigar will do.
They kind of ruined their credibility at the end when they stated they are uncertain of the safety of a drug that has been given billions of times. But that aside, corona viruses evolve so quickly it seems likely they will evolve around Ivermectin as fast as it did around the vaccines. Keep healthy folks and live your life.
This report raises concerns about the Cochrane report
https://infoarmed.com/ivermectin-analysis-by-cochrane-could-be-biased-conclusion-in-doubt/
This was just published and attempts to sift through multiple trials and outcomes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/
If I have covid, ivermectin won’t hurt me, a 5 day course costs about $10 and shows results in 2-3 days that might stop the viral progression and need for hospitalization ….why deny it?
>No study compared ivermectin to an intervention with proven efficacy.
There is no “intervention with proven efficacy,” because if there were all the emergency use authorizations would have been auto-cancelled. Which includes all the vaccines, remdesivir and I think the monoclonal antibodies like Trump got, which likely do do some good. I’m not sure, but suspect that lack of a non-placebo control group downgrades the results of a Cochrane meta-analysis.
“ If I have covid, ivermectin won’t hurt me, a 5 day course costs about $10 and shows results in 2-3 days that might stop the viral progression and need for hospitalization ….why deny it?”
It will hurt you if this five days of treatment, does not work, and this delays getting treatments that will work.
Doctors on this site have written that they are not opposed to this treatment on a “right to try” basis, but at some point , if it is not working then more effective treatments need to be used. There is a finite amount of time in which to turn around the course of the disease.
But, I am not a doctor, so there is that.
I doubt you get a response.
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.