Ivermectin proves ineffective against covid 19

[AlexMCS]

This study is wholly based on placebo (679) vs Ivermectin (679).

The other individuals are completely irrelevant to the results of this article. They aren't even mentioned anymore, nor in text or calculations, only in other unrelated studies. Like I said the lead doctor is pushing for fluvoxamine.

If you consider a 10% improvement irrelevant, that's on you. I, and many people, do not.

I'm also not advocating in favor of ivermectin over better options, provided they are accessible, which is not the case over here yet. Vaccines are not treatment, and the current highly effective treatments are also highly expensive. Ivermectin is cheap as hell, and does work better than placebo.

What I don't like is people saying something is useless when it does have a positive effect.

It might not mean much for you people north of the equator, but it does make a difference for us here, which is why we even have such ongoing researches still.

 

[Xzi]

If you consider a 10% improvement irrelevant, that's on you. I, and many people, do not.

Even taking out the second control group and going by your own numbers, 11 / 1358 is an improvement of 0.8%, not 10%. With good reason, doctors do not prescribe treatments that are only 0.8% more effective than placebo.

Vaccines are not treatment, and the current highly effective treatments are also highly expensive. Ivermectin is cheap as hell, and does work better than placebo.

Vaccines are preventative care, and it doesn't matter how cheap Ivermectin is if you still end up on a ventilator at the hospital after using it. That bill's gonna run you in the tens of thousands.

What I don't like is people saying something is useless when it does have a positive effect.

Of course it has a use, just not specifically treatment of this virus. Flintstones vitamins have a use, but they don't cure cancer.

 

[KingVamp]

well i mean they can, but why would they? ivermection is out of patent and basically worth nothing, where mrna is in patent, must be licensed and can cost hundreds of dollars to produce, so i mean yea they can lie, good luck with that 60 cent on the dollar, i wonder how many gallons of gas thatll get them. especially since its banned basically everywhere.

Why bother making something that cost hundreds of dollars to produce, if it is all a lie anyway?

The same reason all scammers and grifters does things, profit. You think this uptick for ivermectin would have happened, if people didn't think it would actually help? The lowest I've seen for ivermectin is around $20, even with coupons.

 

[lolcatzuru]

Why bother making something that cost hundreds of dollars to produce, if it is all a lie anyway?

The same reason all scammers and grifters does things, profit. You think this uptick for ivermectin would have happened, if people didn't think it would actually help? The lowest I've seen for ivermectin is around $20, even with coupons.

"Why bother making something that cost hundreds of dollars to produce, if it is all a lie anyway?"

is this a real question? because if you convince someone it works, then they will buy it, like we have being on dose number 4.


"The same reason all scammers and grifters does things, profit. You think this uptick for ivermectin would have happened, if people didn't think it would actually help? The lowest I've seen for ivermectin is around $20, even with coupons."

i would not, as its been basically banned in the us and other places interestingly enough. As far as the price, thats the markup, not cost of production, i know money is tough.

 

[tabzer]

People are still afraid of Covid? I thought everyone caught it already. Also, my understanding about ivermectin is that it needed to be supplemented with zinc. But then again, maybe it was the zinc that's helpful and not the ivermectin. I don't eat pills or paste, so I can only speculate.

If you don't want to die "from Covid" just don't go to the hospital. The statistics are clear.

 

[Deleted member 587857]

-

 

[Xzi]

People are still afraid of Covid?

Fear has nothing to do with the facts or science behind modern medical treatments and vaccines.

Also, my understanding about ivermectin is that it needed to be supplemented with zinc. But then again, maybe it was the zinc that's helpful and not the ivermectin.

Bingo. And even then high Zinc levels aren't as helpful in fighting off COVID as high vitamin D levels are. That's still not gonna necessarily save you a hospital trip if you have any other risk factors though, as many Americans do (obesity).

If you don't want to die "from Covid" just don't go to the hospital. The statistics are clear.

Oh right, you're still ridiculous enough to be treating this like it's make believe that a million are dead in the US alone, and a lot of countries were hit even worse relative to their population. Childhood trauma is a bitch, but I'll be interested to hear your opinions on this whole thing once you've matured a bit and are willing to accept reality.

 

[stanna]

Well covid is doing the rounds again at our house for the second time, it's still as underwhelming as it was the first time around, plus this time there's chickenpox as well, guess it's a new variant covidpox.

 

[subcon959]

Oh look, the geopolitical experts are now back to being medical experts again..

 

[tabzer]

Fear has nothing to do with the facts or science behind modern medical treatments and vaccines.


Bingo. And even then high Zinc levels aren't as helpful in fighting off COVID as high vitamin D levels are. That's still not gonna necessarily save you a hospital trip if you have any other risk factors though, as many Americans do (obesity).


Oh right, you're still ridiculous enough to be treating this like it's make believe that a million are dead in the US alone, and a lot of countries were hit even worse relative to their population. Childhood trauma is a bitch, but I'll be interested to hear your opinions on this whole thing once you've matured a bit and are willing to accept reality.

I just see pearl clutching. When you are done playing D&D can we play outside?

 

[Xzi]

I just see pearl clutching. When you are done playing D&D can we play outside?

Misuse of the phrase. That would imply I'm worried about something that hasn't happened yet, rather than presenting you with concrete statistics on what's already happened. And again you prove yourself unable or unwilling to accept that reality, your childish political tribalism is certainly putting up a lot of mental and emotional roadblocks for you lately.

 

[tabzer]

Misuse of the phrase. That would imply I'm worried about something that hasn't happened yet

Lol. No. That's wrong. That's not even close. Google something before you pretend to know what something means.

Personally, my reality differs from whatever you've got jotted down on your fact sheet. I'm not taking it seriously.

 

[subcon959]

Misuse of the phrase. That would imply I'm worried about something that hasn't happened yet, rather than presenting you with concrete statistics on what's already happened.

You might be thinking of a different phrase. Pearl-clutching is usually something old women are accused of when they dramatically overreact.

 

[Xzi]

Personally, my reality differs from whatever you've got jotted down on your fact sheet. I'm not taking it seriously.

Lmao yeah, we all noticed. You don't take anything seriously except the conspiracy theories you pick up from Facebook and/or 4chan. Which in turn makes you impossible to take seriously.

You might be thinking of a different phrase. Pearl-clutching is usually something old women are accused of when they dramatically overreact.

Indeed I was mistaken, but the usage of the phrase is also still incorrect. There was nothing dramatic about what tabzer quoted.

 

[tabzer]

Indeed I was mistaken, but the usage of the phrase is also still incorrect. There was nothing dramatic about what tabzer quoted.

I think you are overly dramatic. And edgy. Definitely an edgelord.

Lmao yeah, we all noticed. You don't take anything seriously except the conspiracy theories you pick up from Facebook and/or 4chan. Which in turn makes you impossible to take seriously.

Oh, yeah? My reality is based on 4chan? I guess someone would have to take you seriously to believe that.

 

[Xzi]

I think you are overly dramatic. And edgy. Definitely an edgelord.

I gave a general tip on improving outcomes if/when you catch COVID-19, and I cited a statistic. What about those things screams "dramatic and edgy" to you? If anything your response was a half-assed attempt at edginess.

Oh, yeah? My reality is based on 4chan? I guess someone would have to take you seriously to believe that.

Or they could just review your post history and confirm it for themselves.

 

[AlexMCS]

Even taking out the second control group and going by your own numbers, 11 / 1358 is an improvement of 0.8%, not 10%. With good reason, doctors do not prescribe treatments that are only 0.8% more effective than placebo.

I won't reply anymore but this calculation is wrong.

You need to compare primary outcome using placebo vs primary outcome using the drug, not the difference/population, that ratio does not mean anything for the study.

Try some test values. Would it be 111/1358 if no one who took the drug got into the hospital? No. It would be 100%:

Effectiveness = (placebo - drug)/placebo

Anyways, I rest my case. I've said enough on the matter.

 

[tabzer]

I gave a general tip on improving outcomes if/when you catch COVID-19, and I cited a statistic. What about those things screams "dramatic and edgy" to you? If anything your response was a half-assed attempt at edginess.

Half-assed, yes. You think you deserve more than that? That's proud. Your reaction with "a million people died, you should take this seriously" response has me wondering why you are on the internet when you could be volunteering to take care of all the dying people around you.

Or they could just review your post history and confirm it for themselves.

People don't exist inside the internet. When I said that I don't see the picture you are painting in my reality, I am talking about my professional and daily life.

 

[Xzi]

I won't reply anymore but this calculation is wrong.

You need to compare primary outcome using placebo vs primary outcome using the drug, not the difference/population, that ratio does not mean anything for the study.

Try some test values. Would it be 111/1358 if no one who took the drug got into the hospital? No. It would be 100%:

Effectiveness = (placebo - drug)/placebo

Anyways, I rest my case. I've said enough on the matter.

There's not even a need to do our own math here, it's written plainly in the results section:

Overall, 100 patients (14.7%) in the ivermectin group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 111 (16.3%) in the placebo group

Only 1.6% more of the placebo group ended up hospitalized, as opposed to the group treated with Ivermectin. No matter how you slice it, it's not enough to be considered even moderately effective for this purpose.

 

[tabzer]

Sounds like 11% more people ended up in the hospital of the placebo group. Was it because they experienced hives or low blood-sugar? We will never know.