Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ivermectin - A useful treatment for COVID-19 coronavirus? Some discussion and studies...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vibrant62
    commented on 's reply
    I certainly hope so. The biggest problems my researches have identified are a) we still don't accurately know the correlates of protection for covid, nor b) how T cell immunity (in all its guises) works in general, and especially not in covid infection. Some T cell responses are beneficial, others appear to be actively harmful and predictors of severe disease. There are some studies underway, including a healthy volunteer challenge study in Oxford that may help to answer the unknowns here. Only when we really understand - in detail - what is going on during infection and after recovery can we come up with ways to counter the immune dysfunction related problems of infection. We will still have to solve the problems of physical damage that the infection causes to endothelia etc, but getting that half of the puzzle solved will help long covid sufferers (and likely those suffering ME/CFS etc) moving forward. Hopefully this knowledge may also help stop severe patients going into full blown ARDS as well.

  • Vibrant62
    commented on 's reply
    Indeed - and this is why all the RCTs on ivermectin for example have been coming out of countries that are not in the West, and where its use has been permitted. In general, HCQ has been found to have potent activity against the ACE2 cellular method of entry, but does not have means of blocking viral entry via TMPRSS2 - which partially explains the mixed results from studies into this compound. Used alone its unlikely to be that effective as an antiviral as SARS Cov 2 simply switches to the other method/s of cellular entry. The situation may be different when used as part of a combination of drugs, especially if other drugs target the TMPRSS2 pathway. The situation with ivermectin is very different.

  • Emily
    replied
    Tetano posted this. Treatment was HCQ, but it shows that doctors in Iran have more freedom than US doctors have.

    https://flutrackers.com/forum/forum/...-a-case-report
    We report a case of COVID-19 infection in a middle aged Iranian man without underlying disease who presented with bizarre behavior. Results of brain imaging were normal, but COVID-19 pneumonia was detected on chest computed tomography scan. Given the respiratory problem and positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine was administered, and after 2 days all of the symptoms resolved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emily
    commented on 's reply
    Well said, Vibrant. I think Dr. Kory mentioned that ivermectin helped some of the 'long haul' patients. I'm sure there are ways to stop the inflammation cycle.

  • Vibrant62
    replied
    Further discussion of forthcoming meta-analysis paper on Ivermectin by Dr Tess Lawrie here with Dr John Campbell, and worth listening to.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ju5v4TAaQ

    I believe that this research gate publication contains some of the data they are referring to but I am uncertain that it is the full paper, as in the above interview (7th April) Dr Lawrie says that it has not yet been published but will be shortly, so it may be that this was an early analysis.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Meta-analysis

    Leave a comment:


  • Vibrant62
    commented on 's reply
    The problem seems to be that science and politics have become interwoven, and for politics, one can 'read' vested interests of industry. It happens in every major market sector, to a lesser or greater extent, but the censorship of the science itself is a very worrying trend. Yes I do see it now. The question is - how can this be fixed? If the root cause is indeed attributable to needing to allow Emergency Use Authorisations (US/UK/EU) for novel interventions in a new disease, then it would suggest that this legislation needs modification. It should not be an 'either/or' .. When so much money and investment is at stake, I now understand why there is so much activity to 'crush' cheap old interventions that could be beneficial, even as adjunctive therapy.. It is not all about the revenues from the novel interventions, its protecting the massive investments that are involved in finding and researching whether they have any benefits or not. There should be space and economic room for both approaches (repurposing old cheap generics as well developing vaccines and other novel interventions). Between Covid itself (which I believe is with us for the very long term) and Long Covid there are ample opportunities for the industry... no country, even rich ones, could possibly afford the full burden of ongoing healthcare using solely novel interventions. It would bankrupt even rich countries. For example, in the case of Long Covid we do know that even people with mild/ asymptomatic disease get Long Covid - what we dont yet know is if this also applies to vaccinated people who get low level disease. If it does, then we are talking about 10-30% of populations with ongoing, long term health problems here. The potential for ongoing and cumulative damage to national and global economies are enormous.

    One thing I have also noticed recently (from our early days of forecasting the pitfalls of an H5N1 pandemic) is that many of the risks and downsides we foresaw back then are indeed happening, just not quickly. Its a slow moving train wreck.. This is a problem that we never really considered, but its potential long term consequences are probably greater than any other aspect of this pandemic. As I keep saying to people, 'its not all about who dies'.

  • Emily
    replied
    Originally posted by Vibrant62 View Post
    A very interesting discussion was held between Dr Jon Campbell and Dr. Pierre Kory on Ivermectin.

    See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19DPijOoVKE

    Part 1 is also worth listening to.

    Dr. Kory has been a mainstream part of the medical science establishment for years with a large number of peer reviewed studies to his name, and he raises some very interesting (but concerning) points at the end of this interview that are worth discussion. He states he has become cynical in the last year, but if what he says is correct, then our regulatory and science funding system (especially during an emergency) is very broken and needs urgently reforming to allow space for cheap interventions as well as the massive investments needed under Emergency Use Authorisations, especially when so many lives are at stake.

    Expert review report on Ivermectin safety can be downloaded here https://www.medincell.com/ivermectin

    Ivermectin pre-print review can be found here:
    Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19
    https://osf.io/wx3zn/

    YouTube have taken down his webinar medical lecture (for medics) on the grounds it violates their terms of service. I watched this before it was taken down and it was pure science and data analysis. This stinks. Something is really very wrong here, and we all should be really very concerned indeed. The science MUST be allowed to speak for itself, especially as we see things unfold in India (and likely other places).
    You are 'woke' now. It takes agreeing or identifying with the censored entity to see it.

    Leave a comment:


  • sharon sanders
    replied
    bump this

    Leave a comment:


  • Vibrant62
    replied
    A very interesting discussion was held between Dr Jon Campbell and Dr. Pierre Kory on Ivermectin.

    See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19DPijOoVKE

    Part 1 is also worth listening to.

    Dr. Kory has been a mainstream part of the medical science establishment for years with a large number of peer reviewed studies to his name, and he raises some very interesting (but concerning) points at the end of this interview that are worth discussion. He states he has become cynical in the last year, but if what he says is correct, then our regulatory and science funding system (especially during an emergency) is very broken and needs urgently reforming to allow space for cheap interventions as well as the massive investments needed under Emergency Use Authorisations, especially when so many lives are at stake.

    Expert review report on Ivermectin safety can be downloaded here https://www.medincell.com/ivermectin

    Ivermectin pre-print review can be found here:
    Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19
    https://osf.io/wx3zn/

    YouTube have taken down his webinar medical lecture (for medics) on the grounds it violates their terms of service. I watched this before it was taken down and it was pure science and data analysis. This stinks. Something is really very wrong here, and we all should be really very concerned indeed. The science MUST be allowed to speak for itself, especially as we see things unfold in India (and likely other places).

    Leave a comment:


  • bertrand789
    commented on 's reply
    Emily , je suis d'accord. Si l'on admet que nous sommes face à une syndémie, il a été démontré que les épidémiologistes n'ont pas été bon, mais les autres l'ont été aussi?

    Le préalable c'est , nous sommes face à une syndémie , ensuite en chaque lieu, on fait en fonction du su ( vitamine, parasite , etc )

  • Emily
    commented on 's reply
    If it is helping COVID patients, (I have no opinion on this), maybe it acts as an immune modulator somehow. I hope they don't do a toxic trial like someone did for HCQ. I think that one was a mistake in dosing, rather than a highest possible dose test. They should also do the trial in a region where doctors are claiming it works. Could be regional exposures to other pathogens priming the locals' immune systems. It might work in one place, an area in need of a cheap medicine, but be of no value elsewhere.

  • bertrand789
    commented on 's reply
    j'accepte ces propos. Pour moi , nous ne sommes définitivement pas face à une épidémie , mais une syndémie . Il me semble que la position de ceux qui veulent aborder une syndémie avec des molécules classées comme médicament et pour lesquels le fabricant indique que même à 10 fois la dose ne sont pas dangereuses, peuvent être en usage dans x populations choisies pour cela .

    Dans ce dossier , on ne connait pas le taux de vitamine D des populations, on sait quel est le parasitisme en x lieux ?

    C'est la quatrième critique que je fais à l'encontre de Monsieur : ne pas avoir incité l'O.M.S à décrire d'une manière épidémiologique et scientifique a tué et va tuer ...

    Nommer correctement , c'est pour moi, le premier des traitements ...

  • JJackson
    commented on 's reply
    Betrand it is definitely a highly effective drug when used to clear parasitic infections and works very well at low doses the point she was making was that the data showing it worked against SARS-CoV-2 was at millimolar concentrations rather than nanomolar. One millimole being one million nanomoles so the safety data for the former does not necessarily apply to the later. If people are taking it at the recommended dosage it will not do them any harm, but is unlikely to do any good based on the data, If they take it at 100,000 times that does it may well help with their COVID but who knows what side effects it may have.

  • bertrand789
    replied
    C'est le premier médicament qui en vétérinaire a montré chez le chien, les bovins, les tortues qu'avec certaines particularités génétiques, cela pouvait tuer. Le rapport bénéfice risque a fait son usage en vétérinaire. Je ne pense pas que la dose soit importante, puisque ces particularités permettent le passage de la barrière hémato-ménigée, ou non . Cela concerne des anti-cancéreux aussi , il me semble .

    Cette audio montre que des personnes peuvent communiquer avec courtoisie . Vu les publications déjà sur ce sujet et les usages fait en grand en Inde

    :
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar?h...C+india+&btnG=

    10 avril 2020 La FDA ordonne de ne pas utiliser l'ivermectine dans le traitement du Covid-19. [ 61 ] ?

    Le 6 mai 2020, le ministère péruvien de la Santé a approuvé l'utilisation de l'ivermectine dans le traitement du Covid-19.
    [72] Le

    12 mai 2020, le ministère bolivien de la Santé a émis une approbation similaire.

    https://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A6...A6%BF%E0%A6%A8


    On ne peut donc qu’être surpris de la position du laboratoire Merck alors que des chercheurs indépendants, des pays ont d’ores et déjà donné une approbation à l’usage de l’ivermectine et l’inde a vu sa courbe de mortalité fortement baisser depuis le début de l’utilisation de cette molécule en 2020.

    https://www.francesoir.fr/societe-sa...ans-les-etudes

    C'est donc un dossier qui permet d'entrevoir que les décisions locales sont diverses... De plus, lorsque l'on admet que cet "ange maléfique" ne provoque de vrais problèmes que pour une infime partie de la population et vu la non description correcte des populations testées , il est possible que l'épidémiologie descriptive soit plus pertinente , que la fondamentale .

    Pour éclairer , ce dernier point , je souhaiterai que les personnes dans cette vidéo expliquent les pourquoi des résultats des chinois?

    Les publications mises en ligne, en ce lieu, chinoises, n'ont jamais décrit les traitements de médecine chinoise , lors des publications sur des traitements potentiels. C'est de la science ?

    Dit, en clair, sur des populations , avec des parasites, connus comme sensible , à cette molécule , son usage ne peut-il changer la donne vis à vis de la covid ?





    Leave a comment:


  • JJackson
    replied
    If you are interested in Ivermectin I would recommend listening to https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-599/ the problem is with it is dosage. Tests finding efficacy were based on concentrations over 1000 times above those on which the FDA authorisation as an anti-parasitc are based. When tested at the allowable concentrations it had no effect. Also it was found to have killed some dogs which had a particular mutation in their genome despite there not having problems otherwise. If a similar mutation is found in some humans it may end up killing them too at the dosage levels that would be needed to be of any use.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X