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

  • Shiloh
    replied
    Source: https://naturalselections.substack.c...s-cov2-extinct

    On Driving SARS-CoV2 Extinct
    Why We Need a Multi-Pronged Approach
    Heather Heying
    Jul 30

    This article is co-authored by Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein. It is very long, and sometimes technical, and not as much fun as a lot of what will be showing up in Natural Selections in the future.

    We are at a crossroads. There is a deadly virus circulating and out of control. Many have died, and many more certainly will. We can choose to use all available tools to eradicate this virus, or we can allow it to become a permanent fellow traveler, endemic to humanity. The first option has a high cost, but that cost is finite, largely ending when the disease ends. The second option is much worse. To the cost that we have already paid, add a continuing pattern of suffering and casualties going forward indefinitely. This toll is incalculable. Some have argued that it is already too late—an evolutionary hazard we warned about early in the pandemic—but we have yet to see a compelling argument to support this belief, and until such a case is made we, together, are morally obligated to pursue the eradication of Covid-19.

    If we are interested in minimizing harm from SARS-CoV2, we need to use prophylaxis to force extinction. Prophylaxis refers to action taken before exposure to prevent an event. A condom is prophylaxis against pregnancy. Doxycycline is prophylaxis against malaria. Vaccines and repurposed drugs such as ivermectin have both been presented as prophylaxis against Covid-19. In order to clear our planet of SARS-CoV2, we need safe and effective prophylaxis distributed so widely that it drives the virus to extinction.

    How we do this is up for debate, and of course there will be disagreement along the way. Some people, including the authors of a recently published Quillette article, see one and only one way forward: vaccination of every person with access to currently authorized vaccines. Other people, including ourselves, believe that the current vaccines—which are non-sterilizing, cannot quickly reach the entire world, and provide only narrow, short-lived immunity—cannot accomplish the goal, not even in principle. Any viable strategy for extinguishing SARS-CoV-2 in the near term must therefore include effective prophylaxis beyond the current crop of authorized vaccines. For now that means drugs taken to prevent infection for those who are unvaccinated and who have not had a confirmed case of Covid (and therefore lack natural immunity). It may also require prophylactic medicine for vaccinated people as fading vaccine-induced immunity and new variants evolving in response to the vaccination campaign render the current vaccines ever less effective. ..

    Leave a comment:


  • Emily
    replied
    Some candid discussion about early treatments in the video below.

    Paul Alexander, PhD is an amazing man. Born in Trinidad, trained at Oxford, Johns Hopkins, and McMasters University, his specialty is the critical analysis of science. He currently resides in the United States, which is a gift to us. He was on the staff of the World Health Organization (WHO) and then became a member of President Trump’s White House Coronavirus Task Force—and provides us a rare insider look at its domination by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx. There was shocking opposition from the bureaucracy that was supposed to be supporting the efforts of President Trump. Dr. Alexander thoughtfully explains the difficulties faced by Trump supporters like himself in a Trump administration that was overrun by enemies. Dr. Alexander’s personal testimony confirms the abuse heaped upon good people who try to help in the den of corruption that our government has become. He also describes the disastrous activities of the CDC and other agencies. You will leave this interview with new insights into the vaccine abuse of America and its children, and the ineptness and malice of our deeply embedded government bureaucrats. I encourage you to explore the toughest challenges with this honorable, soft-spoken, truth-speaking scientist.

    "Paul Alexander, PhD is an amazing man. Born in Trinidad, trained at Oxford, Johns Hopkins, and McMasters University, his specialty is the critical analysis of science. He currently resides in the United States, which is a gift to us. He was on the staff of the World Health Organization (WHO) and then became a member of President Trump’s White House Coronavirus Task Force—and provides us a rare insider look..."

    Leave a comment:


  • sharon sanders
    replied
    bump this

    Leave a comment:


  • Mary Wilson
    replied
    Is Ivermectin for Covid-19 Based on Fraudulent Research?

    3 days ago
    Gideon M-K

    Ivermectin is an antiparasitic medication used to treat various types of worms and similar diseases. It’s pretty safe, widely in use across the world, and in most ways a useful medication to have on hand if you think you’ve been exposed to contaminated human feces, or if you just need to disinfect your sheep.

    However, there has been a lot of hubbub over ivermectin for another reason. According to a number of ad-hoc groups across the world, as well as some scientific studies, ivermectin is a silver bullet against COVID-19. And while there may be some question about whether ivermectin works, with the World Health Organization recommending that it only be used to treat COVID-19 in the context of a clinical trial, there is also a lot of optimism about using it as a treatment. Half a dozen countries have officially promoted ivermectin as a drug for COVID-19, and it has likely been given to tens of millions of people across the world at this point, with prices skyrocketing as a result.
    ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Emily
    replied
    It might have something to offer for long haulers. I saw a couple of legit seeming reports of improvement in a couple of women on Twitter. Here's a news report.


    I put a research article in the library about finding lingering virus in the intestinal tracts of long haulers. Since ivermectin was designed to treat intestinal parasites, the concentrations there could be strong enough to knock it out and allow the immune system to regulate itself again. Maybe the Chinese were onto something doing those anal swabs!

    Leave a comment:


  • Vibrant62
    replied
    I have several issues with this report (see post above), the largest being the implication that removal of this one study completely invalidates the findings of all the others. It also leans towards a high degree of bias in terms of the tone and conclusions of the author. Indeed, the meta-analyses will need correcting if their findings hold up following additional scrutiny, but if you look e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...jt-28-e434.pdf, then yes, the study in question has been included in this meta-analysis. If the researcher's findings are validated, then it will need updating... but it was still only one of 24 RCTs examined, and if you look at each of the arms, the patient numbers in each were not so great as to massively alter the findings and negate any benefit as is implied (in contrast with the conclusions stated in this article by its author).

    Either way, I hope that the currently underway trials in e.g. the UK PRINCIPAL trial are expedited, as if ivermectin works, the need for it is now, not next year or the year after.

    Leave a comment:


  • JJackson
    commented on 's reply
    See Shiloh's post below the first trial that I had seen that which showed a clear benefit now seems to have been fraudulent and has been retracted.

  • Shiloh
    replied
    Source: https://www.news24.com/health24/medi...cerns-20210716


    26m ago
    A study showing promising evidence of ivermectin for Covid-19 retracted amid ‘ethical concerns’
    accreditation
    Compiled by Zakiyah Ebrahim

    There has been a lot of discussion on ivermectin as a possible prophylaxis and treatment for Covid-19.
    In November, a study studying the value of the drug for Covid showed promising findings, and was highly cited in other papers.
    But independent researchers conducted in-depth investigations and found that the original study was potentially based on fraud, inconsistencies, and plagiarism.

    An extensive preprint study showing that the anti-parasitic drug, ivermectin, played a significant role in reducing the risk of Covid-19 infection, hospitalisation, and death has been withdrawn due to "ethical concerns".


    The research was led by Dr Ahmed Elgazzar from Benha University in Egypt and was published on Research Square in November 2020. It was presented as the results of a multi-centre, 600-patient study evaluating the use of the drug in preventing and treating Covid-19. ..


    Leave a comment:


  • JJackson
    replied
    It looks like it may have a uses as a prophylactic

    Use of Ivermectin as a Potential Chemoprophylaxis for COVID-19 in Egypt: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

    https://web.b.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=0973709X&AN=148789244&h=PVj1kZTyWxpsXW3%2fQ829DpZFSeTxrqCWLOnVbRls7njlDaoxzVUOpM019RiN4GCrebRA0ZRyhbjNeUxUTIMdlQ%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx


    Results: Ivermectin group included 203 contacts (to 52 index cases) aged 39.75±14.94 years; 52.2% were males. Nonintervention group included 101 contacts (to a total of 24 index cases) aged 37.69±16.96 years, 49.5% were males. Fifteen contacts (7.4%) developed COVID-19 in the ivermectin arm compared to 59 (58.4%) in the nonintervention arm (P <0.001). The protection rate for ivermectin was more prominent in contacts aged less than 60-year-old (6.2% infected compared to 58.7% if no treatment). Ivermectin in the protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection had an OR of 12.533 and 11.445 (compared to nontreatment) in both univariate and multivariate models, respectively. Side effects of ivermectin were reported in 5.4%; they were mild. Conclusion: Ivermectin is suggested to be a promising, effective and safe chemoprophylactic drug in management of COVID-19.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emily
    commented on 's reply
    I wish they had disclosed the placebo. They welcomed questions, though. I noticed a couple of the HCQ studies used vitamins.
    They do have the dosing in the PDF. (I don't know how this compares to COVID treatment protocols being used.)

    "The dose of ivermectin used was the approved dose in
    Argentina for the treatment of other diseases, such as
    parasitic diseases, and it was staggered according to
    weight. Those weighing up to 80 Kg received 2 tablets of
    6 mg (mg) each at inclusion and another 2 tablets of 6
    mg each 24 h after the first dose (total 24 mg). Those
    weighing more than 80 kg and up to 110 kg received 3
    tablets of 6 mg each at inclusion and another 3 tablets of
    6 mg each 24 h after the first dose (total 36 mg). Those
    weighing more than 110 kg received 4 tablets of 6 mg
    each at inclusion and another 4 tablets of 6 mg each 24
    h after the first dose (total 48 mg). Individuals randomized
    to placebo received the equivalent number of placebo
    tablets to the ivermectin weight-based dosage, at
    baseline and again after 24 h."

  • JJackson
    replied
    BMC Infect Dis . Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
    BMC Infect Dis . 2021 Jul 2;21(1):635. doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5. Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial Julio Vallejos (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?sort=date&term=Vallejos+J&cauthor_id=34215210) 1


    Results: The mean age was 42 years (SD ± 15.5) and the median time since symptom onset to the inclusion was 4 days [interquartile range 3-6]. The primary outcome of hospitalization was met in 14/250 (5.6%) individuals in ivermectin group and 21/251 (8.4%) in placebo group (odds ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-1.31; p = 0.227). Time to hospitalization was not statistically different between groups. The mean time from study enrollment to invasive mechanical ventilatory support (MVS) was 5.25 days (SD ± 1.71) in ivermectin group and 10 days (SD ± 2) in placebo group, (p = 0.019). There were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes including polymerase chain reaction test negativity and safety outcomes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emily
    replied
    May 20, 2021 | USA
    The Drug that Cracked Covid by Michael Capuzzo
    New York Times best-selling author Michael Capuzzo writes in Mountain Home the riveting, unbelievable story behind the story of why a family whose mother was dying of COVID, had to obtain a court-order to compel the hospital to give her a life-saving medicine. Capuzzo calls upon his journalist colleagues to “open their minds to legitimate, unreported doctors and therapies and write about all sides of the Ivermectin story, like journalists always have. It is a historic opportunity. For the first time in the long journey from Gutenberg to Google, journalists may be the ones to save the world.
    https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/The-Drug-that-Cracked-Covid-by-Michael-Ca…

    Leave a comment:


  • Vibrant62
    commented on 's reply
    One thing we need to check closely are the study protocols, and if the proposed dosage regimen is likely to be therapeutic, based on the earlier trial protocols that show benefits - hopefully they will have some sort of dose ranging element to it. The Cochrane Institute came up with a good study protocol which can be found here https://www.cochrane.org/CD015017/HA...ating-covid-19

  • Shiloh
    replied
    Podcast Episode
    #1671 - Bret Weinstein & Dr. Pierre Kory
    The Joe Rogan Experience
    Jun 22
    175 min
    Episode Description

    Dr. Pierre Kory is an ICU and lung specialist who is an expert on the use of the drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19. Bret Weinstein is an evolutionary biologist, visiting fellow at Princeton, host of the DarkHorse podcast, and co-author (with his wife, Heather Heying) of the forthcoming "A Hunter-Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century."

    View at: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7uV..._branch=1&nd=1

    Leave a comment:


  • JJackson
    commented on 's reply
    Good, the trial, I had heard was likely, is in the US so we may get both.
    Last edited by JJackson; June 24, 2021, 02:34 AM.
Working...
X