The irrational attacks on ivermectin have been insane. But some if the critics have been right on one point... The studies have been promising but inconclusive. Part of the problem is many of the studies used combinations of treatments, which may work well on their own (ie. vitamin D) making it hard to seperate the benefits of ivermectin…
The irrational attacks on ivermectin have been insane. But some if the critics have been right on one point... The studies have been promising but inconclusive. Part of the problem is many of the studies used combinations of treatments, which may work well on their own (ie. vitamin D) making it hard to seperate the benefits of ivermectin. Was this study focused on ivermectin or a combination of drugs/vitamins?
No kidding haha. By the by, i was just making a similar point about test negative designs. They are inherently biased to the point of uselessness the way they are currently being used in the academic literature. But the government could eliminate a lot of bias by testing in a similar fashion to political surveys, ie., random samples of the population daily or weekly get tested. We could get relatively close to true VE that way inexpensively. Such a program will cost millions over the course of a year... Too expensive for independent researchers to perform, but a drop in the ocean in comparison to the billions/trillions being spent on covid with public money (for a high value end goal). Would never happen as the results may be contradictory to the ongoing massive propaganda campaign/power grab currently taking place. Oh well.
Did you see the table of results of multiple random controlled studies of ivermectin efficacy, posted recently by Pierre Kory on Twitter? Doesn't look inconclusive to me.
Good to hear. If people are not taking vitamins as part of the treatment, and ivermectin still has such a strong effect, then it is pretty promising (even if some are taking vitamins independently)
I have no way of knowing for sure, but in my mind, the Youtube lecture of John Campbell about Vitamin D may have really improved the course of my Covid. I took a lot of D3 in the beginning of my covid. D3 is well tolerated.
It's a crime against humanity that the potential benefit of vitamin D is covered up. What is the worst outcome of making sure people aren't vitamin D deficient? Less profits to pharmaceuticals? Even if it does not help in COVID (I strongly suspect it does but can attest that I have not had time to thoroughly review the literature), it will help in many other areas of health.
They only provided IVN, but there does not seem to be any data on the actual behavior of the participants.
It's important to note that this does not have any of the desired components of a trial (double-blind, randomization etc.), so the data should be understood with the numerous limitations.
Retrospective observational trials are best used to corroborate data from other types of research.
The irrational attacks on ivermectin have been insane. But some if the critics have been right on one point... The studies have been promising but inconclusive. Part of the problem is many of the studies used combinations of treatments, which may work well on their own (ie. vitamin D) making it hard to seperate the benefits of ivermectin. Was this study focused on ivermectin or a combination of drugs/vitamins?
Also, this is a job of out government, to conduct a large, well designed and conclusive study.
No kidding haha. By the by, i was just making a similar point about test negative designs. They are inherently biased to the point of uselessness the way they are currently being used in the academic literature. But the government could eliminate a lot of bias by testing in a similar fashion to political surveys, ie., random samples of the population daily or weekly get tested. We could get relatively close to true VE that way inexpensively. Such a program will cost millions over the course of a year... Too expensive for independent researchers to perform, but a drop in the ocean in comparison to the billions/trillions being spent on covid with public money (for a high value end goal). Would never happen as the results may be contradictory to the ongoing massive propaganda campaign/power grab currently taking place. Oh well.
Did you see the table of results of multiple random controlled studies of ivermectin efficacy, posted recently by Pierre Kory on Twitter? Doesn't look inconclusive to me.
As far as I could tell, just IVM. But many people smartened enough to take vitamins.
Good to hear. If people are not taking vitamins as part of the treatment, and ivermectin still has such a strong effect, then it is pretty promising (even if some are taking vitamins independently)
I have no way of knowing for sure, but in my mind, the Youtube lecture of John Campbell about Vitamin D may have really improved the course of my Covid. I took a lot of D3 in the beginning of my covid. D3 is well tolerated.
It's a crime against humanity that the potential benefit of vitamin D is covered up. What is the worst outcome of making sure people aren't vitamin D deficient? Less profits to pharmaceuticals? Even if it does not help in COVID (I strongly suspect it does but can attest that I have not had time to thoroughly review the literature), it will help in many other areas of health.
Yes. This alone is a huge crime
What else are you taking with the D3?
They only provided IVN, but there does not seem to be any data on the actual behavior of the participants.
It's important to note that this does not have any of the desired components of a trial (double-blind, randomization etc.), so the data should be understood with the numerous limitations.
Retrospective observational trials are best used to corroborate data from other types of research.