I hope not. I try, often failing, to not insult people. I get my feathers ruffled and defensive at times, no doubt, and I like to point out when someone is gratuitously using insults (ad hominem fallacy), but I have a sincere desire to elevate the debate to a more dignified level. And yes, I miss the boat on this quite often. It is a genuine aspiration, however. (and, yes, I know you were speaking in jest).
Texas hospital system bans ivermectin for COVID patients as their families demand 'wonder drug' https://justthenews.com/politics-po...bans-ivermectin-covid-patients-their-families
Now, Denmark put the vaccines protect you propaganda of the CDC on the line. They have opened up everything. No masks, no nothing. After all they are 80% vaccinated? They probably, effectively, banned Ivermectin use as well. https://www.yahoo.com/news/denmark-lifts-covid-19-restrictions-141301430.html
The study is not merely "flawed" -- it is entirely fraudulent. The data was completely cherry-picked. Of course, this study is pushed by the Ivermectin cultists. Ivermectin As COVID Treatment Study Flawed According to Scientists https://www.newsweek.com/ivermectin-covid-treatment-study-flawed-scientists-1627109 Scientists have cast doubts over an ivermectin study that said it had found a "favorable outcome" when giving the medicine to COVID patients. The May 2021 study was a randomized, double-blinded trial in Israel that compared non-hospitalized patients receiving ivermectin for three days to those who were given a placebo. There were 47 patients in the ivermectin group, and 42 in the placebo group. The study, which is a pre-print available to read on the medRxiv pre-print repository, concluded that it had identified "significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures" in a group of people treated with ivermectin compared to a placebo group. It has since been cited by several news outlets. But Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, a chronic disease researcher and science journalist, criticized the study in a series of Twitter posts on Tuesday. He said that there is a discrepancy between the final study and what the study authors said they would do in pre-registration. The study's pre-registration can be found here. Meyerowitz-Katz said the discrepancy involves people who were excluded from the study based on what is known as the patients' CT value—simply, a measure of how much virus someone has in their system. The study states that COVID patients with a CT value of over 35 in the first two tests were excluded, despite this not being included in the study's initial exclusion criteria. "It appears that the authors have added an extra exclusion criteria that is applied after randomization and treatment," Meyerowitz-Kats tweeted. "If you add these people back in, the results of the study entirely lose their significance," he added. Dr. David Boulware is professor of medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases and International Medicine at the University of Minnesota with formal training in clinical trials. He told Newsweek the criticisms of the study were "spot on" and that the changes "seem very much like cherry-picking." "While post-hoc changes can be made, they need to be explained in great detail," he said. "And preferably before looking at the group level data." Dr. Stephen Griffin is chair of the virus division, microbiology society and academic lead for laboratories at the Leeds Institute of Medical Research. He said Meyerowitz-Katz' criticism "makes perfect sense," and added: "You can't add extra exclusion criteria after randomizing. "The trial is ongoing and I will be interested to see the outcome, but until then I would echo the advice from WHO and urge that Ivermectin is not used off-label to treat COVID. The rise in U.S. poison centers dealing with Ivermectin-related issues is deeply troubling." Dr. Simon Maxwell of the Clinical Pharmacology Unit at the University of Edinburgh said the study is "interesting but flawed" due to the change in protocol, and pointed to several large-scale ivermectin trials currently underway. "Let's all await the clinical trials before advocating mass deployment," he told Newsweek. Newsweek has contacted two of the study's authors for comment. Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic medication that has been put forward as a potential COVID treatment due to a number of studies suggesting it may be beneficial to patients. At the same time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has warned people not to use it to treat or prevent COVID, citing a lack of data, misuse, and the effects of overdose.
New Mexico health officials believe 1 is dead after livestock drug overdose https://www.koat.com/article/ivermectin-overdose-covid-19-new-mexico/37548538
How did he overdose on Ivermectin ? Drink it, chewable, snort it, smoke it, bong, freebasing, or what. A few months from now...it could be the new drug for addicts...crack-ivermectin. wrbtrader
Nice try, but you are wrong once again. Ivermectin has been used in humans since the 1980s. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7290143/ Ivermectin proposes many potentials effects to treat a range of diseases, with its antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-cancer properties as a wonder drug. It is highly effective against many microorganisms including some viruses. In this comprehensive systematic review, antiviral effects of ivermectin are summarized including in vitro and in vivo studies over the past 50 years. Several studies reported antiviral effects of ivermectin on RNA viruses such as Zika, dengue, yellow fever, West Nile, Hendra, Newcastle, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, chikungunya, Semliki Forest, Sindbis, Avian influenza A, Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome, Human immunodeficiency virus type 1, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Furthermore, there are some studies showing antiviral effects of ivermectin against DNA viruses such as Equine herpes type 1, BK polyomavirus, pseudorabies, porcine circovirus 2, and bovine herpesvirus 1. Ivermectin plays a role in several biological mechanisms, therefore it could serve as a potential candidate in the treatment of a wide range of viruses including COVID-19 as well as other types of positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses. In vivo studies of animal models revealed a broad range of antiviral effects of ivermectin, however, clinical trials are necessary to appraise the potential efficacy of ivermectin in clinical setting. Ivermectin has been used for several years to treat many infectious diseases in mammals. It has a good safety profile with low adverse effects when orally prescribed. Ivermectin was identified in late 1970s and first approved for animal use in 1981. Its potential use in humans was confirmed a few years later. Subsequently, William C. Campbell and Satoshi Ōmura who discovered and developed this medication received the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine [1–3]. Studies revealed that ivermectin as a broad-spectrum drug with high lipid solubility possesses numerous effects on parasites, [1, 3] nematodes, arthropods, flavivirus, mycobacteria, and mammals through a variety of mechanisms. In addition to having antiparasitic and antiviral effects, this drug also causes immunomodulation in the host. Studies have shown its effect on inhibiting the proliferation of cancer cells, as well as regulating glucose and cholesterol in animals. Despite diverse effects of this medication, many of its underlying mechanisms are not yet known [4]. Of note, some of these effects may be secondary to toxic effects on cells (Fig. 1). Results The antiviral effects of ivermectin on RNA viruses COVID-19 In a recent in vitro study, the Vero/hSLAM cells infected with the SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 virus were exposed to 5 µM ivermectin in 48 h, and a 5000-fold reduction in viral RNA compared with control was found [15]. The results showed that treatment with ivermectin effectively kills almost all viral particles within 48 h. The study was the first to assess the antiviral effect of ivermectin on COVID-19. The authors acknowledged that the drug may have antiviral effects by inhibiting the importin (IMP) α/β receptor, which is responsible for transmitting viral proteins into the host cell nucleus. The authors proposed human studies to confirm the potential benefits of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19. Although this study was the first to confirm the antiviral effect of ivermectin on COVID-19 [15], other studies examined the antiviral effects of the drug on both RNA and DNA viruses, which are summarized in Table 1.
Maybe the headline should be... Ivermectin treatment successfully prevents COVID death of New Mexico man
The problem with the discussion of Ivermectin here @ Elitetrader.com which is an American trading forum that's owned by a U.S. citizen living in Florida (Baron)... Was the timing of the vaccine attacks by those that believe in Ivermectin when we know and they know that +90% of Covid Hospitalizations, ICU Admissions and Deaths are primarily people that are Not Vaccinated here in the United States and Canada. One can easily be stupid and say every one of these hospitals in North America especially the southern states are lying about the above Covid statistic... Hospitals that have Doctors and Nurses that say they are not going to take the vaccine...it's logical to assume the latter hospitals are not going to fabricate statistics that most of their Covid patients are Not Vaccinated and absorbing critical care resources of other patients not related to a Covid infection. Personally, I know Doctors and Nurses in several red political states and they are not going to get vaccinated. Yet, at the same time, they know > 90% of their severe Covid patients are people not vaccinated. In contrast, I also have relatives in the same states in that work either as a Doctor or Nurse and they are fully vaccinated because they believe in the science here in North America and they understand the Covid statistics here in our North America hospitals. The same is true here in Canada in which I see similar like severe Covid illnesses statistics as the United States and I hear about it from my girlfriend that's a head nurse in the ICU ward of a hospital here in Québec, Canada. More importantly, my relatives in the U.S. have children to protect and they know the best way to do that is to ensure that is for the parents to be fully vaccinated although they know its not a 100% guarantee. With that said, I tried to help the Ivermectin Covidiots here at ET by telling them they're approaching this the wrong way here @ Elitetrader.com in which they should be ONLY discussing the merits of Ivermectin instead of bashing vaccines when the statistics in North America (Canada and the United States) have overwhelming statistics that Vaccines are highly effective in preventing Covid Hospitalization, ICU admissions, and Deaths as a result from a severe Covid illness. They didn't listen and went back on the anti-vaccine attack / misinformation campaign in which many of us rightfully defended North America's vaccine statistics while most of the Ivermectin advocates are foreigners from other countries using statistics from other countries to bash (attack) Vaccines in North America. Simply, it's too late now because the rabbit is out of the hat for them to retrace and start over and discuss only the merits of Ivermectin at a forum when we already have approved antiviral therapeutic drugs for Covid that are successful against Covid. Ivermectin advocates here are the same individuals that early last year refers to Covid as a democratic hoax, or its just like the cold / flu. If they truly believed such...why don't they just take a Tylenol when they get Covid and shut up and stay away from the hospital ? Answer - They know Covid is real and they know who is being hospitalized here in North America with severe Covid illnesses and they know that the Delta Variant is targeting younger adults and children. The latter (children) is my primary issue with those Not Vaccinated infecting children who can not be vaccinated. The result is that many of our Pediatric hospitals have seen a 200% - 700% increase in severe Covid illnesses in children while at the same time in the same states...some Governors of these states are trying to ban face masks for children in schools. wrbtrader