An Ivermectin-Pushing Doc Was Quietly Appointed to This Health Board. Then Things Got Weird https://www.thedailybeast.com/monta...shing-doc-dianna-carvey-then-things-got-weird
Let's take a look at the few pharmacies which are handing out Ivermectin to "treat" Covid... The Pharmacies Giving Ivermectin To People Bamboozled By Right-Wing Misinformation Ivermectin isn’t approved by federal authorities to treat COVID-19, but that’s not stopping people from seeking it out — or others from making money off of it. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivermectin-compounding-pharmacies-covid_n_617c4864e4b0931432187f71
Being evaluated in medical studies for the treatment of Covid-19 is not same as approved. This should be obvious. I will note that ALL the proper peer reviewed studies using double-blind methodology have demonstrated (so far) Ivermectin had no benefit in the prevention or treatment of Covid-19.
I did: (I will note larger studies in Argentina and Colombia have shown no benefit, though at least the latter used standard adult dosage): Israel: Methods The double-blinded trial compared patients receiving ivermectin 0·2 mg/kg for 3 days vs. placebo in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab was obtained at recruitment and then every two days. Primary endpoint was reduction of viral-load on the 6th day (third day after termination of treatment) as reflected by Ct level>30 (non-infectious level). The primary outcome was supported by determination of viral culture viability. Results Eighty-nine patients were eligible (47 in ivermectin and 42 in placebo arm). Their median age was 35 years. Females accounted for 21·6%, and 16·8% were asymptomatic at recruitment. Median time from symptom onset was 4 days. There were no statistical differences in these parameters between the two groups. On day 6, 34 out of 47 (72%) patients in the ivermectin arm reached the endpoint, compared to 21/ 42 (50%) in the placebo arm (OR 2·62; 95% CI: 1·09-6·31). In a multivariable logistic-regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1·06–6·45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13·0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48·2%) in the placebo group (p=0·008). Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients. Iran: Methods In this randomized, double-blind clinical trial, patients with COVID-19 admitted to 2 referral tertiary hospitals in Mazandaran, Iran, were randomly divided into 2 groups: intervention and control. In addition to standard treatment for COVID-19, the intervention group received a single weight-based dose (0.2 mg/kg) of ivermectin; the control group received the standard of care. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging data from participants were recorded at baseline. Patients were assessed daily for symptoms and disease progression. The primary clinical outcome measures were the durations of hospital stay, fever, dyspnea, and cough; and overall clinical improvement. Findings Sixty-nine patients were enrolled (mean [SD] ages: ivermectin, 47.63 [22.20] years; control, 45.18 [23.11] years; P = 0.65). Eighteen patients (51.4%) in the ivermectin group and 18 (52.9%) in control group were male (P = 0.90). The mean durations of dyspnea were 2.6 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group and 3.8 (0.4) days in the control group (P = 0.048). Also, persistent cough lasted for 3.1 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group compared to 4.8 (0.4) days in control group (PP = 0.019). The mean durations of hospital stay were 7.1 (0.5) days versus 8.4 (0.6) days in the ivermectin and control groups, respectively (P = 0.016). Also, the frequency of lymphopenia decreased to 14.3% in the ivermectin group and did not change in the control group (P = 0.007). Implications A single dose of ivermectin was well-tolerated in symptomatic patients with COVID-19, and important clinical features of COVID-19 were improved with ivermectin use, including dyspnea, cough, and lymphopenia. Further studies with larger sample sizes, different drug dosages, dosing intervals and durations, especially in different stages of the disease, may be useful in understanding the potential clinical benefits ivermectin. Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: IRCT20111224008507N3. Keywords: clinical trial, cough, COVID-19, dyspnea, ivermectin, lymphopenia Lagos: We conducted a translational proof of concept randomized, double blind placebo controlled, dose response and parallel group study of IV efficacy in RT—polymerase chain reaction proven COVID 19 positive patients. Sixty-two patients were randomized to three treatment groups. (A) IV 6 mg regime, (B) IV 12 mg regime (given Q84 h for 2 weeks) (C, control) Lopinavir/Ritonavir. All groups plus standard of Care. Results The Days to COVID negativity (DTN) was significantly and dose dependently reduced by IV (P = 0.0066). The DTN for Control were, = 9.1+/–5.2, for A 6.0 +/– 2.9 and for B 4.6 +/–3.2. Two way repeated measures ANOVA of ranked COVID 19 +/– scores at 0, 84, 168 and252h showed a significant IV treatment effect (P = 0.035) and time effect (P < 0.0001). IV also tended to increase SPO2% compared to controls, P = 0.073, 95% CI—0.39 to 2.59 and increased platelet count compared to C (P = 0.037) 95%CI 5.55—162.55 × 103/ml. The platelet count increase was inversely correlated to DTN (r = –0.52, P = 0.005). No SAE was reported. Conclusions 12mg IV regime given twice a week may have superior efficacy over 6mg IV given twice a week, and certainly over the non IV arm of the study. IV should be considered for use in clinical management of SARS-COV2, and may find applications in prophylaxis in high risk areas.
Remember all the dumb Ivermectin cultists claiming Malaysia was one of the countries successfully treating Covid-19 with Ivermectin. About that... Ivermectin does not reduce risk of severe illness from COVID-19: Malaysia's health ministry https://www.channelnewsasia.com/asi...n-does-not-reduce-risk-severe-illness-2289331 KUALA LUMPUR: Ivermectin does not reduce the risk of severe illness from COVID-19, and cannot be recommended for inclusion in current COVID-19 treatment guidelines, said Malaysia's health ministry. Health director-general Dr Noor Hisham Abdullah said on Wednesday (Nov 3) that the ministry recommends that Ivermectin be used only in clinical studies with monitoring, citing the results of the I-TECH study by the Institute for Clinical Research (ICR). The study was conducted on 500 COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital in stage two or stage three categories. It evaluated the effectiveness of a five-day Ivermectin treatment. "The clinical trial study was conducted by infectious disease physicians and clinicians who were actively involved in COVID-19 management in collaboration with ICR under the National Institute of Health," he said. “The I-TECH study was to see whether the administration of Ivermectin in the first week on patients experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 could prevent them from getting worse (stage four or stage five) which was among patients aged 50 years and above and having at least one comorbidity." One group of patients was given Ivermectin treatment, while another group was given the standard care based on the health ministry's guidelines. Lead researcher Dr Steven Lim Chee Loon, an infectious disease specialist from the Raja Permaisuri Bainun Hospital in Ipoh, revealed that no significant difference was found in terms of ICU admission, usage of breathing support equipment, recovery of symptoms, blood test parameter and chest X-ray scans between the two groups. “The probability to fully recover from the symptoms on the fifth day among the two groups was almost similar, where there was no statistically significant difference recorded," said Dr Noor Hisham. "Apart from that, the safety analysis reported a threefold occurrence of side effects among the (Ivermectin) group, compared with the (standard of care) group, of which most of them were diarrhoea cases. "It is hoped that the local study could provide enlightenment to medical practitioners in Malaysia and the public who have been asking about the efficacy of Ivermectin in the COVID-19 clinical treatment practice." He also reminded medical practitioners not to recommend the use of Ivermectin, including sharing advertisements or illegal sale of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, until more solid scientific evidence is available. The results of the study are in line with large-scale studies such as IVERCOR-COVID-19 from Argentina and TOGETHER from Brazil that do not support the routine use of Ivermectin in the clinical practice of COVID-19 treatment, he said. The I-TECH research team planned to submit the study data for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to provide additional information on Ivermectin studies, including meta-analysis, he added.
Yet another Ivermectin study retracted after significant flaws identified -- such as the data being completely bogus and the patients not actually existing. https://retractionwatch.com/2021/11/02/ivermectin-covid-19-study-retracted-authors-blame-file-mixup/