You can't afford a subscription to the WSJ.... how sad. Even sadder is that you can't even find a way around a basic paywall. https://www.wsj.com/articles/iverme...t-trial-to-date-11647601200?mod=djemalertNEWS
As every other mainstream respected study has shown -- dozens of them -- Ivermectin is useless at preventing or treating Covid. It is truly sad that the MAGA crowd still pushes this and other false cures leading to more severe illness and deaths from Covid in patients not receiving effective treatment. Ivermectin Did Nothing To Help COVID-19 Patients, Large Study Finds “If there are active treatments, it is better to use those agents than agents that we wish worked," the New England Journal of Medicine's deputy editor said. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivermectin-covid-patients-study_n_624509fae4b0d8266aa77126 Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug often used to deworm horses and cattle, does not reduce the risk of being hospitalized with COVID-19 despite its questionable rise as an alternative treatment for the disease, according to a large new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine. (More at above url)
The Ivermectin Guys’ Whole Thing Has Really Fallen Apart Meanwhile, they’re still pretending the drug is viable as a treatment for COVID. https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxda8q/the-ivermectin-guys-whole-thing-has-really-fallen-apart In the summer of 2021, a group of the most vociferous people online put all their energies behind the unproven thesis that ivermectin, a widely-used and effective anti-parasitic, is a cure or treatment for COVID. They were joined by a collection of fringe doctors who stood to gain money and attention from promoting that idea, and together they created a surprisingly durable little bubble, which continues to pop, over and over again, while they studiously pretend it remains intact. The latest news about ivermectin’s ineffectiveness as a COVID treatment came via the New England Journal of Medicine, which published what’s known as the TOGETHER study, reporting the results of a large clinical trial in Brazil in which 3,515 COVID-positive adults getting treatment at public health clinics were randomly assigned a three-day course of ivermectin, a placebo, or another intervention. The conclusion: Ivermectin did not workto create a “significantly or clinically meaningful lower risk” of hospital admission or “prolonged emergency department observation.” Ivermectin was given early in the course of illness, which ivermectin proponents have always claimed is key to its effectiveness. This study joins a host of other well-designed clinical studies finding the same thing: Ivermectin doesn’t seem to work to prevent more severe disease. While the National Center of Translational Sciences still has a clinical trial on ivermectin underway, and says it currently can’t recommend for or against the use of the drug to treat COVID, the weight of the existing evidence so far isn’t looking good. Additionally, several studies showing ivermectin’s supposed effectiveness have turned out to be either flawed or outright fraudulent. All of this puts the people trying to make money and/or gain attention from ivermectin in an awkward spot. The Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, the main organization loudly promoting ivermectin in the United States, decided to go the straight conspiracy theory route, putting out a press release which dismissed the TOGETHER study as “predetermined to show ivermectin as ineffective” and accusing the study authors of being in bed with Pfizer. They did this by intently misreading the study’s own disclosure forms, which state that the biosimulation company Certara, which often consults with pharmaceutical companies, has received grants from Pfizer, Merck, Astrazeneca, and other entities, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. A scientist who works for Certara, Dr. Craig Rayner, is a co-author on the study, but says on his disclosure forms that the money given by Pfizer, Merck and Astrazeneca to Certara was not related to ivermectin research or the TOGETHER study. (One must also point out that if you were trying to cover up a nefarious plot to hop into bed with Pfizer, you probably wouldn’t put it on your disclosure forms.) (More at above url)
Once again Ivermectin is shown to be useless for treating Covid, but fringe doctors keep prescribing it -- forcing pharmacies to dispense it. No evidence showing ivermectin effectively against COVID-19, study finds https://knowridge.com/2022/04/no-ev...tin-effectively-against-covid-19-study-finds/ In a recent study published in JAMA, researchers found even though clinical trials haven’t shown oral ivermectin works against COVID-19, doctors continue to prescribe ivermectin. They found health insurers are heavily subsidizing the cost of those prescriptions. The team calls for insurers to align their coverage of the drug with the level of medical evidence surrounding it—just like they do for other medications, tests, and procedures. The study is from the University of Michigan and was conducted by Kao-Ping Chua, M.D., Ph.D. In the study, the team used insurance data to study how much health plans paid for oral ivermectin in late 2020 and early 2021. They identified and examined 5,600 prescriptions for oral ivermectin that weren’t written for a parasitic infection, the main reason that ivermectin is prescribed other than COVID-19. The total cost per prescription was $58 for private plans, which paid 61% of this amount, or about $36. The total cost per prescription was $52 for Medicare Advantage plans, which paid 74% of this amount, or about $39. The rest of the cost was paid by patients. As a result of this coverage, the researchers estimate that United States private and Medicare plans may have paid $2.4 million for ivermectin prescriptions for COVID-19 in the week of August 13, 2021, alone. If prescribing and insurance reimbursement were at that level for an entire year, insurers would spend nearly $130 million over a year on the drug, despite a lack of evidence it works. Unless strong new evidence comes to light, the researchers argue that insurers should require doctors to justify prescribing ivermectin during the pandemic by filling out a prior authorization form. While they acknowledge this could make it harder for patients to get ivermectin for its FDA-approved indications, they believe the number of these patients would be low. As evidence, they pointed to a CDC study showing that only about 3,600 ivermectin prescriptions were filled each week in the U.S. before the pandemic. The team says to be clear, clinicians may still prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 and patients can choose to pay for these prescriptions themselves. The point is simply that insurers shouldn’t cover these prescriptions unless ivermectin proves to be an effective COVID-19 treatment. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization have both said oral ivermectin should not be used for COVID-19 purposes, except in clinical studies.
I have a supply of the the newest Covid treatment miricle Dr Grouchy won't tell you about. The best thing is, it an edible in hotdog flavour! PM for orders.