Re that study provided by Greywings: it is a meta-analysis, yes, which is an examination of existing studies. There are two huge problems with it..

First, it describes Pierre Kory as an expert. He's not. He's an advocate, yes, but has no specialist qualifications and has conducted no clinical trials

Second, and more importantly, among the studies it incorporates in reaching its conclusion is the Elgazzar study. This is the study that was withdrawn for fraud. Including its findings and giving weight to them distorts the entire analysis.

A more reliable meta analysis has been done by the respected Cochrane Library. It includes the following comment regarding the American Journal of Therapeutics article:

" [ the Bryant study ] used a trial sequential analysis to test whether there was sufficient evidence to detect or reject intervention effects and to address imprecision of the effect estimates in this way. They concluded that there may have been sufficient evidence accrued before the end of 2020 to show a significant benefit of ivermectin over control for all‐cause mortality. However, trial sequential analysis cannot adjust for risk of bias or wrong comparators. Therefore, inclusion of all trials in this context into the analysis does not yield reliable results." (Bolding is mine).

Their conclusion:

" Based on the current very low‐ to low‐certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID‐19. The completed studies are small and few are considered high quality. Several studies are underway that may produce clearer answers in review updates. Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use of ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID‐19 outside of well‐designed randomized trials."

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full?cookiesEnabled

Edited to add more references

@jmm1837 excellent concise followup. thank you. c

I think this is a pretty good summary (from the Australian perspective) of how we got to where we are on ivermectin. According to the article, the Cochrane study I mentioned below is still the best analysis of all the other studies and of the current state of knowledge about the drug's utility for Covid.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-08/reality-check-ivermectin-covid19/100440624

Everything you need to know about the virus. Dr. Peter McCullough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=xWBC-JX6lsg

When it was pointed out to me that a doctor I posted about was lying, I denounced him.

Later, I asked olliesmom about a doctor she posted about, Dr Justus Hope. And who he really is. Why he goes under a fake name. No answer.

Today, I pointed out to ronminsouthga (who brought the other doctor‘s lies to my attention) that Dr Peter McCullough lied in the same way. No answer.

One more time..

Here’s what is true about dr Peter McCullough.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93936

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-08-16/doctors-coronavirus-misinformation-license

Peer reviewed papers are not necessarily facts. They are usually reports of research studies although sometimes composite reviews of all major studies on an issue. Peer review indicates that the work represents best practice standards of the research field because it has been reviewed by peers in the field. The findings are factual because they are based on data and peer review examines the veracity of the data. However, much of life is statistical, so in most cases, you are looking at data that does not necessarily strongly indicate one course of action over another. Not all data has clear patterns either. Very few research studies make broad prescriptive conclusions, rather they point towards directions for further study. It takes many studies with strong data-based and statistically significant results before strong prescriptive conclusions are drawn, particularly in the medical field where human lives are at stake. On the flip side, tv reporters and pundits and folks on the internet often make huge, confident assertions of "facts" with very little or completely absent evidence.

Medapage??? Is that all you could find? did you read Dr. Peter McCullough' s history.

https://www.americaoutloud.com/author/dr-peter-mccull

Again, how about him being a liar and misrepresenting himself, ronminsouthga? No comment on that part of his history?

I mean, after you posted about the Okla doctor, I just figured you cared about credibility and ethics.

Re quote below, It is malpractice to prescribe a drug for a patient you know nothing about…..medical and surgical history, current medications, etc.

I am sorry but not surprised to see a few here who simply dont understand the issues at hand. It’s a complex subject and not everyone is capable of processing and evaluating such information.

“Wagshul confirmed in court he had not requested a certified copy of Jeffrey’s medical record from the hospital and that he “knew nothing about this patient at the time [he] wrote that prescription for ivermectin, other than conferences with Mrs. Smith [...]””

I've got an idea - how about asking your own doctor if they have taken the 💉. Then consider whether you have more knowledge and experience in medicine than your own doctor. Currently 96% of physicians are jabbed.

"Researchers at three universities in Nigeria studied the effects of Ivermectin, which is used to treat river blindness and other medical conditions in humans, on men’s sperm counts. According to their study, 85 percent of men who take Ivermectin become sterilized."

My source

in that case, maybe we should back off the warnings to the great unwashed? Just make sure there’s no product liability so the foolish who insist on taking it— early of course, as recommended by their quack doctors and friends—can’t sue and ruin the manufacturer, thereby depriving horses and dogs of their heartworm medicine.

@graywings123 that’s outstanding news! We can only hope that one statistic is correct. 😂🤦‍♀️🙏👍🤞

Bummer, that ivermectin/fertility story has been retracted.

Yeah - saw this on FB this morning:

Just talked to our vet today (went for our puppy). He is not vaccinated. He got covid twice. Tested both times. So I guess "natural" immunity is not foolproof either or a guarantee of immunity. My uncle got pneumonia three times. The third killed him. Not wishing that on anyone, just using it as an example of a virus that does not convey long term immunity if you beat it, you can even become more susceptible for the next time. Nature is extremely variable.

Curious, Pink. Did he give you a reason for not getting vaccinated?

I am hearing of health care professionals who are not being vaccinated. Sometimes I wonder if they overthink it. One of our dentists (we go to a husband/wife group) recently shared that he is not vaccinated. Just the other day a friend whose father has Covid, shared that she is not vaccinated (I do not ask). I was a bit shocked though because she works in a pediatrician's office. I would think that medical staff would want to be vaccinated because of their exposure. However, she has a clotting problem and that has given her pause. Of course I live in the South and I know some of the southern states are the lower vaccinated states. Geeze.

I have an extremely low risk of contracting covid 19 or getting sick if i did contract it, and I’m getting tired of trying to protect others from a disease they dont even acknowledge. Except for children, the preventative is free and avsilable to everyone. Maybe we are trying too hard to keep certain groups from feeling the true consequences of their actions?

@User I sure hope so. Sadly I know several who have been vaccinated and have had covid. Granted, none of these were ICU cases, but I don't want it at all! Just had a family friend (70-ish) come home yesterday from the hospital. I've also heard that we (the vaccinated) can still spread. Not sure on that. We just try to be careful!

It's true that vaccinated people can still catch and spread the disease. The point of the vaccinations was never to prevent us from getting Covid entirely (most vaccinations for viruses don't do that) but to limit the severity if we did catch it. We're going to wearing masks for a long time.

I've got an idea - how about asking your own doctor if they have taken the 💉. Then consider whether you have more knowledge and experience in medicine than your own doctor. Currently 96% of physicians are jabbed.

Where is that proof? Why are so many medical people quitting because they refuse to take the Jab? Houston Baptist Hospital Read. Also Dr.s know nothing about what they prescribe. They depend on Pharma salesmen. Also Dr.s get lots of free trips to fun places for pharma meetings. What I want to know is why you people are not concerned about where the virus came from and Dr. Fauci connection.

Did yall hear Bidens new mandate?

"Where is that proof? Why are so many medical people quitting because they refuse to take the Jab?"

They're not. A handful are quitting, but most are getting the jab. I believe the figure in the US is 96%. Here in Aus, a few doctors, nurses and paramedics are rejecting it, but we're talking, again, something like 5%.

By the way, if you really believe doctors don't know anything about drugs or vaccines, why are you so willing to take the word of Dr. McCullough on vaccines, ivermectin and the rest? What makes him special? Is it perhaps because he says what you want to hear?

Did yall hear Bidens new mandate?

Finally ... why did we have to wait so long for this?

I wish it extended to all employees.

Plus I hope paying for testing falls on the individual. Germany just stopped paying for unjabbed people's mandatory testing.

“Also Dr.s get lots of free trips to fun places for pharma meetings.”

That’s been against the law for YEARS. They can’t even give doctors coffee mugs. Your information is as wrong and out of date as your opinions. it’s pretty clear that you never sttended medical school Ron, but feel free to keep demonstrating your abject ignorance.

Tina, its true that vaccinated people who contract Covid can transmit it. i understand that. What I’m saying is that I’m not sure I care. Why should I care more about some idiot rube’s health than they do?

“What I want to know is why you people are not concerned about where the virus came from and Dr. Fauci connection.”

I know, right? My sister’s Uber driver’s cousin’s mechanic’s nurse wife said that he totally went to China and sneezed on everyone and then tried to act like bats did it! OMG! He is totally trying to wipe everyone out! But why? I asked my Magic Eight Ball and it said, ”Try again later”. What did yours say?

Impressive (and correct) use of the possesive apostrophe, Jinx

Getting vaccinated is not only about you and your own safety - it's to stop the spread of the virus - to get it under control so we can get back some normalcy.

Since when is it OK to decide someone should be protected based on whether someone else thinks they deserve it? Isn't that what caused things to get so bad in the first place?

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/covid-variants-q-and-a

had more been vaccinated at the outset the less there would be for the virus to attack and as this article explains fewer chances for mutations. There is NO going back now and no amount of tracking or reporting etc will help. That train has left the station a long time ago. The virus is endemic now. There won’t be any help for our population or others except to keep plodding along with vaccinations and ultimately annual vaccinations as we have now for flu and pneumonia.

Our children who can’t be vaccinated are at risk. Please take care and protect yourself and others by masking and encouraging vaccinations . We all should care about each other. The reason we are in this mess now is the lack of pulling together as a country.

My best friend’s father- in - law is being made as comfortable as possible. He waited so long to seek medical help and at that it was his son’s who took matters into their own hands and got him to Reno NV two hrs from his home. The sons are not vaccinated and according to my friend aren’t predisposed to being vaccinated even as they watch their father die from a preventable illness. My friend is vaccinated.

Her DH was asking if they could try vitamins and the anti-parasitic. No had they come immediately for medical care he would have been a candidate for monoclonal antibody therapy . At 77 he was using poor judgement as are his sons. I’m very saddened by this situation and feel sorry for the medical personnel who have their hands tied at this point unable to help.

DH’s cousin was laid to rest today. Another covid pneumonia victim. Unvaccinated leaving a grieving daughter and grandbabies and cousins. c

Maybe this is side-tracking but...

"Not everyone dies from Covid."

I have heard this argument so often and not many will dispute that fact.

But the fact is that many that don't die take up time and resources in ICU's or medical beds while our healthcare workers try valiantly to save them. Meanwhile, heart attacks, strokes, traumatic injuries are not getting the precious ICU/CCU beds because the "not everbody dies of Covid" folks are inundating our medical resources.

@nekotish good point. i saw earlier this week where one of our local hospitals has set up a mobile morgue. 😞

I have heard from a close friend, who is a medical professional, that they have been briefed on "wartime triage" recently. Basically, we can only save those who have the best chance. Hard to beleive that it has come to this!

I am aware of Dr. McCullogh's history. He had zero experience, pre-Covid, with treating viruses, so far as I can see. He has never conducted a clinical trial on Covid. He cannot back up his support of ivermectin with a single reputable study. It seems to me he has no more expertise in this area than your average intern. Certainly less than my own GP, who has plenty of experience with infectious diseases.

And how about FLCCC physician and co founder Dr. Fred Wagchul? He's the fellow who gave an ivermectin prescription to a man already in hospital with Covid, the hospital refused to give it to their patient, the patient's wife sued, the courts ultimately supported the hospital. Seems that, among other things, that "highly qualified doctor" was not in fact board-certified in anything, hadn't been affiliated with any hospital in a decade, hadn't seen the patient in question, and hadn't even read his medical file. That's the quality of care and expertise on offer from FLCCC.

So I ask again, why do you think their expertise is greater than that of the 96% of MDs in the US who are getting the jab?

Personally, I listen to scientists who actually have qualifications in virology, immunology, and epidemiology, and to doctors who actually have expertise with infectious diseases. I don't listen to organizations like the FLCCC whose "studies" are rejected for publication because of breaches of ethical standards.

But that's just me. As I said, McCullough et al are saying what you need to hear so their lack of qualifications and inability to point to reliable data doesn't seem to matter.

I've been curious how ivermectin even came into awareness as a possible "cure" for covid. The WAPO has a good article today and I'm just pasting the part of it that answers my question, I believe:

"So how did people get the idea that it can treat covid?

The idea that ivermectin could be a coronavirus treatment began gaining steam in the spring of 2020, when Australian researchers observed that the medicine killed the virus in a laboratory setting. The findings had notable caveats, however. For one, the amount of drug required to have an effect on the virus was much higher than the amount approved for use in humans, and could be fatal. And lab-based tests, where the drug and virus interact in a petri dish, also don’t account for the complexities of the human body.

“You could take many drugs and push them to a high enough concentration that you would see some effect in a laboratory setting against pathogens,” Parikh said. “When we use them in humans, we have to find the sweet spot where the drug has its positive effect, but the risk of any of those side effects is extremely low.”

David Boulware, a professor of medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases and International Medicine at the University of Minnesota, agreed. “Just because it works in the lab doesn’t mean that it works in humans,” said Boulware, who is involved in two ongoing large-scale clinical trials examining the effect of ivermectin on people with covid.

“People believe it’s either a miracle cure or that it’s highly dangerous and the reality is it’s neither of those two,” he said. “When used in normal human doses, it’s a relatively safe medicine, but we just don’t know if there’s any benefit” to treating covid.

Supporters tout anti-parasite drug as covid-19 treatment, but skeptics call it the ‘new hydroxychloroquine’

Other clinical trials conducted so far have been controversial. Findings have been complicated by concerns over issues with the research, such as plagiarism, methodological flaws and small sample sizes. At least one large study that reported benefits has been withdrawn following complaints about plagiarism and data manipulation.

According to Boulware, the best data currently available is from a trial in Brazil, which has not formally published its findings. In that study, ivermectin performed similarly to the placebo, he said, meaning there was no apparent clinical benefit to taking the medicine.

said its scientists. Merck, a pharmaceutical company that manufactures ivermectin, said its scientists are continuing to review available data. But at this point, they have found “no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect” against covid, “no meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy” in people with covid, and “a concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies,” Merck said."

WAPO article

“Have you read Dr. McCullough history?”

You mean that he’s a liar and fraud? Have you read about that? You sure are selective in what you want to hear and believe! Zero credibility.

Trail, such sad stories. :(

Oh but, Jinx, the government, the media, big pharma, the medical establishment and probably others are all out to get us gullible sheeple. They're all in cahoots. Gosh, don't you know that?

Try to enlighten yourself. Do not trust any recognized authority. Trust only the widely discredited because only they have the guts to join forces with other discredited sources to go up against them that's out to get us !

@ronminsouthga I tried to read the dr.‘s ”history”. it seems to have disappeared. Now why would that happen?

”

• Medapage??? Is that all you could find? did you read Dr. Peter McCullough' s history.https://www.americaoutloud.com/author/dr-peter-mccull ”

Here’s what your link looks like…

I think I saw the link yesterday, maddielee. It was to a discussion between the esteemed Dr McCullough and another doctor. I watched a little. I will say the were both well dressed and conducted themselves as gentlemen. 😵

Was he speaking with ”Dr Justus Hope”? Oh, wait, it couldn't have been, since that’s a fake name whomever it is hides behind.

Justus Hope! Good one. No, it wasn't Justus Hope. I wonder if "Justus" is deliberately misspelled or if "Justus" just can't spell. Is it a pun I don't understand?

The Ivermectin story (for history buffs like me)

https://www.mountainhomemag.com/2021/05/01/356270/the-drug-that-cracked-covid

Hey, I have a cousin named Justin Case….DOCTOR Justin Case. Hilarious! That spelling of Justus is not uncommon around here…. but I think it is Just Us Hope.

Pamike - hardly a scholarly article. 🙄

@pamike great read. I pray that these people can get the treatment they need when they need it, in spite of the protocol, which is obviously not working so well….

I heard on the local news a bit ago, another school closing. Too many sick teachers and not enough subs. We have a few school systems on virtual and several schools have closed for a week or two at a time, trying to get over illness. I'd say this is something that will become the norm, at least for a while.

"The Ivermectin story (for history buffs like me)"

The study of history, like the study of science, requires a certain degree of scepticism and intellectual rigour. This article is not history; it's a puff piece in which the author has conducted no research himself, has made no attempt to verify the information he's been provided, but simply accepted the claims of a self-interested group of doctors.

Of Paul Marik he says: "Marik is world famous as creator of the “Marik Cocktail,” a revolutionary cocktail of cheap, safe, generic, FDA-approved drugs that dramatically reduces death rates from sepsis by 20 to 50 percent anywhere in the world—whether you’re in a hospital in Zurich or Zimbabwe, Chicago or Chengdu—down to near zero."

The simplest of googles tells me that the Marik Cocktail has been the subject of a number of large scale, rigorous, randomized controlled trials, the latest completed earlier this year. Not one of them has found any value in the protocol.

And as for Dr. Kory, the article says that "Kory even testified to the Senate on May 6, 2020, his first appearance before the committee seeking COVID-19 treatments, that steroids were “critical” to saving lives and received silence and scorn.Six weeks later, the publication of the Oxford University Recovery Trial proved that the FLCCC doctors were right, and corticosteroids became the accepted worldwide standard of care, changing the trajectory of the pandemic."

Politicians may have treated him with scorn, but Kory was hardly the maverick he likes to portray himself as. Mainstream doctors and scientists had been looking at steroids and had been conducting actual clinical trials long before he made that appearance. The RECOVERY trial started 5 months before Kory, who had conducted no clinical trials himself, made his appearance at the Senate. The author of this article gives Kory way too much credit.

Kory also cites an article published in the American Journal of Therepeutics as evidence that ivermectin works. That article has been roundly criticised, not least for relying in significant part on a study subsequently found to be fraudulent.

In sum, this isn't history at all. It's sloppy, lazy journalism.