Ivermectin
-
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
-
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
I think there are two points in the editorial, and it's easy to conflate them.
Point #2 is whether the drug is effective in treating COVID. I have zero skin in that game, and from what I've seen there have been few good studies to support its use. Anecdotes are not a reason to use it, unless you're practicing "might-as-well-give-it-a-try" medicine. Not that that's a bad thing when you're desperate, of course.
Point #1 is somewhat more sinister. Ivermectin is a safe drug. Side effects and complications are exceptionally rare. Compare those effects with the side effects of a drug like digitalis, which has an exceptionally narrow therapeutic window, and was the mainstay of treatment for congestive heart failure for decades. Goodness, compare it with aspirin, which would never be approved today.
Edit to add: I have not read the FDA statement about the dangers of ivermectin, so I'm relying on the editorial's accuracy.
-
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
I think there are two points in the editorial, and it's easy to conflate them.
Point #2 is whether the drug is effective in treating COVID. I have zero skin in that game, and from what I've seen there have been few good studies to support its use. Anecdotes are not a reason to use it, unless you're practicing "might-as-well-give-it-a-try" medicine. Not that that's a bad thing when you're desperate, of course.
Point #1 is somewhat more sinister. Ivermectin is a safe drug. Side effects and complications are exceptionally rare. Compare those effects with the side effects of a drug like digitalis, which has an exceptionally narrow therapeutic window, and was the mainstay of treatment for congestive heart failure for decades. Goodness, compare it with aspirin, which would never be approved today.
Edit to add: I have not read the FDA statement about the dangers of ivermectin, so I'm relying on the editorial's accuracy.
Nope nope nope. No country in the world would have had the revelation yet?????
Countries that can’t vaccinate their people?
This is why we are going to have passports, masks and lockdowns. Enough people in the US think Ivermectin will be there for them.
Yes, it is almost free and very safe.
-
@jon-nyc said in Ivermectin:
What ever happened to hydroxychloroquine?
It turns your skin bright orange. Just look at goldfish if you don't believe me.
-
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
People are imagining that, yes. You can't imagine it, but that doesn't say much. It is fact that 1) there is reason to believe, with evidence, that Ivermectin is effective and 2) it has not been widely studied, to get a more clear idea of effectiveness. The op-ed writers, and Bret Weinstein et all, are advocating for studies. Why do you find that so bewildering? A guy like Bret has his neck out there, because he's making predictions that could easily be proven wrong. So, let's prove it wrong, why not?
As for whether Bret is too confident based on existing evidence - I would think he is being too confident. But his confidence doesn't give me a shocked face while I run for a fainting couch at how humans can be so crazy.
-
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
@horace said in Ivermectin:
The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece today about Ivermectin and why the the FDA is crapping on such a promising drug. I wasn’t able to read the whole story without a subscription. Can anybody paste it here?
Thanks George.
-
@horace said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
People are imagining that, yes. You can't imagine it, but that doesn't say much. It is fact that 1) there is reason to believe, with evidence, that Ivermectin is effective and 2) it has not been widely studied, to get a more clear idea of effectiveness. The op-ed writers, and Bret Weinstein et all, are advocating for studies. Why do you find that so bewildering? A guy like Bret has his neck out there, because he's making predictions that could easily be proven wrong. So, let's prove it wrong, why not?
Take the vaccine and study it is what I would do.
We are going back into some form of limited freedom because enough people aren’t getting the vaccine.
Quietly study the thing in India or Brazil and let us know what happened.
So disheartening to have this pandemic extended because of skeptics but maybe this is our limits. We are not so great after all.
-
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@horace said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
People are imagining that, yes. You can't imagine it, but that doesn't say much. It is fact that 1) there is reason to believe, with evidence, that Ivermectin is effective and 2) it has not been widely studied, to get a more clear idea of effectiveness. The op-ed writers, and Bret Weinstein et all, are advocating for studies. Why do you find that so bewildering? A guy like Bret has his neck out there, because he's making predictions that could easily be proven wrong. So, let's prove it wrong, why not?
Take the vaccine and study it is what I would do.
We are going back into some form of limited freedom because enough people aren’t getting the vaccine.
Quietly study the thing in India or Brazil and let us know what happened.
So disheartening to have this pandemic extended because of skeptics but maybe this is our limits. We are not so great after all.
Well, you're definitely not so great at focusing on a point when you're emotional about some vaguely related point, but actually an attempt to convince people not to get vaccinated appears nowhere in that op-ed.
-
-
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@horace said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@horace said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
@george-k said in Ivermectin:
Ivermectin fights 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. A single dose reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in cells by 99.8% in 24 hours and 99.98% in 48 hours, according to a June 2020 study published in the journal Antiviral Research.
Conspiracy of all time. Can you imagine something that effective over a year ago and it’s not widely distributed. What is wrong with people?
People are imagining that, yes. You can't imagine it, but that doesn't say much. It is fact that 1) there is reason to believe, with evidence, that Ivermectin is effective and 2) it has not been widely studied, to get a more clear idea of effectiveness. The op-ed writers, and Bret Weinstein et all, are advocating for studies. Why do you find that so bewildering? A guy like Bret has his neck out there, because he's making predictions that could easily be proven wrong. So, let's prove it wrong, why not?
Take the vaccine and study it is what I would do.
We are going back into some form of limited freedom because enough people aren’t getting the vaccine.
Quietly study the thing in India or Brazil and let us know what happened.
So disheartening to have this pandemic extended because of skeptics but maybe this is our limits. We are not so great after all.
Well, you're definitely not so great at focusing on a point when you're emotional about some vaguely related point, but actually an attempt to convince people not to get vaccinated appears nowhere in that op-ed.
Horace- you are so funny with your emotional and self righteous comments over and over again. I understand the tactic.
I also understand the tactic of narrowing the scope of a convo to discrete words and sentences.
If your goal is to silence me, say the word and I will happily go.
I hope you don't go, Loki. At this point I have little interest in your histrionics, and I have given up any hope that you'll be self-aware of how irrational you become when you get emotional, but when you're not histrionic you're interesting. I think you're a smart guy and an interesting poster. But you have a definite issue with remaining tethered to rational discourse when you get emotional about something. What is most irritating to me about that, is that when you're in that state, you begin accusing everybody else of being crazy.
-
Hey, if Loki goes, can we all blame the conservatives for driving him away?
I'm no expert, but...
-
@doctor-phibes said in Ivermectin:
Hey, if Loki goes, can we all blame the conservatives for driving him away?
I would blame the anti-vaxxers.
-
-
@loki said in Ivermectin:
I had no idea I was at the top of the charts with emotions, seriously.
You can sod off - I'm at the top of the charts. You're not even a proper lefty. Least-ways, you never attend any of the meetings.
I'm no expert, but...
-
@doctor-phibes said in Ivermectin:
@loki said in Ivermectin:
I had no idea I was at the top of the charts with emotions, seriously.
You can sod off - I'm at the top of the charts. You're not even a proper lefty. Least-ways, you never attend any of the meetings.
I think lefties had plenty of meetings last year, thanks.
-
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
OK, I googled it myself. Best article I found:
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/
And some tidbits...
Proposed Mechanism of Action and Rationale for Use in Patients With COVID-19
Reports from in vitro studies suggest that ivermectin acts by inhibiting the host importin alpha/beta-1 nuclear transport proteins, which are part of a key intracellular transport process that viruses hijack to enhance infection by suppressing the host’s antiviral response.4,5 In addition, ivermectin docking may interfere with the attachment of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein to the human cell membrane.6 Ivermectin is thought to be a host-directed agent, which may be the basis for its broad-spectrum activity in vitro against the viruses that cause dengue, Zika, HIV, and yellow fever.4,7-9 Despite this in vitro activity, no clinical trials have reported a clinical benefit for ivermectin in patients with these viruses. Some studies of ivermectin have also reported potential anti-inflammatory properties, which have been postulated to be beneficial in people with COVID-19.
Rationale
Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures.13 However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
@mik this is the same thinking as HCQ. The fact that a drug may work in vitro, in a cell culture does not translate to you can expect it to work in vivo.
And, a somewhat related point, Plaquenil (HCQ) was first developed as an anti-malarial, but discovered to have anti-arthritic properties, effectiveness in SLE, and porphyria as well. The fact that ivermectin is an anti parasitic drug does not, per se, preclude its usefulness in other situations.
-
@mik said in Ivermectin:
Can we just stop with the personal attacks?
Probably not, if I'm confronted with mindless attacks that anybody who so much as entertains notions I entertain are incomprehensibly divorced from reality.
Meanwhile, back on topic - is there any understanding (I haven't read all the available literature) of how or why ivermectin works or might work against COVID? I haven't seen it.
There is at least some small signal in the evidence that suggests Ivermectin has some effect, especially as a preventative against COVID. Even the sceptics acknowledge that. They also acknowledge that Ivermectin hasn't been studied enough to know one way or another. If it is effective, I don't think anybody has a clue as to the mechanism.
