- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
There's a recent new study on the use of Ivermectin for Covid
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:23 am
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:23 am
Sharing for discussion
Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 63 studies
Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 63 studies
quote:
•Meta analysis using the most serious outcome reported shows 72% [55-82%] and 86% [75-92%] improvement for early treatment and prophylaxis, with similar results after exclusion based sensitivity analysis and restriction to peer-reviewed studies or Randomized Controlled Trials.
•Statistically significant improvements are seen for mortality, hospitalization, recovery, cases, and viral clearance. 27 studies show statistically significant improvements in isolation. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 63 studies is estimated to be 1 in 1 trillion.
This post was edited on 8/18/21 at 7:57 am
17
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:25 am to stout
Break it down to me like i’m 5, is that good or bad?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:28 am to GEAUX5
quote:
Break it down to me like i’m 5, is that good or bad?
quote:
Conclusion
Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 63 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 1 trillion. As expected for an effective treatment, early treatment is more successful, with an estimated reduction of 72% in the effect measured using random effects meta-analysis (RR 0.28 [0.18-0.45]). 37% and 96% lower mortality is observed for early treatment and prophylaxis (RR 0.63 [0.38-1.04] and 0.04 [0.00-0.59]). Statistically significant improvements are seen for mortality, hospitalization, recovery, cases, and viral clearance. The consistency of positive results across a wide variety of heterogeneous studies is remarkable, with 92% of the 63 studies reporting positive effects (27 statistically significant in isolation).
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:32 am to GEAUX5
quote:They surveyed a bunch of different studies on invermectin and their statistical analysis shows that it likely has some level of efficacy in the treatment of covid.
Break it down to me like i’m 5, is that good or bad?
Also
quote:
While many treatments have some level of efficacy, they do not replace vaccines and other measures to avoid infection. Only 29% of ivermectin studies show zero events in the treatment arm.
This post was edited on 8/18/21 at 7:34 am
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:32 am to stout
Almost all of those studies don’t have a control group
Without a very robust control group, any covid study is basically useless. I’ll explain. If you treat 1000 people with fruity pebbles either as a prophylaxis or as a treatment once sick, 99.5% will have positive results
That’s why we all hate the “double blind control yada yada”,but with a virus in which 99% of people survive, it’s absolutely necessary to know if the meds have any effect
Without a very robust control group, any covid study is basically useless. I’ll explain. If you treat 1000 people with fruity pebbles either as a prophylaxis or as a treatment once sick, 99.5% will have positive results
That’s why we all hate the “double blind control yada yada”,but with a virus in which 99% of people survive, it’s absolutely necessary to know if the meds have any effect
This post was edited on 8/18/21 at 7:36 am
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:34 am to lsupride87
Isn't there enough data out there from the past 18 months of Covid reporting and deaths to use as a semi control group which seems to be what this study does?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:36 am to lsupride87
I asked to folks at the Urgent Care where I tested positive, my PCP, and the hospital where I received the infusion. All have said they have tried and continue to try it. Just hasn't seemed to make a difference.
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:36 am to stout
quote:Sure. And in those groups 99.5% of people survive it, 99.995% for a lot of age groups
Isn't there enough data out there from the past 18 months of Covid reporting and deaths to use as a semi control group which seems to be what this study does?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:37 am to lsupride87
quote:
treat 1000 people with fruity pebbles
I'm cured if this is the case
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:38 am to lsupride87
quote:
And in those groups 99.5% of people survive it
Sure and this is the issue I have with it but they are also comparing recovery times as well as other variables for their conclusion of its effectivness if I am understanding the data correctly.
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:39 am to lsupride87
Then using that logic...why do we need a vaccine?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:40 am to stout
I hope Ivermectin is effective. That would be a great thing for society as a whole
Although 72% definitely doesn't seem like a miracle drug like some are trying to tout it as
Seems pretty standard
Although 72% definitely doesn't seem like a miracle drug like some are trying to tout it as
Seems pretty standard
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:41 am to Cajunhawk81
quote:Because when you are talking about a virus where the entire population starts off with ZERO immunity, .5% isn’t exactly something you just accept when you can prevent it with something as easy as a vaccine
Then using that logic...why do we need a vaccine?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:43 am to Cajunhawk81
quote:To protect against serious illness, hospitalization, and death. That’s a weird question at this point.
why do we need a vaccine?
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:44 am to lsupride87
But you can also prevent it by not stopping transmission. Sweden has proved that. .5% seems 100% acceptable when compared to all the hoops we've jumped through for the last year and a half for it to still keep happening.
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:45 am to Cajunhawk81
quote:I have never supported the lockdowns at all. But what does that have to with the vaccine?
But you can also prevent it by not stopping transmission. Sweden has proved that. .5% seems 100% acceptable when compared to all the hoops we've jumped through for the last year and a half for it to still keep happening.
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:45 am to stout
Sorry, but ivermectin has been safely used for 40 years and is now generic. There is no financially beneficial reason to use such a safe, proven treatment option.
Concentrate on newer patented products that can generate economic stimulus, both now and to the legal community through future class action suits.
Concentrate on newer patented products that can generate economic stimulus, both now and to the legal community through future class action suits.
Posted on 8/18/21 at 7:49 am to Salmon
quote:
Although 72% definitely doesn't seem like a miracle drug like some are trying to tout it as
I agree that with the 72% but the higher percentages when taken as a Prophylaxis is the real statistic to me. That proves that it does what many have been saying which is this...
quote:
IVERMECTIN prevents viral entry into the nucleus of the cells.
The virus attaches on a heterodimer protein Importin a / Importin ß-1 which serves as a transport system in order for it to gain entry into the nucleus. Then the virus shuts down the nucleus thereby immune responses against it is practically suppressed. IVERMECTIN inhibits this heterodimer protein and the virus is prevented from latching onto it and is thus prevented from being transported into the nucleus, thereby disabling the virus from performing this critical function.
Page 1 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News