- 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
re: Ivermectin for Cancer Study Peer Reviewed and Published
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:01 pm to BoarEd
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:01 pm to BoarEd
Ot would be interesting if this was a good alternative way to treat cancer. But companies will have an interest in quashing the programs studying it. They'll get the usual paid experts to sing that it's horse paste all over again. If that doesn't do it, they'll think of something else.
1
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:02 pm to Chrome
quote:
Ot would be interesting if this was a good alternative way to treat cancer.
The spoiler alert here is that it seems to be exactly that.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:03 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
I don't have any problem saying that calling people "useful idiots" is unhelpful. If that's what was meant, I disagree with it.
I simply call balls and strikes. Many posters don’t want to be helped, so I have no problem being “unhelpful” to them
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:03 pm to BoarEd
The internet is full of assholes. He's calling you an idiot because you let Hulscher treat you like one.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:04 pm to BoarEd
quote:
He's an absolute frickin a-hole who acts exactly the same way every time a topic such as this comes up and every time this is proposed to you, you minimize it by saying he's simply frustrated. frick that shite. The guy is a prick.
Why are you so angry? You don’t need Ivermectin, you need a therapist or a mood stabilizer.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:05 pm to BoarEd
quote:
This is a lie.
No double blind testing says 100% ancedotal not scientific evidence.aaaaa
That being said, I've had several friends who have taken Ivermectin with fenbendazole and were prostate cancer free in 4 months. Another has taken the same for pancreatic cancer and here we are 6 years later he's live 5-1/2 years beyond prognosis.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:05 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
you let Hulscher treat you like one.
I guess I'll sit in the company with the medical journal that reviewed and published it then and continue not giving a frick what internet "doctors" think about it.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:06 pm to BoarEd
They think it's dubious now.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:06 pm to BoarEd
quote:
International Institute of Anticancer Research
Either my AI search engine is lying, or someone else is:
These are results for international journal of cancer research and treatment
Search instead for interbational journal of cancer research and treatment
AI Overview
There is no single prominent publication with the exact title "International Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment," but several similarly named peer-reviewed oncology journals exist, most notably the International Journal of Cancer, Cancer Research and Treatment, and the International Journal of Cancer Research & Therapy.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:08 pm to CitizenK
quote:
No double blind testing says 100% ancedotal not scientific evidence.aaaaa
It was in fact a lie.
quote:
That being said, I've had several friends who have taken Ivermectin with fenbendazole and were prostate cancer free in 4 months. Another has taken the same for pancreatic cancer and here we are 6 years later he's live 5-1/2 years beyond prognosis.
This board could collectively fill 10 pages with anecdotes such as this. We need clinical trials done on these drugs. This study and publication was an attempt to get us there. And look at how it's received by the "doctors" in the house.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:08 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
He's calling you an idiot because you let Hulscher treat you like one.
Ding ding ding
Read said BS tweet. Ran to a very popular forum to share said BS tweet. Got said BS tweet in front of more eyeballs.
Not sure what else you would call that person who got duped
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:08 pm to BoarEd
Have you joined Scientology yet? Your thetan levels are awfully high.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:09 pm to BoarEd
quote:
I guess I'll sit in the company with the medical journal that reviewed and published it then and continue not giving a frick what internet "doctors" think about it.
And if they end up redacting or adding an editor’s addendum to this study….I assume you’ll be back to admit you were wrong then?
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:11 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
And if they end up redacting or adding an editor’s addendum to this study….I assume you’ll be back to admit you were wrong then?
Why would I? As it stands now it is reviewed and published and you're not admitting you're wrong about it. Why the double standard? Why be insulting to people sharing it?
Oh yeah, because again, you're a dishonest piece of shite.
This post was edited on 7/25/26 at 7:12 pm
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:13 pm to BoarEd
quote:
I guess I'll sit in the company with the medical journal that reviewed and published it then and continue not giving a frick what internet "doctors" think about it.
quote:
Major Medical Journal Launches Formal Audit Into Ivermectin Cancer Study
In a major blow to advocates of off-label alternative cancer treatments, the international peer-reviewed journal Anticancer Research has issued an official Expression of Concern and triggered a comprehensive data integrity and ethical oversight audit into a newly published study evaluating the combination of ivermectin and mebendazole in cancer patients.
The Facts at a Glance
The Claim:
A new prospective study proves that a combination of ivermectin and mebendazole yields a staggering 84.4% Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR) and tumour regression in real-world cancer patients.
The Reality:
The underlying study relies entirely on unverified, self-reported digital surveys with a devastating 38.1% patient drop-out rate. Furthermore, nearly half of the participants were concurrently undergoing standard oncological care (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery), making it impossible to attribute clinical benefits to the anti-parasitic medications. The publishing journal has officially paused scientific endorsement of the study pending an ethics and data integrity investigation.
quote:
A major medical journal is walking back its publication of a controversial, alternative cancer treatment paper after the international scientific community expressed grave concerns over the validity of its mind boggling claims.
The peer-reviewed Anticancer Research journal has officially issued an Expression of Concern and initiated a formal Post-Publication Data Integrity and Ethical Oversight Audit into a study that evaluated the off-label use of anti-parasitic drugs in the treatment of cancer patients.
This post was edited on 7/25/26 at 7:23 pm
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:14 pm to BoarEd
If you would only let Xenu clear you, your overt behavior would vaporize.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:17 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Why would I? As it stands now it is reviewed and published and you're not admitting you're wrong about it. Why the double standard? Why be insulting to people sharing it?
Are you under the impression that every study that is “peer reviewed” and published is created equal?
Anyone who has actually looked at this study (ironically not you; the person who started this thread) has posted to you several weaknesses of the methodology. Which has even been acknowledged by the journal itself. Further, it is obvious the claims in the tweet are sensational and meant to drive clicks and engagement . Yet you just ignore all of this and say “well it’s peer reviewed and published.”
Again, if you are offended by my calling you a useful idiot…stop acting like one.
This post was edited on 7/25/26 at 7:19 pm
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:18 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
The publishing journal has officially paused scientific endorsement of the study pending an ethics and data integrity investigation.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:19 pm to onmymedicalgrind
It is the expected conclusion to a Hulscher study.
Posted on 7/25/26 at 7:19 pm to onmymedicalgrind
In other words, no, you don't plan on displaying any integrity. So again, frick off and have a bad day.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News