The Ivermectin discussion

PureIsle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117814174#Comment_117814174

Yes indeed that would be correct .... IF there was a requirement to get the blood concentrations up to that level.

Fortunately that is not the case, as multiple studies have shown, and this is attributed by many to the multiple mechanisms present in the human body that were not present in the petri dish.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Interesting article about Ivermectin from 2017, back before we had all the intellectual powerhouses around to give us their “lol horse paste” takes.

SortingYouOut

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117815396#Comment_117815396

Wasn't there only issues with one trial in the meta analysis and the head of that is currently disputing the claims against it, so in the air. Also, why are they too small, wasn't the remdesiver study confined to a tiny group of subjects?

Wolf359f

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817441#Comment_117817441

I think people fail to realize how relying on small trials cause anomalies. Take 2 participants, 1 takes a green tictac daily, one takes an orange one.

At some point in time, one may contact covid, at which point the other one proves a certain colour tictak is effective vs Covid.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817231#Comment_117817231

You may want to go back a few posts, where we discussed this study, that has nothing whatsoever to do with Covid, in detail.

The horse paste thing only came up because more and more actual idiots here in the real world are buying it and ingesting it. Because, you know, vaccines are not really safe. Horse paste is. 🙄🙄🙄

Nobody here, ever, questioned the efficacy of Ivermectin for River Blindness.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817637#Comment_117817637

What study? Did you even click on the link you posted?

SortingYouOut

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817469#Comment_117817469

The remdesivir trial had just over 1000 patients, half with and half with a placebo. The anomalies you mention didn't seem to be an issue when granting that a licence.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817644#Comment_117817644

Apologies for using the term 'study' instead of 'review article' for the piece about treating parasitic intestinal worms.

The 'review article' has nothing whatsoever to do with Covid.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819199#Comment_117819199

You're coming across like you're attempting to condescend but I can't for the life of my figure out what the hell you're talking about.

What review article about treating parasitic intestinal worms? You were talking about river blindness a post back.

The link I posted is still there, ya know. You could just click it.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819275#Comment_117819275

Here's, again, the link you posted:

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

From the article:

The drug’s potential in human health was confirmed a few years later and it was registered in 1987 and immediately provided free of charge (branded as Mectizan)—‘as much as needed for as long as needed’—with the goal of helping to control Onchocerciasis (also known as River Blindness) among poverty-stricken populations throughout the tropics. 

This unprecedented compound has mainly been used in humans as an oral medication for treating filarial diseases but is also effective against other worm-related infections and diseases, plus several parasite-induced epidermal parasitic skin diseases, as well as insect infestations. It is approved for human use in several countries, ostensibly to treat Onchocerciasis,

So, looks like you posted a link to a Nature article that describes Ivermectin effectiveness in treating parasitic, intestinal worms, which cause illnesses such as Onchocerciasis (River Blindness), but either did not read the article, or did not understand what it is actually about.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819398#Comment_117819398

I see you're sticking with "condescension" then? Your call I s'pose. Maybe it suits you.

Anyway.

The article, from 2017, is about Ivermectin's effectiveness as an anti-parasitic drug, and its potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent (indeed, studies into its use as an antiviral against chikungunya, zika and yellow fever are ongoing).

In light of the "lol horse paste Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic, dummy!" posts that keep cropping up here, as though no drug has ever been repurposed, I thought it was interesting to note that the potential for repurposing Ivermectin was noted back before SARS-CoV-2 was a thing.

I don't know why anyone would expect an article from 2017 to mention Covid.

The point is that, while Ivermectin is currently used as an anti-parasitic drug, that does not preclude it from being effective for other ailments, as many here seem to think every time they post "Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic" as though that's game over.

It would be like stomping your foot when Tamoxifen showed a positive signal for the treatment of BPD and insisting that it CAN'T be used for that because it's an anti-cancer drug. It's just a strange position to take.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819559#Comment_117819559

The point is that, while Curiosity Cola is currently used as a non-medical refreshment, that does not preclude it from being effective for other ailments - like healing Covid and cancer.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819686#Comment_117819686

So what is your position? Ivermectin is not effective against anything but the parasitic infection specified on the in-box leaflet, and all trials into effectiveness against Covid, Zika, Chikunguya, Yellow Fever and anything else for which a positive signal is identified in laboratory or frontline practice should be halted and abandoned? Or what?

Because I can understand the fervour of the oldskool anti-vaxxers who want a "ner ner this old drug is better than vaccines" moment. I can understand the fervour of the frontline doctors who believe (rightly or wrongly) that it works, and believe it should be administered as a matter of urgency and the safety profile and pandemic situation make it unethical to wait for perfect study results. I can understand the people who are not convinced by the current evidence, and think that well-run studies are vital. I can understand the people who look at the data and think that Ivermectin is ineffective and potentially dangerous to use, but are willing to let a well-designed study run its course and wait to be proven right.

What I cannot understand is people who are so dead set against Ivermectin being used to treat Covid-19 that they are willing to obfuscate and outright lie, pretend that Ivermectin has only ever been used in animals, pretend that drugs are never repurposed in surprising ways that the original developers did not envisage, get apparently angry at the revelation that Ivermectin has shown antiviral properties and is being investigated for other viral infections, and become positively incensed that anyone is even remotely interested in positive signals—from albeit imperfect studies—that might show a path toward a lower mortality rate in a pandemic disease. That, I do not understand at all. The motivation eludes me.

Unicorn Milk Latte

Post from new member @PureIsle above:

Horse Paste indeed!

www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Post from @[Deleted User] shortly afterwards:

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Interesting article about Ivermectin from 2017, back before we had all the intellectual powerhouses around to give us their “lol horse paste” takes.

Any chance the two of you used the same conspiracy website as a source? And didn't actually read the article, or get what it's actually about?

Some serious straw man building going on here.😂

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821223#Comment_117821223

It's one of the more prominent articles about Ivermectin from pre-Covid-hysteria days, which clearly states that the drug is being studied for its antiviral properties. It's not like Nature is some obscure little darkweb conspiracy site. It makes sense that you'd see that article posted when such gems as "hurrr durrr horse paste" and "Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic and that is all it can ever be" show up, since it deals with both quite elegantly, and in an article that predates any perceived current incentives or notions of conspiracy.

Anyway, I'm sure you didn't mean to evade my question: What is your position on Ivermectin? You seem to be going with "drugs can never be repurposed and Ivermectin is for horses and dummies".

Ivermectin has shown antiviral properties against Covid-19 in-vitro. That's pretty uncontroversial. Much of the argument is around the requisite concentrations, their potential toxicity, and the efficacy (or lack thereof) of non-toxic doses in-vivo. So when you come in here with such spectacularly intelligent points as: "while Curiosity Cola is currently used as a non-medical refreshment, that does not preclude it from being effective for other ailments - like healing Covid and cancer", you very much appear to have been captured in some way by a certainty that cannot currently exist. A faith, if you will; some unshakeable loyalty to the conclusion that Ivermectin simply could not ever be effective against SARS-CoV-2.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821315#Comment_117821315

What is your position on Ivermectin?

My position:

• it's the latest trending topic among conspiracists and antivaxxers, and has replaced both Hydroxychloroquin and drinking bleach.
• it's not terribly important as a - moderately effective, at best - preventive measure for Covid, because there are several highly effective vaccines that prevent Covid, that don't have to be ingested frequently and indefinitely to provide protection.
• research for possible antiviral properties? Go for it, if it has any beneficial effects for anything, including Covid, no harm in finding out.
• it's one of many possible Covid treatments that has been tried out over the last year and a half. One of the least successful ones.
• no doubts about well documented beneficial effects Ivermectin had when used as intended, as treatment for parasitic intestinal worms in poor countries
• re-purposing existing medication for a new illness is common practice, undeserving of the dramatic hand waving of the Ivermectin/antivaxx crowd
• creating an idiot narrative that Ivermectin somehow prevents Covid has done harm, in that believers have started finding ways of acquiring it, and self medicating - which has resulted in a steep increase of calls to poison control centres in the US

The actual, real world impact of Ivermectin regarding Covid is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChYpO2KmH7k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821370#Comment_117821370

Thanks for the response.

• "it's the latest trending topic among conspiracists and antivaxxers, and has replaced both Hydroxychloroquin and drinking bleach."

Fair, though I am not so interested in the opinions of random Twitter users as I am in the opinions of the FLCCC types who are working in frontline Covid care.

• "it's not terribly important as a - moderately effective, at best - preventive measure for Covid, because there are several highly effective vaccines that prevent Covid, that don't have to be ingested frequently and indefinitely to provide protection."

I tend to disagree slightly. I wouldn't see Ivermectin as a replacement for vaccines, but if it's effective in any meaningful way as prophylaxis at safe doses, and since we know that vaccine efficacy drops and vulnerable people are still dying, it could be a useful additional layer of protection for the very vulnerable.

• "research for possible antiviral properties? Go for it, if it has any beneficial effects for anything, including Covid, no harm in finding out."

Agreed.

• "it's one of many possible Covid treatments that has been tried out over the last year and a half. One of the least successful ones."

I think it's one that has become politicised very quickly, and it's therefore difficult to get through the "noise". I look forward to the results of the US/UK/Japan studies, hopefully they'll shed more light.

• "no doubts about well documented beneficial effects Ivermectin had when used as intended, as treatment for parasitic intestinal worms in poor countries"

And river blindness, head lice, scabies, etc. Yes. The discoverers won a Nobel for it.

• "re-purposing existing medication for a new illness is common practice, undeserving of the dramatic hand waving of the Ivermectin/antivaxx crowd"

You can see how your "while Curiosity Cola is currently used as a non-medical refreshment, that does not preclude it from being effective for other ailments - like healing Covid and cancer" might lead someone to believe you're clueless re: drug repurposing though, surely? Maybe you were being funny. Ha ha.

• "creating an idiot narrative that Ivermectin somehow prevents Covid has done harm, in that believers have started finding ways of acquiring it, and self medicating - which has resulted in a steep increase of calls to poison control centres in the US"

Well, yes. There are also instances in the US of people being prescribed Ivermectin off-label by their doctor and their pharmacist refusing to fill the prescription. I'm not sure if pharmacies overriding doctors' off-label prescriptions is common practice in the US, but you could see how someone prescribed a medicine by their doctor but refused it by their pharmacy might go out of their way to try and get it in other ways. In any case, I'm not an advocate of people taking animal preparations of any medication, particularly not when there are human preparations available with long-standing safety records.

I didn't watch the video. Partisan American TV personalities give me hives. Sorry.

growleaves

@[Deleted User] 'And in turn to damage the trust they have in what ought to be our general instruments of sense-making. As I said: hard to understand the motivation.'

No it isn't hard to understand. There is not merely a vaccine push, there is a tidal wave of passion for these vaccines and a black poison sea of deep hatred for anything else.

So Ivermectin isn't just unreliable in lieu of more data, it is the worst thing in the world and you're intellectually a sub-cretin I hope you choke on your horse medicine etc., etc.

That's how human beings are, and not appearing hideous isn't on their list of priorities.

As for newspapers damaging trust in themselves, they are like junk-bond corporations being looted as they collapse. Who reads them or takes them seriously anyway.

I have no opinions on Ivermectin itself.

The total partisanisation of Ivermectin in which every pro-vaccine, pro-restrictions partisan heaps scorn on both the drug and anyone who considers it possibly a treatment tells us nothing at all except that it's a big no from the 'official'/mainstream faction.

The lockstep march of these foot-soldiers make their individual contributions pointless. They all speak with one voice and say nothing that can't be gleaned from any other media.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821459#Comment_117821459

every pro-vaccine, pro-restrictions partisan

Wait. You can't be both. Either you're pro vaccine, meaning, you want to lift restrictions as quickly as possible. Or you're pro-restrictions, meaning, the fewer people are vaccinated, the longer you can keep up with non-pharmaceutical restrictions.

One of the main objective of antivaxxers is to extend restrictions as long as possible, so they can continue playing the victim of the evil, oppressive government.

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821417#Comment_117821417

I didn't watch the video.

To be frank, you didn't miss anything crucial. The video is just - ever so slightly breathless and over dramatic - reporting on escalating calls to poison control centres, with some basic background info on Ivermectin (she even mentions River Blindness - good research before going on air..), and descriptions of some neurological symptoms that are consistent with the effects on neurotransmitters that are mentioned in the arstechnica article I linked to earlier.

BTW, the arstechnica piece has a link to this NCBI paper, which has a good overview of history and use cases for Ivermectin, with lots of technical detail about how it works. It also mentions antiviral properties, with a link to this study, which describes the antiviral effect of Ivermectin towards Flavivirus - which is significantly, fundamentally different to coronaviruses, with transmission via insect bites. Vaccines for illnesses caused by Flavivirus, like Yellow Fever, have been around since 1937.

PureIsle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821223#Comment_117821223

Answers to

Ques.1 No. I do not visit such websites

Ques.2 No, I read and understood.

Your post contributed nothing to the discussion.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821503#Comment_117821503

Oh okay then, should have said people who support restrictions for 'only' 18 months and counting but who are against them in spirit.

YFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058140590/ivermectin-emerges-as-theraputic-for-covid

Any research on that?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821511#Comment_117821511

According to this CDC health advisory notice, there's been a 24-fold increase in Ivermectin prescriptions, without counting the bought-from-India and I-have-a-horse-guv-honest types of usage, and a three-fold increase in calls to poison centres about Ivermectin. Which would seem to suggest that the rate of Ivermectin poison incidents has decreased. Funny old world.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117822296#Comment_117822296

No, that's you not understanding maths (and assuming that the people prescribed it previously were also misusing it to the level that required calling poisons centres - which is very unlikely)

Former Former Former

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817887#Comment_117817887

Remdesivir is a great illustration as to why fabulous claims for treatments like ivermectin and fluvoxamine need to be approached with caution.

In its earliest trials, remdesivir showed great promise. However, when it came to a randomised, placebo-controlled trial, suddenly the benefits were a lot more modest. And remdesivir is a genuine anti-viral medicine, not like the others which have no real basis for efficacy.

Until it's proven in a properly conducted trial, none of it really counts. Ivermectin has failed miserably in these trials. It doesn't work.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117822308#Comment_117822308

A three-fold increase in calls in the context of a 24-fold increase in prescriptions is a lower rate of calls. And, since people were calling poison centres for Ivermectin prior to 2020, we can assume that at least some people were concerned enough about misuse to call.

In any case, it was just a facetious observation. Of course people shouldn't be using animal preparations. Of any drug. No need to get all antsy.

PureIsle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117822697#Comment_117822697

What is your proposal for proving it efficacious or not, in the absence of Pharma companies being interested due to lack of return (Ivermectin being out of patent), and our governments abdication of responsibility to Pharma companies in this area?

Doctors are doing small scale trials the world over.

You do not believe these doctors?

Who then will you believe? A corporation who has a huge vested interest in the result?

Unicorn Milk Latte

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117822296#Comment_117822296

Antimask and antivax activist Caleb Wallace recently caught Covid, and treated the symptoms with with Vitamin C, zinc, aspirin and ivermectin. He has died from Covid as a consequence of not being vaccinated, and ineffective treatment.

The idiot doctor who prescribed him Ivermectin, regardless of repeated warnings of its ineffectiveness, should be held accountable, IMHO.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117823600#Comment_117823600

Well I think you're jumping the shark a bit there, old chum.

First, we don't know if Ivermectin is effective or not, yet. Not you, not me, not anybody.

Second, as far as I know, the advice given to people who are not sick enough for hospital is that they stay home, rest, get plenty of fluid and take paracetamol for fever. Unless the Ivermectin actively contributed to a worse outcome (and afaik there is no evidence of that), then the doctor isn't accountable for anything.

Third, if Ivermectin if effective in treating covid (and again, nobody knows definitively, yet), you would still expect to see some deaths in people who take Ivermectin, just as you see deaths in people who are vaccinated, and just as, if Ivermectin were effective, you would still see deaths in vaccinated infected people treated with Ivermectin.

Last, as a matter of accuracy, nobody has warned of "ineffectiveness". The FDA's position is that "Additional testing is needed to determine whether ivermectin might be appropriate to prevent or treat coronavirus or COVID-19" and "You should not take any medicine to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless it has been prescribed to you by your health care provider and acquired from a legitimate source."