The Ivermectin discussion

Piollaire wrote: »

What kind of idiot would ask a GP about veterinary products.

I'm sure there are GPs who would prescribe Ivermectin if they were allowed as is the case in the US.

I think Ivermectin is an authorized medicine in Ireland and doctors can prescribe off-label here. Not sure you will find a doctor who gets his scientific advice from evolutionary biologist youtubers though, but who knows

Ballynally wrote: »

And hey, feel free to call me a lunatic any day..

'sup ya loon?

Ballynally wrote: »

To get back to the horse paste: i can read the ingredients.

I feel like the ingredients list would be more likely to lie to a horse than a person. I'd be much more comfortable with the people version.

Ballynally wrote: »

Time for the EU (and Ireland) to follow suit.

Here's a link to Joe Rogan's podcast w Bret Weinstein and dr.Kory.

Which is why I asked the original question about Irish doctors.
Who is the Irish Pierre Kory?
Who is the Irish Joe Rogan for that matter?
Who are the corresponding characters in the Irish version of this thing?

Has anyone actually raised this with their GP?

astrofool wrote: »

e) It is interesting that the Invermectin thread is now heading down the conspiracy theory route for whatever reason

It's because we're asking questions. That's all it usually takes to get you labelled a pushed down the conspiracy chute.

astrofool wrote: »

h) No one has come back and commented on the bmj paper to show evidence to the contrary, most seem to be ignoring it

The report is sound but the authors leaning is clear right off the bat. The "needs a toxic does" argument gets a mention and together with the lack of clinical trials is rightly identified as a reason the WHO couldn't include it.
The leaning shows up to me when he suggests this "raises questions about the pertinence of conducting clinical studies on ivermectin."
To me, "we can't do anything without clinical trials" does not mean "there's no point in doing trials."

Leaning aside, the general thesis is correct. I'm just not sure how practical it is.

If we were to observe a pub for a night, we could not definitively say that alcohol gets you drunk.
Some studied beer drinkers, some wine. Others studied spirits.
Some subjects had peanuts with their drink, some had dinner beforehand and some were doing coke in the jaxx.
We can't say for sure.

That's why meta analysis protocols were developed with ways of accounting for these types of scenarios.

So, to beat this analogy to death, we have a meta-analysis from the vintners association saying that it's likely true.
We have seasoned and experienced front line barmen attesting to alcohols effectiveness.
We have a very small chance that someone will get alcohol poisoning but from years of experience, most just get a hangover.
We don't know yet if long term use will kill your liver but we know it's safe in the short term.

So, if I'm faced with a terrible party I may not be able to avoid and I'm asked if I want technically unproven beer or a prototype boredom vaccine, I know what my answer is:
"Give me the beer and put me on the mailing list for developments on the vaccine."

Then again, I could just be pedantic and say that "EBM opinion and debate" isn't good enough, I need an RTC.

ligind wrote: »

The folks I know who are now pro ivermectin
- don't agree with lockdowns
- didn't believe the hospitals were under pressure
- think the PCR test a has 90%plus false positive rate
- initially were on the hydroxy chloroquine bandwagon
- think the vaccines are highly dangerous

- don't agree with lockdowns
No issue with lockdowns. In fact, I've been a little taken a back at how quickly people start acting like covid has gone away when restrictions are loosened.

- didn't believe the hospitals were under pressure
Not been keeping track, I'm putting my effort into saying out of them. I have a close friend who works in one and they didn’t get the tsunami they were expecting at the beginning (in the ICU) but we haven't spoken about it since.

- think the PCR test a has 90%plus false positive rate
News to me.

- initially were on the hydroxy chloroquine bandwagon
I completely ignored it. Fell for the "Orange man bad" zeitgeist and let others make up my mind for me.
I should have dealt with that more objectively.

- think the vaccines are highly dangerous
Vaccines have the potential to be dangerous. That's why it's a ten year development processes. We're only 18 months into that process.
I know it's probably fine but only in the same way that I know based on my history, I'm unlikely to crash when I get into the car. I still want a seat belt tho.

Piollaire wrote: »

I'm none of the above but I took Ivermectin until I got vaccinated.

How'd you manage that? How many legs do you have?

Piollaire wrote: »

Who listens to youtubers - it's the body of science they present that matters. And where did you pull that off-label nugget from?

What do you mean off-label nugget? Do you know what the term means?

I have to imagine any use of ivermectin for covid-19 in USA or in Ireland would be considered off-label since although it is an approved medicine, it is not approved for the treatment of covid-19.

Disclaimer: I am not recommending or against Ivermectin for covid-19, I have 0 medical qualifications, just clarifying some people here that USA is in a unique position with respect to use of Ivermectin. I think the situation in Ireland is probably pretty similar

DaSilva wrote: »

Not sure you will find a doctor who gets his scientific advice from evolutionary biologist youtubers though, but who knows

Just send them here:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/guide-for-this-website/take-action-and-share-the-infos-with-your-doctor/

A good doctor should be able to tell you whether or not these doctors are bad doctors.
But more importantly, they should be able to tell you why.

snnowwy wrote: »

Still interested to know what I might expect when I ask my doc.

I expect you'll have a wasted trip - Irish doctors are keeping their heads down on this one.

moonage wrote: »

There's a debate between the author of that BMJ paper and Dr Pierre Kory, one of the leading proponents of ivermectin.

The BMJ guy has very weak arguments and Dr Kory runs rings around him:

The research institute where he works is funded by my favourite pharma company Merck/MSD, and others, and yet he declares no competing interests in his opinion piece.

lucernarian wrote: »

There are those who equate Ivermectin advocacy with vaccine denialists, but both they and the ones who actually are guilty of this are lacking a lot of perspective on science, evidence and empiricism.

I think it's fair to say at this point that ivermectin deserves further study to get high quality data on its efficacy, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it clearly works.

All indications are that it is beneficial across all stages of the disease including as a preventative.

True, the definitive studies have not been done, and are unlikely to be done for various reasons.

There is nothing anywhere that I have found that indicates taking Ivermectin could be harmful or have other negative effects, unless a deliberate overdose was administered.

On the basis that it is probably beneficial and in the middle of a pandemic where emergency approval for several new vaccines has been granted, the big question remains why this drug, whose safety cannot be questioned, is not available off label to patients in Ireland for the prevention and treatment of Covid-19, as determined by the patient's doctor.

DaSilva wrote: »

What makes you think it is not available off label? I'm guessing its the narrative that it is a super secret cure being suppressed by big pharma?

Nothing to do with your very weird guess.

Have you information to show it is available?
Have you got it?
How would I get it if I wanted it as a preventative medicine?

As far as I am aware,
if a doctor believes it is appropriate to prescribe it and is happy to do, and a pharmacist is happy to dispense it, it may be possible to source an ivermectin product that is licensed in another country

How many doctors in ROI will write a prescription for this use?
How many pharmacists will dispense it for this purpose?

By your question I guess you have this information.

lucernarian wrote: »

There are those who equate Ivermectin advocacy with vaccine denialists, but both they and the ones who actually are guilty of this are lacking a lot of perspective on science, evidence and empiricism.

snnowwy wrote: »

- initially were on the hydroxy chloroquine bandwagon
I completely ignored it. Fell for the "Orange man bad" zeitgeist and let others make up my mind for me.
I should have dealt with that more objectively.

According to these doctors (40:45), Hydroxy chloroquine actually was of use but has been surpassed in efficacy by Ivermectin. Shame on me for shirking my responsibility for what I think.
It's well worth watching the whole thing for a very good example of empiricism. Full disclosure: I'm only half way in but I'm confident there wont be any suggestions of using 'eye of newt' or the likes.

I can only hope Irish GP's come out on this doctor’s side of the science / politics gauntlet.

lucernarian wrote: »

I think it's fair to say at this point that ivermectin deserves further study to get high quality data on its efficacy, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it clearly works.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

On the basis that it is probably beneficial and in the middle of a pandemic where emergency approval for several new vaccines has been granted, the big question remains why this drug, whose safety cannot be questioned, is not available off label to patients in Ireland for the prevention and treatment of Covid-19, as determined by the patient's doctor.

I agree with Johnboy. Given Ivermectin's safety profile and the immediacy of the situation, I think we could relax our standards on evidence, especially in light of how we've already done that with the vaccines.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Nothing to do with your very weird guess.

Have you information to show it is available?
Have you got it?
How would I get it if I wanted it as a preventative medicine?

As far as I am aware,
if a doctor believes it is appropriate to prescribe it and is happy to do, and a pharmacist is happy to dispense it, it may be possible to source an ivermectin product that is licensed in another country

How many doctors in ROI will write a prescription for this use?
How many pharmacists will dispense it for this purpose?

By your question I guess you have this information.

Whoever has it, share the wealth. Don't be holding out on us.

Do Irish doctors have the discretion to prescribe off label?
Does that extend to medicines approved in other countries?
Same questions for pharmacists.
Anyone got any links to the relevant bodies for this?

As I understand it, any approved drug can be prescribed off label by any doctor, if it is thought efficacious.

Do I misunderstand the situation in Ireland?

We all know that Ivermectin is not approved for treatment of Covid-19, but does that, in itself, prevent a doctor from prescribing it for Covid-19?

I obviously do not think this is so.
The difficulty therefore would be finding a doctor who will prescribe it, and subsequently a pharmacist who could obtain it and would supply it to the patient.

That is my present view, but am very willing to reconsider it in light of good/linked information.

Anyone have experience of long covid?
I've heard the most common symptom is being dismissed by your doctor. Any truth to that?

If not, I'd be interested in what kind of treatment is standard of care in Ireland at present.

moonage wrote: »

Maybe print this off and see what your GP has to say about it.

That is my plan, I just wanted to get a gauge of how they'll react.

moonage wrote: »

I recently got a very small horse and got some ivermectin paste for him

So you're telling me that not only do you have to put a coat on it in winter but you have to brush it's teeth as well?
How on earth did horses survive long enough for us to domesticate them?

Doctors cannot prescribe something thats not available. Look at the hpra website. Do a search for ivermectin under the medicines section, medicine section is for humans.

The only authorisation is for two creams. That is what is available as ivermectin for human use in Ireland. Doctors cannot prescribe this for off-label use as it's a cream that is used on the skin. This cannot be ingested.

And yet they are not people who decide if there is enough evidence and telling the FDA what to do will not advance that cause anyway. It's not as if they are the first to make claims like this. I genuinely don't understand the strategies of those pushing Ivermectin over the last 15 months. If they are not writing opinions, they are showing up on TV, making YouTube videos telling people how right they are or shouting that they have been muzzled and that it's all one big conspiracy.

A much better approach would have been to produce enough data that people will not question, a large clinical trial. That is coming from Oxford. TBH, unless that reveals something spectacular you really can't see it being adopted as a widespread general treatment. Research is already moving rapidly onto specific COVID treatments and that is where regulators are looking.