Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Results: Among 400 patients who were randomized in the primary analysis population (median age, 37 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 29-48]; 231 women [58%]), 398 (99.5%) completed the trial. The median time to resolution of symptoms was 10 days (IQR, 9-13) in the ivermectin group compared with 12 days (IQR, 9-13) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for resolution of symptoms, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.32]; P = .53 by log-rank test). By day 21, 82% in the ivermectin group and 79% in the placebo group had resolved symptoms. The most common solicited adverse event was headache, reported by 104 patients (52%) given ivermectin and 111 (56%) who received placebo. The most common serious adverse event was multiorgan failure, occurring in 4 patients (2 in each group).
Conclusion and Relevance: Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes.
Comments
Why the fuck are you posting a 6-month old article on a study completed last December when there are numerous Ivermectin studies in the meantime?
Here's *SEARCH* on the same site:
https://plus.mcmaster.ca/COVID-19/Search/Results?SearchTerms=Ivermectin
First article (published Sept 27, reviewed Oct 15) says:
Stop your fucking myopic one-track propaganda.
I know you hate it that Ivermectin shows *some* efficacy so you can't splatter your vomit everywhere so instead you have to carefully cherrypick your biased articles.
[do note that I am not claiming that this last chronological study is definitive - the previous one may contradict it. That is the nature of SCIENCE - you might look up the word, it's fascinating]
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 4:14am
Rant away, meanwhile Merck has data that shows that an oral medication may prevent hospitalization due to COVID
https://www.universalpersonality.com/merck-pill-intended-to-treat-covid-19-succeeds-in-key-study/business/
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 8:35am
A gigantic pharma company's pitching it's own therapy - no shit Sherlock. And with any luck their data's even somewhat accurate.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 9:02am
Hey Sherlock, who do you think makes Ivermectin?
It is Merck
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 9:30am
Lessee...
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 11:42am
Merck developed it
Big Pharma
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 12:41pm
I guess playing dumb is your holdout strategy. Merck doesn't make much money on drugs with expired patents, so it will wait for one that it has an active patent on. There is no profit in reviving Ivermectin for whatever niche roles it might play, even if those roles help people suffering.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 1:41pm
So there is a great Ivermectin conspiracy, trying to keep a good drug down?
You are gullible. There is no solid data that supports the us of ivermectin for COVID. The new Merck drug shows promise.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/10/12/fact-check-mercks-molnupiravir-and-ivermectin-not-same-drugs/6023438001/
Keep plugging away.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 1:48pm
Unlike you i can read, so I can pull out distinctions between glowing success and useful corner cases, for example. Yes there were conspiracies about Ivermectin pretending it was just a horse dewormer, but overall it's gotten quite a lot of review - go to clinical studies.gov and search - so it's not as problematic as others.
I'm sure Merck's marketing guy who fwd that story to USA today got a big attaboy/girl - whether it's true or not is another issue. Some big pharma Biogen got the FDA to approve a pretty useless Alzheimers drug, causing a scandal.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.372.6547.1141
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 2:29pm
RE: Why the fuck are you posting a 6-month old article on a study completed last December when there are numerous Ivermectin studies in the meantime?
Because he wants to pump the politicization of science.
On Dagblog yet. Which makes it extra absurd, as if that will make a difference.
BTW, most of us like it that our personal physicians can prescribe medications for off-label use. Even if we get bad results, that's the risk we take. And we would be quite unhappy if that situation becomes more regulated because of politicalization over stupid things like Ivermectin being used for Covid.
by artappraiser on Wed, 10/27/2021 - 3:54pm
The Pharmacies Giving Ivermectin To People Bamboozled By Right-Wing Misinformation
Ivermectin isn’t approved by federal authorities to treat COVID-19, but that’s not stopping people from seeking it out — or others from making money off of it.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivermectin-compounding-pharmacies-covid_n_617c4864e4b0931432187f71
The scam continues
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 10/30/2021 - 11:39am
Why do you give a fuck? 85k Americans are infected each day, down from 180k beginning of Sept, with 2k deaths per day. Yet you want to prattle on and on, repeating lies re the few Ivermectin users. As AA noted, off-label use or however it's called is perfectly fine - many approved drugs, as Ivermectin is, are used for other illnesses than designed. And Ivermectin has been shown to be somewhat useful for some early usage - not all cases by any means, but some, in the face of a deadly pandemic and debilitating post-Covid syndromes that no one really knows how to cure, only somewhat (fortunately) prevent. Yet you defy science that goes against your tribe's cherry-picked belief, just like wing nuts defy science for their cherry-picked beliefs. Both suck. And the CDC & other health orga have pretty shitty records dealing with this and other health crises, so holding them up as the gold standard ain't really worth it. How many Ivermectin users have died or been injured? A huge fucking silence in terms of actual data - just you and HuffPost doing scare tactics again. I'm more worried about the actual infected from the pandemic - you can go pound sand as usual.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 10/30/2021 - 12:36pm
It's very simple:
1) Nobody human should be accessing veterinary-grade ivermectin somehow. If they get sick or die from doing so, whatever the reason they took it, it's considered their own damn fault
2) Ivermectin for humans has to be prescribed by a doctor. So WHERE'S THE PROBLEM?
3) Do we want to start policing everything doctors prescribe? Nobody who cares about getting decent medical care would be an advocate for more strenuous policing of off-label prescriptions.Plenty of insurers already do that and it sucks, drives doctors and patients nuts, they can't get the medicine they need to try because some damn stupid bureaucrat is making the doctor dive through hoops, saying it's off-label, then the doctor has to send 20-page defense faxes and 5 phone calls.
(Not to mention insurers are often lying about what they care about when they challenge covering a prescription. What they usually really care about is that it's expensive because it's not in their "formulary" Their "formulary" is prescription drugs for which they have already made contracts with the manufacturer on how much they are going to pay. Anything else is much more out of their pocket and they will fight it. Very common for Medicaid plans! Those will cover only the cheapest generic drugs, which might not be the best antibiotic for your infection and not the fancy schmancy cancer chemo, no way. They'll challenge and challenge and challenge that you have to try this and that and the other thing first because it's standard protocol for the diagnosis code. You and the doctor know those won't work. They don't care, they want you to use what's cheap for them and their ass is covered by "standard protocol". Just another reason poor people who are on Medicaid get bad medical treatment: doctors working on 10 patients per hour capitation basis prescribing "protocol" medicine.)
by artappraiser on Sat, 10/30/2021 - 2:52pm