5 ms·

The Ivermectin Guys’ Whole Thing Has Fallen Apart

30 points by computer23 4y ago

hinkley 4y ago
For years every time I saw a forsythia bush flowering in the spring I would think of Jude Law's disaster of a character in Contagion, complete with hearing his lisp in my head. Then Covid happened, and I discovered that movie was so accurate that I'm not sure I have the stomach to watch it again.
quantified 4y ago
I heard a notion that I’d love to see followed up on, that places which believe ivermectin was working for them have a higher rate of parasitic infections to begin with, and suppressing these does improve COVID outcomes. Sort of lines up with the politics. Rural, not urban.
- NobodyNada 4y ago
  Scott Alexander thinks this is a plausible hypothesis: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...
  - quantified 4y ago
    Wonder how many undiagnosed low-level parasitic infections there are out there?
    - epmaybe 4y ago
      interesting article: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/how-a-worm-gave-the-south-a-bad-name/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/how-a-worm-gave-the-so...
dreaminvm 4y ago
Not defending Ivermectin, but what do people have against trying alternative therapeutics for COVID? I rarely see articles bashing the "other side" for being wrong on many COVID decisions: CDC flip-flopping on masks CDC flip-flopping on how vaccine prevents spreads Airplanes being the safest with high quality filters, yet they are the only place where masking is still required (which even the airlines disagree with) CNN calling Ivermectin a horse dewormer, when Ivermectin has been administered to a large percentage of the global population ... the list goes on and on *edit for formatting
- skyde 4y ago
  the problem is not that Ivermectin is only for Horse. It's that the huge amount of misinformation caused people to get the horse version instead of asking a doctor for the version designed for human. Its basically uneducated peoples trying to self prescribe because they think they know better than a doctor that spent 14 year in school and had GPA of 3.5+.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- mariuolo 4y ago
  > Not defending Ivermectin, but what do people have against trying alternative therapeutics for COVID? Nothing at all, as long as proper testing procedures are followed.
  - skyde 4y ago
    right there are other therapeutics that look more promising. ex: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04661-w.epdf?sharing_token=PSmpYRF9ORzbd8rGMPz8X9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N4JB_mNROefRsuIW_Cd0WB5B-0yTtI5KZCAnyKgM8q5zhLX3DnE9_jRXlcerlI-wZVETnlK6u6V76zjQm0fYK29C1kWnm-ZoYBw3ND8n_Ln7gu6RB5u8vVLsgafssDDNg%3D https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04661-w.epdf?shar...
  - andrewflnr 4y ago
    No, we only wish that was true. There's definitely a lot of blind tribalism on the supposedly pro-science side. I've seen it first-hand.
logic_beats_pro 4y ago
The count of peer reviewed studies showing a benefit for the use of Ivermectin is now 62, and they can be found here: https://ivmmeta.com/ https://ivmmeta.com/ The earlier the better of course, just like Tamiflu. The best results were attained when Ivermectin was used as a prophylactic.
- Inityx 4y ago
  A rebuttal of this site specifically: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t... >Ivermectin doesn’t reduce mortality in COVID a significant amount (let’s say d > 0.3) in the absence of comorbid parasites: 85-90% confidence
  - logic_beats_pro 4y ago
    I see that this is from November 2021 when there was 40 peer reviewed studies. Any update to this for the additional 22 peer reviewed studies?
    - IE6 4y ago
      This kind of thinking is what was so exhausting during the height of the pandemic. The "barrier for entry" was very low (a facebook meme, watching a podcast) but the burden of proof was immense (always more research that needed to be done on behalf of the people saying it probably didn't make sense).
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  That site gets mentioned in the article: > As we’ve previously discussed, IVM Meta has some curious traits: it resolves to the same IP address as hcqmeta.com as well as c19legacy.com. HCQMeta uses the same kind of purported real time meta analysis to recommend for the use of hydroxychloroquine. C19 legacy has claimed to count the “unnecessary” deaths caused by doctors not using hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin to treat COVID-19. All of these sites refer physicians to the FLCCC for “treatment protocols” and also promote the World Council for Health, a faux public health consortium that’s made up solely of ivermectin advocacy groups.
mikem170 4y ago
This guy put together a great analysis of over two dozen ivermectin studies [0] and he found that the studies done in countries where intestinal worms are common giving ivermectin showed a benefit against covid, and that in countries where intestinal worms are not common ivermectin did not help with covid. This makes sense because it is known that intestinal worms can compromise the immune system. https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...
BlueTie 4y ago
Think of all the things that are Ivermectin-level questionable (cloth masks, 6ft, vaccinated don't spread, 95% effective at preventing illness, airborne, etc.) that have negatively impacted far more people than a few nuts who decided to put all their eggs in the Ivermectin basket. If you're choosing to go after Joe Rogan and none of the proponents of the other points above, it seems fairly obvious that you're ideologically motivated in your attack.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  It is airborne. Distance works. Vaccinated spread less instead of not at all. You seem to be deliberately misinterpreting other recommendations to paint them a certain way.
TurkishPoptart 4y ago
And what? The CDC's narrative has also fallen apart. Moderna is pushing to authorize a FOURTH mRNA injection for otherwise healthy young men who've received 3 shots and may have already had omicron and are immune. This is contrary to WHO guidance in which the risk of heart problems outweigh the minor benefit of maybe not being hospitalized from contracting a strain of COVID-19 (delta) which has been eradicated thanks to the weaksauce omicron variant. That is chaos. The science is literally _years_ behind on this, and it's clearer than ever that Pfizer and Moderna are trying to rake in as much $$$ as their FDA friends will allow them to. First, do no harm.
- ea550ff70a 4y ago
  "The CDC's narrative has also fallen apart." Are you okay buddy? Are you aware that this is an evolving virus and the reality of a year or two ago is no longer the same as the virus has evolved substantially? The "narrative" has adapted to reflect the changing playfield. OBVIOUSLY many things have changed as the virus changes and as the global health related organizations adapt with it. Go outside and touch grass.
Commodore63 4y ago
Weinstein et al work extra hard to push the narrative that traditional institutions are untrustworthy and discredited. But when stuff like this happens - rather than say "mea culpa", they cry foul and invoke the specter of vast shadowy conspiracies (which they call the "DISC", the Distributed Idea Suppression Complex). Grifting hypocrites, the lot of them.
anamax 4y ago
I'm confused. Let's assume that Ivermectin is completely useless, not only against Covid-19 but other things that make Covid-19 more dangerous. How do you get from there to an official campaign against it? Someone who takes Ivermectin on their nickel doesn't stop anyone from producing or distributing something that does work.

30 points by computer23 4y ago

For years every time I saw a forsythia bush flowering in the spring I would think of Jude Law's disaster of a character in Contagion, complete with hearing his lisp in my head. Then Covid happened, and I discovered that movie was so accurate that I'm not sure I have the stomach to watch it again.

quantified 4y ago

I heard a notion that I’d love to see followed up on, that places which believe ivermectin was working for them have a higher rate of parasitic infections to begin with, and suppressing these does improve COVID outcomes. Sort of lines up with the politics. Rural, not urban.

NobodyNada 4y ago
Scott Alexander thinks this is a plausible hypothesis: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...
- quantified 4y ago
  Wonder how many undiagnosed low-level parasitic infections there are out there?
  - epmaybe 4y ago
    interesting article: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/how-a-worm-gave-the-south-a-bad-name/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/how-a-worm-gave-the-so...

dreaminvm 4y ago

Not defending Ivermectin, but what do people have against trying alternative therapeutics for COVID? I rarely see articles bashing the "other side" for being wrong on many COVID decisions: CDC flip-flopping on masks CDC flip-flopping on how vaccine prevents spreads Airplanes being the safest with high quality filters, yet they are the only place where masking is still required (which even the airlines disagree with) CNN calling Ivermectin a horse dewormer, when Ivermectin has been administered to a large percentage of the global population ... the list goes on and on *edit for formatting

skyde 4y ago
the problem is not that Ivermectin is only for Horse. It's that the huge amount of misinformation caused people to get the horse version instead of asking a doctor for the version designed for human. Its basically uneducated peoples trying to self prescribe because they think they know better than a doctor that spent 14 year in school and had GPA of 3.5+.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
mariuolo 4y ago
> Not defending Ivermectin, but what do people have against trying alternative therapeutics for COVID? Nothing at all, as long as proper testing procedures are followed.
- skyde 4y ago
  right there are other therapeutics that look more promising. ex: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04661-w.epdf?sharing_token=PSmpYRF9ORzbd8rGMPz8X9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N4JB_mNROefRsuIW_Cd0WB5B-0yTtI5KZCAnyKgM8q5zhLX3DnE9_jRXlcerlI-wZVETnlK6u6V76zjQm0fYK29C1kWnm-ZoYBw3ND8n_Ln7gu6RB5u8vVLsgafssDDNg%3D https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04661-w.epdf?shar...
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  No, we only wish that was true. There's definitely a lot of blind tribalism on the supposedly pro-science side. I've seen it first-hand.

logic_beats_pro 4y ago

The count of peer reviewed studies showing a benefit for the use of Ivermectin is now 62, and they can be found here: https://ivmmeta.com/ https://ivmmeta.com/ The earlier the better of course, just like Tamiflu. The best results were attained when Ivermectin was used as a prophylactic.

Inityx 4y ago
A rebuttal of this site specifically: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t... >Ivermectin doesn’t reduce mortality in COVID a significant amount (let’s say d > 0.3) in the absence of comorbid parasites: 85-90% confidence
- logic_beats_pro 4y ago
  I see that this is from November 2021 when there was 40 peer reviewed studies. Any update to this for the additional 22 peer reviewed studies?
  - IE6 4y ago
    This kind of thinking is what was so exhausting during the height of the pandemic. The "barrier for entry" was very low (a facebook meme, watching a podcast) but the burden of proof was immense (always more research that needed to be done on behalf of the people saying it probably didn't make sense).
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
That site gets mentioned in the article: > As we’ve previously discussed, IVM Meta has some curious traits: it resolves to the same IP address as hcqmeta.com as well as c19legacy.com. HCQMeta uses the same kind of purported real time meta analysis to recommend for the use of hydroxychloroquine. C19 legacy has claimed to count the “unnecessary” deaths caused by doctors not using hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin to treat COVID-19. All of these sites refer physicians to the FLCCC for “treatment protocols” and also promote the World Council for Health, a faux public health consortium that’s made up solely of ivermectin advocacy groups.

mikem170 4y ago

This guy put together a great analysis of over two dozen ivermectin studies [0] and he found that the studies done in countries where intestinal worms are common giving ivermectin showed a benefit against covid, and that in countries where intestinal worms are not common ivermectin did not help with covid. This makes sense because it is known that intestinal worms can compromise the immune system. https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...

BlueTie 4y ago

Think of all the things that are Ivermectin-level questionable (cloth masks, 6ft, vaccinated don't spread, 95% effective at preventing illness, airborne, etc.) that have negatively impacted far more people than a few nuts who decided to put all their eggs in the Ivermectin basket. If you're choosing to go after Joe Rogan and none of the proponents of the other points above, it seems fairly obvious that you're ideologically motivated in your attack.

lern_too_spel 4y ago
It is airborne. Distance works. Vaccinated spread less instead of not at all. You seem to be deliberately misinterpreting other recommendations to paint them a certain way.

TurkishPoptart 4y ago

And what? The CDC's narrative has also fallen apart. Moderna is pushing to authorize a FOURTH mRNA injection for otherwise healthy young men who've received 3 shots and may have already had omicron and are immune. This is contrary to WHO guidance in which the risk of heart problems outweigh the minor benefit of maybe not being hospitalized from contracting a strain of COVID-19 (delta) which has been eradicated thanks to the weaksauce omicron variant. That is chaos. The science is literally _years_ behind on this, and it's clearer than ever that Pfizer and Moderna are trying to rake in as much $$$ as their FDA friends will allow them to. First, do no harm.

ea550ff70a 4y ago
"The CDC's narrative has also fallen apart." Are you okay buddy? Are you aware that this is an evolving virus and the reality of a year or two ago is no longer the same as the virus has evolved substantially? The "narrative" has adapted to reflect the changing playfield. OBVIOUSLY many things have changed as the virus changes and as the global health related organizations adapt with it. Go outside and touch grass.

Commodore63 4y ago

Weinstein et al work extra hard to push the narrative that traditional institutions are untrustworthy and discredited. But when stuff like this happens - rather than say "mea culpa", they cry foul and invoke the specter of vast shadowy conspiracies (which they call the "DISC", the Distributed Idea Suppression Complex). Grifting hypocrites, the lot of them.

anamax 4y ago

I'm confused. Let's assume that Ivermectin is completely useless, not only against Covid-19 but other things that make Covid-19 more dangerous. How do you get from there to an official campaign against it? Someone who takes Ivermectin on their nickel doesn't stop anyone from producing or distributing something that does work.