Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire New Study Links Ivermectin to ‘Large Reductions’ In COVID-19 Deaths

Well, what do you know.


Link to story


BY TOM OZIMEK June 21, 2021

A recent pre-print review based on peer-reviewed studies has found that using antiparasitic drug ivermectin could lead to “large reductions” in COVID-19 deaths and its use could have a “significant impact” on the pandemic globally.

For the study (pdf), published on June 17 in the American Journal of Therapeutics, a group of scientists reviewed the clinical trial use of ivermectin, which has antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, in 24 randomized controlled trials involving just over 3,400 participants. The researchers sought to assess the efficacy of ivermectin in reducing infection or mortality in people with COVID-19 or at high risk of getting it.

Using multiple methods of sequential analysis, the researchers concluded with a moderate level of confidence that the drug reduced the risk of death in COVID-19 patients by an average of 62 percent, at a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.19-0.79, in a sample of 2438 patients.

Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the risk of death was found to be 2.3 percent among those treated with the drug, compared to 7.8 percent for those who were not, according to the review.

“Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease,” the authors wrote.


Since the start of the pandemic, both observational and randomized studies have evaluated ivermectin as a treatment for, and as prevention against, COVID-19 infection.

“A review by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance summarized findings from 27 studies on the effects of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection, concluding that ivermectin ‘demonstrates a strong signal of therapeutic efficacy’ against COVID-19” the researchers wrote, referring to one recent review, which was based on data from both peer-reviewed studies and preprint manuscripts.

They cited another recent review that concluded that ivermectin reduced deaths by as much as 75 percent, while noting that neither the National Institutes of Health in the United States nor the World Health Organization (WHO) have recommended the use of ivermectin outside clinical trials for use in the fight against COVID-19.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in a note on “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19,” warns that it has received “multiple reports of patients who have required medical support and been hospitalized after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for horses.”

“Using any treatment for COVID-19 that’s not approved or authorized by the FDA, unless part of a clinical trial, can cause serious harm,” the FDA said in the note, adding that it has not reviewed data to support the use of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients.

The WHO said in March that “the current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive” and that, until more data becomes available, the agency recommends that “the drug only be used within clinical trials.”

The authors of the ivermectin efficacy study argued, however, that the drug has an “established safety profile through decades of use” and “could play a critical role in suppressing or even ending the SARS-CoV2 pandemic.”

“The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally,” they argued in the study abstract.

The authors noted in their publication that all the studies on which they based their conclusions have been peer-reviewed.

oh yeah? But what does Anthony Fauci say about it?

Interesting.. The wife and I live in rural Indiana, pretty conservative area.. We both caught the China flu around Christmas and our local Dr. gave us a prescription for Ivomec immediately.. We both recovered, me with only a sniffle. My wife was a pretty sick girl ending up with Pneumonia and about a 30 day recovery period.. We believe the Ivomec might have kept her above ground.. FWIW..

Fauci, "Ivermectin? Never heard of it."

Why would anyone recommend against something that will cause no harm and in fact there is a large amount of evidence saying it is very beneficial, even life saving?

I'm sure that is rhetorical..


Clyde

One problem is that such studies tend to focus on people who have already been hospitalized due to COVID19. Well, Ivermectin is most effective when used early after onset of COVID19. It's also somewhat effective after substantial breathing difficulty sets in, but it's far more effective at preventing the lung damage to start with by early dosing with it, soon after diagnosis. Used early, doctors who are working with it are of the opinion that it operates as a near perfect cure. Wait till the damage is already done to the lungs, however, and it's helpfulness, though still present, is significantly reduced. Unfortunately, the above study seems focused on its helpfulness after lung damage has already occurred, and has already caused significant breathing issues.

Lol.

Maybe being behind bars would hasten his recall.

Doctors are afraid of their superiors who've told them that it's irresponsible to prescribe Ivermectin. They are told to tell patients that there's no evidence for its effectiveness.

This whole ''pandemic'' and mostly the response to it has a stink to it. I wish if it had to happen it would have been after Trump was re-elected. He did some things for political reasons trying to get re-elected. Things he otherwise might not have done. I can't imagine he would have consented to the shutdown and the huge borrowing binge had he not gotten somewhat panicked over the election. The Democrats now have a saddle cinched tight on us and a bit in our mouth and they can get away with anything.

I find it interesting that the research above only found a 62% decrease across 2,000 patients. Meanwhile in India, they are seeing 80%-90% reduction across several HUNDRED MILLION patients.

But hey, I get it. The trial above was done in a "controlled" environment. The Indians were only using real world conditions...

For an explanation as to the difference, read my post above.

The thing is that it will work but only if folks take it before they are on deaths door.

Early is the key but those folks in high offices of the health dept.don't want the good citizens to have an effective and economical means to help themselves.

They want those .gov big bucks they get for putting folks in the hospital.

same results in Mexico, Brasil,

Most countries in Africa where ivermectin has been handout for treating parasites in the past had much lower deaths too.

What happened to the doctor that testified to Congress on saving lives with Ivermectin?
He get canceled?

I thought no one here was going to take any medical treatment not approved by the FDA for the treatment of Covid?

I believe you misapprehended. It is more like many of us are not taking a new concoction rushed onto the public. A concoction unlike that of any other human vaccine, of unknown long term effects, that messes with the genetic code, that most doctors can't explain the way it works so that a reasonably well read person can understand, that is being pushed by known population control advocates.
As opposed to medications such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine both of which have a long history of safety and use in humans.
It is bad enough to kill off senior citizens, but the ''vaccines'' are being pushed on young productive adults and even kids.
Since you posed a question, I'll ask you what is the harm in trying 2 known drugs with a good safety record if they might help?

YouTube banned that video. Banned a video of testimony to the Senate.

It's back up.