TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Ivermectin shows clinical benefits in mild to moderate COVID19: RCT double-blind

47 pointsby lolspaceover 3 years ago

10 comments

cjhvealover 3 years ago
Please only take this medication by prescription from a medical doctor. Even if these results are replicated, there is a huge difference between 12mg/day IV for 5 days under medical supervision and consuming a tube of apple flavored paste containing 6 grams of ivermectin. Ivermectin is neurotoxic at high doses and can absolutely kill you.
评论 #28427855 未加载
rolphover 3 years ago
a) &quot;In vitro studies have shown the efficacy of Ivermectin (IV) to inhibit the SARS—CoV-2 viral replication, but questions remained as to in-vivo applications&quot; [0]<p>b) &quot;Sixty-three patients with positive PCR result were randomized into three arms of the study. There was 1 withdrawal, thus 62 patients completed the study&quot; [0]<p>c) &quot;We cannot conclude in this study that Ivermectin has a place in prophylaxis, but this warrants investigation.&quot; [0]<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;academic.oup.com&#x2F;qjmed&#x2F;advance-article&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1093&#x2F;qjmed&#x2F;hcab035&#x2F;6143037" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;academic.oup.com&#x2F;qjmed&#x2F;advance-article&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1093&#x2F;q...</a>
评论 #28428022 未加载
brataoover 3 years ago
&quot;Sample size: A convenient sample size of 60 with 20 in each arm, was planned. However, 62 were ultimately randomized.&quot;<p>Sounds very underpowered
评论 #28428051 未加载
marricksover 3 years ago
I saw a post on NIH studies showing possible benefits and people dismissing it because it wasn&#x27;t a preponderance of evidence. Totally valid to dismiss a selected sample but made me realize there was more of a basis for its usage than, let&#x27;s say, bleach.<p>That said, <i>I was wrong, removed</i>. I guess it&#x27;s too much to ask for people to trust the recommended medicine, perhaps we should get more pro-vaccine conspiracy theories out there =&#x2F;
评论 #28427830 未加载
benzofuranover 3 years ago
Trial group of 62 patients and no parasite screening in those patients - yawn. But could be interesting grounds for a more significant and controlled study with patients with comorbidities.
评论 #28427820 未加载
评论 #28427819 未加载
shawnb576over 3 years ago
You know what shows great clinical benefits?<p>Getting vaccinated.
wobblyaspover 3 years ago
Awesome! Let&#x27;s let medical professionals and the like make the decision about recommending it!
b0skover 3 years ago
They are back. Spamming hacker news every day with debunked studies.
评论 #28427953 未加载
resource0xover 3 years ago
Much bigger study showing statistically significant benefits <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ijidonline.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;S1201-9712(21)00100-4&#x2F;pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ijidonline.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;S1201-9712(21)00100-4&#x2F;pdf</a>
评论 #28427961 未加载
throwaway224466over 3 years ago
Ivermectin is proven to work, but it&#x27;s out of patent. That means pharmaceutical companies can&#x27;t profit from it. Hence the Ivermectin FUD campaign.<p>Big Pharma will do everything in their power, including manipulate the media, to buy time while they develop new oral Covid drugs with a slightly tweaked chemical composition (<i>just</i> enough for them to legally profit off it). Knowing they have a certain % of the population that will blindly follow and argue for them helps.
评论 #28428131 未加载