Ivermectin & India

[LemonSwan]

I feel like I am in a conspiracy theory. I saw people talking about this online and went to google - thinking it was all wrong. But its wasn't. What they were saying appears to me to be right. And it just cant be.

They were saying Ivermectin prevents and treats COVID (we cant get this in the UK btw before anyone accuses me of anti-vax).

In India the Covid situation was running wildly out of control. On the 10th May they offered Ivermectin to all of the adult population. www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/05/11/indian-state-will-offer-ivermectin-to-entire-adult-population---even-as-who-warns-against-its-use-as-covid-19-treatment/?sh=1aeac2216d9f

Then on 9th June they ban the mixture of drugs (including Ivermectin) which they were using to treat individuals in hospital.

This mixture appears to contain some of the key drugs advocated by some of the leading clinicians in Critical Care; and Oxford have added Ivermectin to their trials recently.
covid19criticalcare.com/

Now when I look at the google data it may just be a coincidence - particularly the drop in cases as it started to decline a few days before the 10th May. But what I cannot get over is the deaths jump overnight of 5000 people from 9th June to 10th June. I have looked all over for other countries who had something like this and I can only find smooth lines.
(Shown in pics - you can google 'covid in india' to see the data).

I just dont understand this. Can someone explain please because surely this just cannot be right.

Theres too many questions:
Why have I not heard about this Ivermectin before last week,
Why is no one concerned as to which drug withdrawn from treatment caused 5000 deaths overnight in India

Quite a ramble but the more I read the more I feel like I need a tin hat.

Please either pass me a hat or scrumple it up and throw the ball of foil at me.

Thanks in advance

It would be wonderful if there was a proven drug to help Covid/Long Covid and maybe it’s Ivermectin but the evidence isn’t there yet and it’s not licensed for it.

@Hoppinggreen eh? In your PP post you said

Due to my work I know that Ivermectin is so effective in long Covid that Doctors won’t do a placebo trial as it’s unethical. I also know that there are plans to get it licensed for UK use

Which I questioned and asked for some links as I don't believe there is currently any robust evidence that ivermectin is effective in treating LC, but you seem to have done a sudden U-term?

Oh FFS. Its like Donald Trump has invaded mumsnet

That isn't vitriol, but happy to go that way as you prefer @HoppingGreen. Your command of the English language seems as weak as your scientific knowledge, so hopefully this will be clearer. You're claiming to pass along half-heard information to make yourself feel important. Factually, it isn't even in a trial for long covid, it's early stage infection! People are seriously struggling with long covid symptoms; someone might actually believe you "know" something and decide to self medicate as a result. That's why it's dangerous to leave your posts unchallenged; because your irresponsible posting could lead to illness or death. Take a second to think next time you have the urge to feel important.

How would a wormer work against a virus can anyone explain to a thick person?

It doesn't.

There's increasing evidence it doesn't, but any evidence that any trials are being performed are grist to the mill for conspiracy theorists.

@TheVolturi

How would a wormer work against a virus can anyone explain to a thick person?

I posted the Gavi summary below, but it is worth repeating the link as it explains the thoughts behind why some people thought it might help and gives accurate information about the (limited and flawed) trials that have been conducted to date and the more robust trial (for early symptoms NOT long Covid) that is currently ongoing.

https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/ivermectin-why-potential-covid-treatment-isnt-recommended-use

One running theme in this pandemic has been the desire of certain parties (mostly but not exclusively on the Trumpian/conspiratorial end) to split treatments and interventions into Works! and Useless! in a Manichaean way.

So masks are Useless because people don’t put them on and off perfectly and there are gaps round the side, even though they’re patently protective against droplets.

Vaccines are Useless because some vaccinated people still die.

But somewhere out there is a treatment that Works! If you give it people will rise from their bed and walk in a biblical way, and the pandemic will disappear.

PRINCIPLE protocol (trial registry) said that they would test 3 drugs initially, including hydroxychloroquine * I wonder if experiment stopped early due to other emergent findings about hydroxy-quine harms.

*feel like I deserve a medal every time I spell that correctly

it sounds like the group HGreen is working with want to try to promote idea that treatment of active infection with ivermectin could reduce development of Long covid later. I can't follow all the covid research so not up to date... last I understood LC was being described as an umbrella term for up to 7 conditions with the shared triggering event (SARS-CoV-2 infection). The diversity might mean very different approaches to getting better. Each type of LC could be described by distinct symptomatic cluster & duration of symptoms. The main actual treatment for LC will probably continue to be symptom management strategies.

How ivermectin could help prevent up to 7 distinctive & diverse conditions of unknown and possibly diverse aetiologies... oh well, maybe. 🤷 Someone will fund the trial, I imagine.

This seems completely at odds with some of the research that suggests that being infected with parasites is actually associated with better outcomes for Covid patients and patients with viral infections: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3832647
idpjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40249-019-0560-6

Thought readers of this thread may also find this page interesting. It's Merck's own statement on their product and Covid :

www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

World wide there have been lots of clinical trials of ivermectin, including observational trials, trials conducted by practising doctors who couldn't get funding (these are the ones that were abandoned for ethical reasons) and RCTs. The Oxford trial is just one of many.

On the one hand we have big pharma saying it can't possibly work (it's off licence and cheap and we have vaccines to flog) and on the other hand we have medical practitioners saying it has efficacy and providing evidence. Who to believe?

feel like I deserve a medal every time I spell that correctly

You have no idea how many times it took me to get it right on the tiny screen on my phone at stupid o’clock this morning.

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022926

I’m not sure how the big pharma conspiracy theorists explain away the dexamethasone. If stuff was really being hidden, surely they wouldn’t have been careless enough to let a dirt cheap old med be virtually the first thing that showed promise.

I don’t disbelieve you hopping but from what you’ve said the doctors in that meeting might be out of their depth. There isn’t enough proven efficacy on Ivermectin. And any trial on it would have to be against whatever the current best treatment for long covid is.

Which is currently ‘who knows we’re still not sure what long covid is.’

@KOKOagainandagain

World wide there have been lots of clinical trials of ivermectin, including observational trials, trials conducted by practising doctors who couldn't get funding (these are the ones that were abandoned for ethical reasons) and RCTs. The Oxford trial is just one of many.

On the one hand we have big pharma saying it can't possibly work (it's off licence and cheap and we have vaccines to flog) and on the other hand we have medical practitioners saying it has efficacy and providing evidence. Who to believe?

On the one hand we have big pharma saying it can't possibly work (it's off licence and cheap and we have vaccines to flog)

@KOKOagainandagain

Other cheap drugs have been approved for treatment of COVID, like the corticosteroids after RCTs provided evidence of efficacy. Trials are continuing to test other cheap drugs that can be repositioned. I'm not sure how this squares with your opinion that "big pharma" are blocking the use of ivermectin because it's off license, cheap and...[they have] vaccines to flog"

The existing body of evidence does not provide evidence of efficacy due to methodological limitations (observational studies are not really appropriate for this kind of things) which is why Oxford and others are now conducted well designed, well powered RCTs.

It's simply not true to say that those who suggest that ivermectin could be a useful in the box are anti-mask, anti-vaccine or anti-lockdown (when the shit is hitting the fan).

The same people that were pro-mask when WHO and our government advised against it were proposing the use of ivermectin long before the vaccine roll out. And now they advise both.

For some people is all political and about social control. Masks are muzzles. Having never given a thought to the vulnerable or services for those experiencing domestic violence or SEN or even NT DC they are now self appointed champions. Where were you before? How did we ever survive without you?

For others it's about public health. Non-pharmacological ways of keeping access open. And treating people when they become ill. And prevention of illness. Because that's what really matters for service users and providers.

@Lostinacloud

Dr Clare Craig’s Twitter feed often includes information about ivermectin use, trials and results. It’s a absolute scandal that this long time proven as safe drug’s effectiveness has been totally suppressed and censored.

This.

Lostinacloud

Dr Clare Craig’s Twitter feed often includes information about ivermectin use, trials and results.
It’s a absolute scandal that this long time proven as safe drug’s effectiveness has been totally suppressed and censored.

This.

@Wildswim

Observational studies, RCTs, and meta-analyses looking at efficacy of ivermectin are all publicly available for anyone to read. They are not being censored or blocked. When you critically assess these, it is clear there is no robust evidence for efficacy.

Clare Craig is a member of the infamous HART group and has become fairly infamous well known for the amount of misinformation she has spread regarding coronavirus, including many now deleted tweets.

@AmberIsACertainty

Ivermectin is a horse wormer. Yes you can get it in the UK. OTC medicine in feed stores. I'm not advising anyone to eat it.

It's an anti parasitic. My children were prescribed it when they got Barbados sandworm in their feet. It's a very safe drug with over 40 years of use.

Meta analyses of its efficacy in covid have been published. But as it's off patent & makes no money, its use is being quashed by those who want/need EUA for the vaccines, remdesivir and the mAbs that all have IP and will make money for the drug industry.

And I'm not anti drug industry: I've worked in it for 25 years. This is how it operates, and it's about money, not health.

@LemonSwan

Do you have any instincts as to what you think happened overnight on the 9th?

Is it another drug if not the Ivermectin, or do you just think a coincidence?

I would imagine it’s a data reporting thing. A bunch of mislaid stats gets inputted. We had a similar jump early on in the pandemic when they discovered a load of missing deaths.

I don’t think ivermectin is killing people. They use it for kids with head lice in America. I’ve given it Dd when she was a kid for head lice. Works wonders. I also give it to my chickens and they’re still alive.

Check out what Dr Paul Marik has to say about ivermectin and the struggle to get his paper on it published earlier this year.

The way the journals have caved to pressure from their biggest customers (drug companies) this year has been beyond shameful.

Also check out - while I'm at it - the June paper on mRNA vaccines in pregnancy in the NEJM that actually shows a spontaneous abortion rate of 82% (once you've read the footnote to table 4) but buried that and claimed rates were similar to historical reference. Criminal. It's online. You can see if for yourself & do the basic maths they failed to do.

@confuseddotcom090

Meta analyses of its efficacy in covid have been published.

Several meta-analyses have been published, with wildly differing conclusions. The issue is that the existing studies are not good quality due to methodological issues, and so that is happening is biased effect estimates are being amplified - referred to in epi as "rubbish in, rubbish out". Oxford are now conducting a well designed, well powered RCT which will provide robust effect estimates.

But as it's off patent & makes no money, its use is being quashed by those who want/need EUA for the vaccines, remdesivir and the mAbs that all have IP and will make money for the drug industry.

Other off-patent cheap drugs have been approved for treatment of COVID, like the corticosteroids after RCTs provided evidence of efficacy. Trials are continuing to test other cheap drugs that can be repositioned. How does this fit with your theory that cheap alternatives are being ""quashed?" Why are RCTs continuing if "they" don't want it to be used?

@confuseddotcom090

Check out what Dr Paul Marik has to say about ivermectin and the struggle to get his paper on it published earlier this year.

The way the journals have caved to pressure from their biggest customers (drug companies) this year has been beyond shameful.

Also check out - while I'm at it - the June paper on mRNA vaccines in pregnancy in the NEJM that actually shows a spontaneous abortion rate of 82% (once you've read the footnote to table 4) but buried that and claimed rates were similar to historical reference. Criminal. It's online. You can see if for yourself & do the basic maths they failed to do.

Interesting how a thread about ivermectin has now descended into claims that the vaccines cause miscarriage

dethamexazone is off patent, too.

What is an "observational trial" -- anyone know?

@YellowBelltCat - I posted a link on page 1, it was 4000 missed deaths in Bihar from wave 2.

@confuseddotcom090 - whatever you think you've seen, you've misunderstood the information. Early stage spontaneous abortion levels were 13%, wider population stats are 12-24%. So there is not a difference.
www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2104983