agip wrote:
Fisky you are one of the Ivermectin pushers, right? Any comment on this new study showing it is no better than a placebo in preventing severe covid?
(If my memory is wrong about you, please forgive)
I apologize in advance for the typos. I have an injury and I'm having to use voice dictation. I saw four problems with this study. 1. The dosage was less than recommended by the front line doctors alliance... 0.4 mg instead of 0.6 mg. 2. Treatment stopped after five days. The front line alliance recommend stopping treatment after five days or after recovery. Obviously, those severe cases would have been continued treatment with ivermectin under the FLCCC protocol and that might've made a difference in the outcome. 3. Supplemental zinc was not given. From what I've read, both hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin need adequate levels of zinc in order to provide a therapeutic benefit. I don't remember the mechanism, but if I recall correctly, Covid somehow deplete the body of zinc? Regardless, zinc needs to be included in the treatment with hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. 4. The doctors writing this study said that they did not research mortality as a primary outcome because the death rate in Malaysia it was so low. However the data itself shows four deaths in the ivermectin group and 10 Dead in the control group! Look at the study. You'll see the numbers.
The ivermectin group also showed significantly fewer patients that needed to be ventilated. Two patients in the ivermectin group and 8 in the control group, if I recall correctly.
If I am reading this correctly, this means that even though this study did not use a high enough dosage of ivermectin and it did not continue to treat with ivermectin in severe cases after five days and it did not provide supplemental zinc, it's still reduced ventilation patients by 80% and deaths by 60%.
If I'm wrong, and someone wants to point out why, i'll listen.