Bonfire1996 said:
Simple question for Ol Jock:
What lessened the Delta Variant impact in densely populated India?
Nothing. Deaths and cases in India are grossly undercounted. Most estimates of the actual death toll are 4MM+ deaths.
FDA Tweet
9,343 Views |
80 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by Nasreddin
Nothing. Deaths and cases in India are grossly undercounted. Most estimates of the actual death toll are 4MM+ deaths.
Ol Jock 99 said:You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it. https://t.co/TWb75xYEY4
— U.S. FDA (@US_FDA) August 21, 2021
What a time to be alive
It's the Tide Pod Challenge but for adults.
anti vaxers: they're not FDA approved!
FDA: now they are, also don't use horse dewormer to treat covid
anti vaxers: can't trust the FDA!
FDA: now they are, also don't use horse dewormer to treat covid
anti vaxers: can't trust the FDA!
Gordo14 said:Bonfire1996 said:
Simple question for Ol Jock:
What lessened the Delta Variant impact in densely populated India?
Nothing. Deaths and cases in India are grossly undercounted. Most estimates of the actual death toll are 4MM+ deaths.
Couldn't find a good article on that 4 million number but the reported death rate of India is .0003% and the U.S.' is .002%. Using our number in relation to India's population would make it 2.5 million deaths.
Old McDonald said:
anti vaxers: they're not FDA approved!
FDA: now they are, also don't use horse dewormer to treat covid
anti vaxers: can't trust the FDA!
I didn't trust the FDA before Covid.
TarponChaser said:
That tweeted piece from the FDA is a prime example of why people have mistrust. It states that ivermectin is not an antiviral when that is absolutely false. The antiviral properties of ivermectin have been well known and documented for 45 years.
Does that guarantee efficacy against covid? No. However, there are studies showing how the antiviral properties have something to do with preventing the virus from binding to cells.
Perhaps that's a too nuanced and difficult to communicate position but don't lie and say the drug has no antiviral capability.
Sorry, but you're mistaken about the bolder section. Ivermectin has never demonstrated any clinical antiviral properties.
In vitro is useless if it doesn't translate to clinical use.
This is the problem in a nutshell.
They're throwing shade; not trying to be relatable.tmaggie50 said:
I like that they use "y'all" to sound like a relatable voice to southerners lol.
Do I agree with their method? While the Mississippi Health Department in their brief mentioned that a majority of the recent calls to their poison control center (70%) had to do with ivermectin, it was fortunately a small amount of people (n=1) that were advised to speak with a practitioner and no one was hospitalized. Most (85%) just had some discomfort. Frankly it's not very professional coming from the FDA, a government agency, though and a comms person maybe didn't run that one by enough people and thought they'd try humor at the expense of some folks who for whatever reason decided to take their chances with the animal version.
If someone goes through their doctor and is written a scrip for ivermectin for humans off label that's one thing and the FDA frowns on it as a COVID treatment but ultimately they know that's between a patient and their PCP, but the folks in Mississippi that end up calling poison control because they are experiencing issues due to ingesting something formulated for animals? That elicited the twitter version of an 'are you obtuse' ala Shawshank.
I offer no opinion on someone's decision to ingest either substance, that's my take on the FDA tweet itself.
https://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/resources/15400.pdf
That seems reasonable. It doesn't appear any study confirms "antiviral properties". There are many studies that show some therapeutic value however. Could it be Ivermectin simply reduces inflammation in the respiratory tract thus mitigating the most harmful effects of Covid?Zobel said:TarponChaser said:
That tweeted piece from the FDA is a prime example of why people have mistrust. It states that ivermectin is not an antiviral when that is absolutely false. The antiviral properties of ivermectin have been well known and documented for 45 years.
Does that guarantee efficacy against covid? No. However, there are studies showing how the antiviral properties have something to do with preventing the virus from binding to cells.
Perhaps that's a too nuanced and difficult to communicate position but don't lie and say the drug has no antiviral capability.
Sorry, but you're mistaken about the bolder section. Ivermectin has never demonstrated any clinical antiviral properties.
In vitro is useless if it doesn't translate to clinical use.
This is the problem in a nutshell.
Zobel said:TarponChaser said:
That tweeted piece from the FDA is a prime example of why people have mistrust. It states that ivermectin is not an antiviral when that is absolutely false. The antiviral properties of ivermectin have been well known and documented for 45 years.
Does that guarantee efficacy against covid? No. However, there are studies showing how the antiviral properties have something to do with preventing the virus from binding to cells.
Perhaps that's a too nuanced and difficult to communicate position but don't lie and say the drug has no antiviral capability.
Sorry, but you're mistaken about the bolder section. Ivermectin has never demonstrated any clinical antiviral properties.
In vitro is useless if it doesn't translate to clinical use.
This is the problem in a nutshell.
Sorry, you're incorrect. Ivermectin has had known antiviral properties since its introduction. That's a large reason why it's been used successfully vs. viral infections like dengue, Zika, and yellow fever for 40-45 years and what led to the theory it could be effective vs. covid.
The therapeutic evidence is weak. The largest study that showed benefit was pulled for fraud; without it, you're left with almost entirely low powered, less reliable studies. The next largest study to date found no benefit. The largest study to date (TOGETHER trial) found no benefit in preliminary reported results - the paper has not been published yet. But this is exactly the opposite of what you'd expect if it works. If it works, the better / stronger the study, the more evidence you'd see.
A doctor who was running an ivermectin clinical trial wrote this article talking about another influential study with problematic data on ivermectin. He notes -
A doctor who was running an ivermectin clinical trial wrote this article talking about another influential study with problematic data on ivermectin. He notes -
Quote:
This off-label use of ivermectin entails several risks:Once again, scientific rigor is needed, even in pandemic times.
- Diversion of drug supply, causing shortages for its use in proven indications.
- The use of veterinary formulations or non-supervised doses could lead to unforeseen side effects that can harm ongoing mass treatment schemes at community. level such as the Mectizan Donation Program which managed to eradicate river blindness in Colombia just a few years ago.
- Rural regions of Latin America have a high prevalence of intestinal helminths. These parasite are known to modulate one type of immune response that favors viral clearance. Mass deworming due to ivermectin could have repercussions on the severity of COVID-19.
- Moral hazard, due to a false feeling of protection or treatment with the drug.
- Impossibility to conduct clinical trials should ivermectin become the new standard of care.
Only in vitro and in some caes in animals. Not in clinical trials. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'll gladly update my position.
Here's a paper on the topic from June of last year. They note:
Here's a paper on the topic from June of last year. They note:
It did not help in a clinical trial against dengue fever that just published May of 2021. No clinical efficacy observed.Quote:
In this systematic review, we showed antiviral effects of ivermectin on a broad range of RNA and DNA viruses by reviewing all related evidences since 1970. This study presents the possibility that ivermectin could be a useful antiviral agent in several viruses including those with positive-sense single-stranded RNA, in similar fashion. Since significant effectiveness of ivermectin is seen in the early stages of infection in experimental studies, it is proposed that ivermectin administration may be effective in the early stages or prevention. Of course, confirmation of this statement requires human studies and clinical trials.
If the FDA wanted to get a bunch of good ol boys from Mississippi to stop using Ivermectin they could have just as easily sent a telegram stating usage could result in welfare reductions and longer lines at Hardees
texan12 said:Gordo14 said:Bonfire1996 said:
Simple question for Ol Jock:
What lessened the Delta Variant impact in densely populated India?
Nothing. Deaths and cases in India are grossly undercounted. Most estimates of the actual death toll are 4MM+ deaths.
Couldn't find a good article on that 4 million number but the reported death rate of India is .0003% and the U.S.' is .002%. Using our number in relation to India's population would make it 2.5 million deaths.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/07/20/1018438334/indias-pandemic-death-toll-estimated-at-about-4-million-10-times-the-official-co
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-57888460
https://www.cgdev.org/publication/three-new-estimates-indias-all-cause-excess-mortality-during-covid-19-pandemic
Whatever the number is, this should thoroughly debunk the idea that India had less of a pandemic thanks to ivermectin.
Antivirus effectiveness of ivermectin on dengue virus type 2 in Aedes albopictus
Results
Both of quantitatively and qualitatively inhibiting effects of ivermectin have been detected in this study. Generally, DENV-2 replicated well in Aedes albopictus without ivermectin intervention, whose virus loads exhibited significantly higher when the mosquitoes were holding from 4 days to 10 days after infectious blood feeding. In contrast, with the treatment of ivermectin, the infection rate was reduced by as much as 49.63%. The regression equation between infection rates (Y2) and ivermectin concentration log2 values (X2) was obtained as Y2 = 91.417.21*X2 with R2 = 0.89.
Conclusion
Ivermectin can directly or indirectly inhibit DENV-2 multiplication in Aedes albopictus. Moreover, the actual concentration for application in zooprophylaxis needs to be confirmed in the further field trials.
Summary of past studies from "Nature"
Results
Both of quantitatively and qualitatively inhibiting effects of ivermectin have been detected in this study. Generally, DENV-2 replicated well in Aedes albopictus without ivermectin intervention, whose virus loads exhibited significantly higher when the mosquitoes were holding from 4 days to 10 days after infectious blood feeding. In contrast, with the treatment of ivermectin, the infection rate was reduced by as much as 49.63%. The regression equation between infection rates (Y2) and ivermectin concentration log2 values (X2) was obtained as Y2 = 91.417.21*X2 with R2 = 0.89.
Conclusion
Ivermectin can directly or indirectly inhibit DENV-2 multiplication in Aedes albopictus. Moreover, the actual concentration for application in zooprophylaxis needs to be confirmed in the further field trials.
Summary of past studies from "Nature"
Aedes albopictus is a mosquito, and I literally quoted the conclusion from the Nature systematic review in my previous post saying that human clinical studies are required.
It's interesting to me since you aren't supposed to get the vaccine for a period of time after Covid but for those like you with long Covid there is something still active in your body. It's an interesting dilemma, sorry it's happening to you.ea1060 said:Correct, I also have long Covid. But I didnt have these specific covid symptoms prior to getting the vaccine.bay fan said:
Am I mistaken or do you also have long Covid?
The study you cited was only for mild cases of Covid. If the benefit of Ivermectin is respiratory anti-inflammatory, its therapeutic effects would not be seen in mild cases.Zobel said:
The therapeutic evidence is weak. The largest study that showed benefit was pulled for fraud; without it, you're left with almost entirely low powered, less reliable studies. The next largest study to date found no benefit. The largest study to date (TOGETHER trial) found no benefit in preliminary reported results - the paper has not been published yet. But this is exactly the opposite of what you'd expect if it works. If it works, the better / stronger the study, the more evidence you'd see.
A doctor who was running an ivermectin clinical trial wrote this article talking about another influential study with problematic data on ivermectin. He notes -Quote:
This off-label use of ivermectin entails several risks:Once again, scientific rigor is needed, even in pandemic times.
- Diversion of drug supply, causing shortages for its use in proven indications.
- The use of veterinary formulations or non-supervised doses could lead to unforeseen side effects that can harm ongoing mass treatment schemes at community. level such as the Mectizan Donation Program which managed to eradicate river blindness in Colombia just a few years ago.
- Rural regions of Latin America have a high prevalence of intestinal helminths. These parasite are known to modulate one type of immune response that favors viral clearance. Mass deworming due to ivermectin could have repercussions on the severity of COVID-19.
- Moral hazard, due to a false feeling of protection or treatment with the drug.
- Impossibility to conduct clinical trials should ivermectin become the new standard of care.
Ok, then find a study that demonstrates that. It would be great if it was a sample size >50.
Are you familiar with the term p hacking? This may be what you'll find if you do.
If ivermectin is a miracle drug that stops covid from replicating or binding to the cell, it should help in a logical or consistent way. It should prevent infections, it should reduce disease severity, it should stop people from dying, etc etc. Like the vaccines do, I might add.
There's no reason it should keep people out of the ICU, but not help with mild disease. If you found a study that showed one but not the other, that would be something to side-eye.
Are you familiar with the term p hacking? This may be what you'll find if you do.
If ivermectin is a miracle drug that stops covid from replicating or binding to the cell, it should help in a logical or consistent way. It should prevent infections, it should reduce disease severity, it should stop people from dying, etc etc. Like the vaccines do, I might add.
There's no reason it should keep people out of the ICU, but not help with mild disease. If you found a study that showed one but not the other, that would be something to side-eye.
Y'all are projecting a lot of insecurity into a tweet.
Fitch said:
Y'all are projecting a lot of insecurity into a tweet.
This post could have been used daily for about 6ish years now
Lol. Don't use ivermectin because science.ursusguy said:
https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
Then ends the article with not science.
Quote:
Meanwhile, effective ways to limit the spread of COVID-19 continue to be to wear your mask, stay at least 6 feet from others who don't live with you, wash hands frequently, and avoid crowds.
At a minimum the tweet is unprofessional and arguably condescending. Either way it's definitely not going to convince anyone to not take ivermectin.
Maybe, instead of tweeting like a try-hard 14 year old, spend more time working on approving the vaccine so you can remove one more reason why people won't take it.
Maybe, instead of tweeting like a try-hard 14 year old, spend more time working on approving the vaccine so you can remove one more reason why people won't take it.
YouBet said:Lol. Don't use ivermectin because science.ursusguy said:
https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
Then ends the article with not science.Quote:
Meanwhile, effective ways to limit the spread of COVID-19 continue to be to wear your mask, stay at least 6 feet from others who don't live with you, wash hands frequently, and avoid crowds.
Nah dog, I'm cool. I'll just go ahead and continue to act like a human being. Anything that makes you act like humanity never has in our history is not a solution.
Ol Jock 99 said:You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it. https://t.co/TWb75xYEY4
— U.S. FDA (@US_FDA) August 21, 2021
What a time to be alive
So I first found this tweet funny and clever and didn't really object to it. I don't have a stance on Ivomec and if I did it would be unqualified. But when I come back to this tweet, I find it pretty disgusting. The FDA is a federal government agency that serves the public. Why on earth are they mocking Americans? Even if not intended to be disparaging, why are they making cute commentary like this? If the FDA has a statement to make, then it should be done and it should be technical and in accordance with their charter.
lead said:Ol Jock 99 said:You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it. https://t.co/TWb75xYEY4
— U.S. FDA (@US_FDA) August 21, 2021
What a time to be alive
So I first found this tweet funny and clever and didn't really object to it. I don't have a stance on Ivomec and if I did it would be unqualified. But when I come back to this tweet, I find it pretty disgusting. The FDA is a federal government agency that serves the public. Why on earth are they mocking Americans? Even if not intended to be disparaging, why are they making cute commentary like this? If the FDA has a statement to make, then it should be done and it should be technical and in accordance with their charter.
Whatever, they tried to be funny and it missed. Just like all companies they probably have some marketing kid in charge of their social and this appeared to be an attempt to sound more relatable than preachy.
Which is why you take the approach that lead suggested. All that tweet will accomplish is to reinforce whatever line people have drawn rather than its intended effect. Its pretty reasonable to expect a federal agency to not mock or infer people are stupid when you are trying to change their mind.
It's just dumb. Ivermectin is used on humans as well as other animals. The difference is dose. Are they implying that the millions of people in the developing world that take it every year are animals? Seems kinda racist.t - cam said:
Whatever, they tried to be funny and it missed. Just like all companies they probably have some marketing kid in charge of their social and this appeared to be an attempt to sound more relatable than preachy.
Yeah. Not sure that the FDA needs to be trying to compete with Wendy's for the most comical social media account. Probably not all that effective at accomplishing their goals.AgDev01 said:
Which is why you take the approach that lead suggested. All that tweet will accomplish is to reinforce whatever line people have drawn rather than its intended effect. Its pretty reasonable to expect a federal agency to not mock or infer people are stupid when you are trying to change their mind.
agforlife97 said:It's just dumb. Ivermectin is used on humans as well as other animals. The difference is dose. Are they implying that the millions of people in the developing world that take it every year are animals? Seems kinda racist.t - cam said:
Whatever, they tried to be funny and it missed. Just like all companies they probably have some marketing kid in charge of their social and this appeared to be an attempt to sound more relatable than preachy.
I think they just wanted people to stop getting it on their own from sources that are quite frankly ridiculous. Getting medicine at tractor supply is in fact a bad idea. I doubt they have much issue with it being prescribed by a doctor.
What do doctors in other countries say about the use of Ivermectin?
Wondering if TarponChaser will come back after this. Excellent conversation between you two, I hope he is willing to learn and accept that his position is not well informed.
It's also kind of funny that they say it's not FDA approved, when at the time of the tweet, all covid vaccines weren't approved either.t - cam said:agforlife97 said:It's just dumb. Ivermectin is used on humans as well as other animals. The difference is dose. Are they implying that the millions of people in the developing world that take it every year are animals? Seems kinda racist.t - cam said:
Whatever, they tried to be funny and it missed. Just like all companies they probably have some marketing kid in charge of their social and this appeared to be an attempt to sound more relatable than preachy.
I think they just wanted people to stop getting it on their own from sources that are quite frankly ridiculous. Getting medicine at tractor supply is in fact a bad idea. I doubt they have much issue with it being prescribed by a doctor.
Well thats the issue, is very few doctors will prescribe it for covid. And even if they do prescribe it, a lot of pharmacies are refusing to fill the prescription. So theyre making it almost impossible to get a normal prescription for ivermectin which is causing people to get it from the tractor supply.t - cam said:agforlife97 said:It's just dumb. Ivermectin is used on humans as well as other animals. The difference is dose. Are they implying that the millions of people in the developing world that take it every year are animals? Seems kinda racist.t - cam said:
Whatever, they tried to be funny and it missed. Just like all companies they probably have some marketing kid in charge of their social and this appeared to be an attempt to sound more relatable than preachy.
I think they just wanted people to stop getting it on their own from sources that are quite frankly ridiculous. Getting medicine at tractor supply is in fact a bad idea. I doubt they have much issue with it being prescribed by a doctor.
Its a downright witch hunt against ivermectin right now.
But why would it matter if you did take the vaccine? I'm VERY right leaning yet nothing at all about the vaccine scars me nor nothing about what the left does makes me steer from the vaccine. Why not just take it and move on with your life. I took it. I'm officially done with Covid. I also have had Covid before I was vaccinated. To me, that should be about the same as having a booster. I use the vaccine to not mask, go anywhere and everywhere and live as I did pre Covid (granted, I did most of that pre vaccine as well, so). Heck, I think the vaccinated are completely justified in moving on from all of this. I'm against all mandates, whether masks or vaccines and I get and support people making the choice. But I don't see the compelling reason why not to take the vaccine.Robin Hood Was A Thief said:
Because we don't have to. And the reaction of the leftists have proven to me to stand well clear of it.
Capitol Ag said:But why would it matter if you did take the vaccine? I'm VERY right leaning yet nothing at all about the vaccine scars me nor nothing about what the left does makes me steer from the vaccine. Why not just take it and move on with your life. I took it. I'm officially done with Covid. I also have had Covid before I was vaccinated. To me, that should be about the same as having a booster. I use the vaccine to not mask, go anywhere and everywhere and live as I did pre Covid (granted, I did most of that pre vaccine as well, so). Heck, I think the vaccinated are completely justified in moving on from all of this. I'm against all mandates, whether masks or vaccines and I get and support people making the choice. But I don't see the compelling reason why not to take the vaccine.Robin Hood Was A Thief said:
Because we don't have to. And the reaction of the leftists have proven to me to stand well clear of it.
I got the vaccine four months ago and now I have frequent dizzy/light headed spells and forearm pain. Others are experiencing the same thing.
If I could go back in time I would've never gotten the vaccine.
Featured Stories
See All
36:45
3h ago
2.4k
27:19
59m ago
1.8k
Best & worst moments from Texas A&M football's 2024 campaign
by Olin Buchanan
22:50
21h ago
2.8k
Reed Report: Preparing for Aggieland's first top-10 hoops showdown
by Luke Evangelist
8:34
5h ago
803