Was just curious if this has been discussed over here. Looks like some Tokyo scientists conducted a study of rates of infection and related fatalities in interior African countries where Ivermectin is regularly used by the masses vs a group of more developed outer/coastal African countries where it is not prescribed/used in daily life.

Their results seem to strongly conclude that in countries where Ivermectin is distributed to and used by the entire population, this use is the most reasonable explanation for the significant reduction for the decrease in morbidity and fatality rate. My wife (pharmacist) always wondered if widespread regular use of HCQ could be reason for such reductions in morbidity/fatality since a few months into this thing in 2020. Maybe it's Ivermectin?






Link to study...

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254377v1.full.pdf

Yes many many times. The fact it keeps popping up is probably an indicator of how weak the evidence is on ivermectin. The study is a classic example of just looking at a correlations and purposely blinding yourself to the actual reality.

1. At no point was in the study was ivermectin used to treat covid
2. The highlighted countries have some of the worst health care in the world where accurate reporting is not occurring
3. The "study" ignores South American countries that do the same thing
4. The countries in question hardly test at all for COVID. Where western countries have tested their population many times over, these counties have tested fractions.
5. The countries in question have some of the lowest average life spans around, meaning a disease that is more deadly to old people would go easier on countries with no old people
6. The ivermectin that is distributed in the "study" is a pill that is typically sent out once a year. So the entire premise is based on a magical pill taken orally once a year that prevents you from dying from a virus year round. Compare that to even the best scientific results from non peer reviewed double blind studies where ivermectin is taken at onset and success is measured by reduction of symptoms compared to the control group.

Another Doug said:

---

Yes many many times. The fact it keeps popping up is probably an indicator of how weak the evidence is on ivermectin. The study is a classic example of just looking at a correlations and purposely blinding yourself to the actual reality.

---

No kidding. It seems like every few weeks someone has to post this "study" here.

Why are people trying so hard to make ivermectin or hcq seem like a miracle drug hiding in the shadows when a true modern miracle of science, the mRNA vaccine is proving to be significantly more effective than anything else out there. Not only that, but the mRNA vaccine costs less than 30 dollars a dose (depending on vaccine), which is going to be cheaper than a standard prescription of ivermectin (30 dollars for less than a week). Not to mention much cheaper than the $1200 cost of a regeneron infusion.

Right now the government is covering the cost of both regeneron and the vaccine, so both are "free," while ivermectin isn't. Just get the free vaccine and take whatever supplements you want afterwards that you feel will help.

The last time this was posted, of many times, the OP blasted people for not believing in JOHNS HOPKINS data.

Well it turns out, neither the study in the graph, nor the links show any data at all from Johns Hopkins. And neither does their Git repo. The guy that was blasting JOHNS HOPKINS over and over again disappeared and never responded.

So OP, could you kindly tell us where that Johns Hopkins data that makes up that graph is?

Another Doug said:

---

So the entire premise is based on a magical pill taken orally once a year that prevents you from dying from a virus year round.

---

Damn. Kinda sounds like a vaccine.

Old Buffalo said:

---

Another Doug said:

---

So the entire premise is based on a magical pill taken orally once a year that prevents you from dying from a virus year round.

---

Damn. Kinda sounds like a vaccine.

---

I'm far from a Branch Covidian, but I sincerely hope you're not serious….

Per the CDC new definition it might be.
Per the new CDC definition, vitamin C is now a vaccine for scurvy

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Why are people trying so hard to make ivermectin or hcq seem like a miracle drug hiding in the shadows when a true modern miracle of science, the mRNA vaccine is proving to be significantly more effective than anything else out there. Not only that, but the mRNA vaccine costs less than 30 dollars a dose (depending on vaccine), which is going to be cheaper than a standard prescription of ivermectin (30 dollars for less than a week). Not to mention much cheaper than the $1200 cost of a regeneron infusion.

Right now the government is covering the cost of both regeneron and the vaccine, so both are "free," while ivermectin isn't. Just get the free vaccine and take whatever supplements you want afterwards that you feel will help.

---

Politics. Blue team has claimed the vaccine remedy, so red team needs a remedy of their own to prevent blue team from winning the Internet.

Had Trump won and been the one pushing people to get vaccinated, does anyone seriously think the demographics for the "vaccine hesitant" look the same as they do now?

boomis said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Why are people trying so hard to make ivermectin or hcq seem like a miracle drug hiding in the shadows when a true modern miracle of science, the mRNA vaccine is proving to be significantly more effective than anything else out there. Not only that, but the mRNA vaccine costs less than 30 dollars a dose (depending on vaccine), which is going to be cheaper than a standard prescription of ivermectin (30 dollars for less than a week). Not to mention much cheaper than the $1200 cost of a regeneron infusion.

Right now the government is covering the cost of both regeneron and the vaccine, so both are "free," while ivermectin isn't. Just get the free vaccine and take whatever supplements you want afterwards that you feel will help.

---

Politics. Blue team has claimed the vaccine remedy, so red team needs a remedy of their own to prevent blue team from winning the Internet.

Had Trump won and been the one pushing people to get vaccinated, does anyone seriously think the demographics for the "vaccine hesitant" look the same as they do now?

---

What I find so odd about that is that, to me, the vaccine is one of Trump's greatest accomplishments. Team Red (of which I am one) should be shouting victory from the mountain tops.

When I was standing in line to get the vaccine back in March the young man keeping the door at Methodist hospital asked me if I was happy to get the vaccine. I said, "Oh, yes! I'm thrilled. Thank you, Donald Trump!" And then I said, "oops, am I allowed to say that here?" He responded, "Sure! Thank you Jesus and Donald Trump!" I laughed with him. Then he told me that his 80 year old grandmother lived in Canada and was upset that she couldn't get the vaccine yet. Donald Trump made it possible for us to get it much faster and saved countless lives.

Team Red saved the day with the vaccine. Period. Biden didn't do squat, and every word he says makes the situation worse, imho.

Nope. They just have to find something that works that they can own so they can't admit that the vaccine is the best option. Which is hilarious, because Trump pushed the vaccine hard and was one of the first to take it. Now we've got half the country turned into anti-vaxxers trying to just take whatever random ass drugs they can find to combat COVID instead of just taking the vaccine specifically designed for COVID.

HossAg said:

---

Nope. They just have to find something that works that they can own so they can't admit that the vaccine is the best option. Which is hilarious, because Trump pushed the vaccine hard and was one of the first to take it. Now we've got half the country turned into anti-vaxxers trying to just take whatever random ass drugs they can find to combat COVID instead of just taking the vaccine specifically designed for COVID.

---

That's just flat out bs.

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

Why are people trying so hard to make ivermectin or hcq seem like a miracle drug hiding in the shadows

---

posted this in another thread a few weeks ago:

Quote:

---

ivermectin scratches several psychological itches for those mistrustful of government and major institutions. for someone who is deeply mistrustful of entities like the government, big pharma, and the bulk of the medical community who are all pushing for vaccinations, someone coming in and telling them "here's the magic cure those bad guys don't want you to know about!" is quite persuasive.

that sort of messaging appeals to their biases. sticking it to big pharma by taking a "cure" they don't approve of. rebelling against "elitist" and "arrogant" medical professionals that think they're so much smarter than them just because they went to medical school (anti-intellectualism). in-group affirmation from people who share their values. the pride and individualistic satisfaction of "doing their own research" to find a different way to fight covid and not relying on what "experts" recommend.

---

a quick glance through the OP's posting history reveals his affinity for these biases