India's official statistic is a joke. You can't base any serious conclusion on that (one of my coworker is from India).

Quote from Fm1

Jed very little antibody testing is going on here in the US, what makes you think that India is doing that testing.

I read an article by a group of India's leading epidemiologists. They said that although very little antibody testing is being done, they themselves launched a project to test a representative sample of the population in one district. They found far more people with antibodies than the reported number of cases should have produced. In short, there is little antibody testing in the nation as a whole, but a study of one particular area showed that the official numbers there are far too low. It is reasonable to assume that is the situation everywhere. There is other evidence of underreporting, such as large district that reported no deaths from any cause for months.

Who said there is little antibody testing in the U.S.? I have not read that.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Bob - COVID epidemiology is multidimensional and so many factors vary between countries. It is not easy to quantify, but here are the obvious differences UK vs India, which explain what you view as surprising above:

(1) India has much higher past infection rate => more immunity. If 70% of children are immune from past infection you are in a different situation from if not.

(2) India is hot country - virus degrades faster and indoor rooms have better ventilation, people are outdoor more. (The only exception here is the highly industrialised parts where air con can circulate air indoors).

There is a misunderstanding in your analysis. The infection rate does not depend on R. Instead R alters the rate of change of the infection rate. For example that, everywhere now, will be positive due to omicron. But you won't see that until the omicron levels get large enough to be visible, and that depends on how muhc of it seeded early on (the UK as always does really badly for that).

Display More

Ok so from the list we remove "worms" and youth.

If we add previous infection immunity, then we are giving a big thumbs up to the reports that infection does a better job than vaccinations. Since India has low vaccination and low case count this supports that previous infection trumps vaccination. (vaccinated countries are foundering remember) and that vaccinating the youth will probably not impact much.... ?

Now how about this immunity.... you state 70%, not sure where you get this. However, UK is surely at or above this! Since we now agree that previous infection works (you attribute India's success to this) then take all of UK's vaccinations plus previous infections and you will certainly be well above 70%. They are 70.1% fully vaccinated so counting previous infections, they will be well over 70%. Very much over!

Thus, previous infection, like youth, does not seem to support this situation does it? Or are you saying that the 71% vaccination gives little to no immunity?

So that leaves temperature. Hmmm. the biggest waves the US and UK have had have only been in cooler months??? No, there are summer outbreaks as well! How is India in August? Temps there average in the 80's to low 90's. Quite moderate yet still no big outbreaks! hmmm....

I guess we would need to see some statistical studies on this temperature idea to support it. Sounds like it might be pretty much "anecdotal" to me... now that is something you surely would not support nor spread around is it???? Seriously, this is does not seem scientifically supported as you seem to apply "scientific" to ivermectin.

So I find the temperature logic lacking and unsupported.... although not disproven any more than ivermectin.

So that leaves Jed's, "you cannot believe India data" as I previously mentioned???? Well, I am unsure why India reports show huge case load for a April - May and now very low. Was they only reporting during April and May? What has changed? All I can say is that it is the reported numbers by WHO and World o Meter. If one wants to bash these numbers, they can bash any World o Meter numbers I guess?

or.... ivermectin a distinct possibility! Is there anything else?

Quote from THHuxleynew

There is a misunderstanding in your analysis. The infection rate does not depend on R. Instead R alters the rate of change of the infection rate.

A Dilettante is speaking. If R=0 no infections happen. But this is already to much after 3 vaxx doses .... Dementia...

Quote from JedRothwell

You misunderstood. The experts say there are many more cases of COVID than reported. Possibly 10 times more.

Great argument what is 10X 0 ? or 10 x 10 like in Uttar Pradesh compared to 100'000 in USA...

Quote from JedRothwell

They found far more people with antibodies than the reported number of cases should have produced. In short, there is little antibody testing in the nation as a whole, but a study of one particular area showed that the official numbers there are far too low.

You are joking again: This is true for any place in the world. The silent infection make up 3/4 during high pandemic phases. I likend the Swiss data about three weeks ago. Silent rate still 75% !!!!

One tip for our FUD'ers. Ivermectin in humans has never been use for worms... Only idiots repeat such unfounded claims...It works against parasites and virus!

Public Health Ontario Study Shows Young Males Face More Myocarditis/Pericarditis Risk with Moderna’s Spikevax vs. BNT162b2

Public Health Ontario Study Shows Young Males Face More Myocarditis/Pericarditis Risk with Moderna’s Spikevax vs. BNT162b2

A team of researchers from Public Health Ontario sought to better understand rates of myocarditis/pericarditis associated with COVID-19 vaccines. This

trialsitenews.com

A team of researchers from Public Health Ontario sought to better understand rates of myocarditis/pericarditis associated with COVID-19 vaccines. This study establishes an estimate of reporting rates of myocarditis/pericarditis post the mRNA-based vaccination by a range of demographic cohorts from age and gender to dose number and inter-dose interval. Using the Ontario provincial COVID-19 vaccine registry in addition to an adverse event database associated with the province, the team embarked on a population-based cohort observational study utilizing passive vaccine safety surveillance data covering people who were vaccinated with at least one dose between December 14, 2020, and September 4, 2021. Ultimately, this study revealed similar findings to other studies—young males face greater risk with mRNA-based vaccines for cardiovascular problems such as myocarditis/pericarditis and that overall, more problems are identified with Moderna’s vaccine versus BNT162b2 produced by Pfizer-BioNTech. The authors suggest policy measures can be put in place to mitigate risks. They do not mention risk-benefit analysis, an important topic associated with the COVID-19 vaccination of very young people.

Canada’s most populated province, Ontario has a population of approximately 14.7 million with over 6 million in the Toronto metropolitan area alone. The active COVID-19 vaccines in this region include both available mRNA products including Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) and Moderna (mRNA-1273 or Spikevax). This study was led by Dr. Sarah Wilson as the corresponding author, an epidemiologist under the employ of the provincial public health agency called Public Health Ontario.

What did the team find?

The team includes the entire population involved with reported episodes in the provincial adverse event database. They found that the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis met level 1-3 of the Brighton Collaboration case definitions which can be found here.

Out of 19,740,741 doses of mRNA-based vaccine product administered the repository included 297 reports of myocarditis/pericarditis meeting the study’s inclusion criteria. Among those they found the following:

69.7% occurred following second dose of the mRNA vaccine

76.8% occurred in makes

Median age of reports 24 years

Highest reporting range: males 18-24 years old following mRNA-1273 second dose

Rate in the highest group 5.1 (95% CI 1.9-15.5) times higher than the rate following BNT162b2 as the second dose

Shorter inter-dose intervals equals higher rates of adverse events for both vaccine products

Adverse event rate higher in those people who received Moderna as a second dose and were subjected to heterologous versus homologous vaccine schedule

Conclusion

The Public Health Ontario team wrote that vaccine product, inter-dose interval, and vaccine schedule combinations could be a factor in the risk of myocarditis/pericarditis as well as gender (sex). The study authors raise the possibility of making programmatic changes to mitigate the risk of these adverse events post mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination.

Many European nations, especially those in the Nordic countries, have at least temporarily halted the use of Moderna’s’ Spikevax (mRNA-1273) on young people aged 30 and below. TrialSite reminds us that even with Delta, the probability of serious injury and death with children is far less than with adults. However, the incidence and long-term effects of long covid in children aren’t well understood. These topics must be studied to form more precise risk-benefit analyses as to determining whether young children should be vaccinated along with true risks for adverse events.

Funding

Public Health Ontario

Canadian Immunization Research Network

Public Health Agency of Canada

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

ICES (supported by grant from Ontario Ministry of Health

About Public Health Ontario

In 2008 the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion Act of 2007 created the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion (OAHPP) which operates under the name of Public Health Ontario since 2011. OAHPP is an agent of the Crown and is considered an arms-length government agency.

Lead Research/Investigator

Sarah E. Wilson, Public Health Ontario; the University of Toronto, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Corresponding Author

Epidemiology of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA vaccines in Ontario, Canada: by vaccine product, schedule and interval

Quote from Fm1

So he was vaccinated and still died

Fm1 Yes I noticed that.

So do you think he took the vaccine before he caught Covid, while he was telling everybody else not to take the vaccine?

Or do you think he asked for the vaccine when he found he had Covid in which case the vaccine would be of little use to him?

I assumed the latter since he said he wished he had taken it earlier.

Either way a tragedy for somebody.

Quote from Bob#2

Ok so from the list we remove "worms" and youth.

If we add previous infection immunity, then we are giving a big thumbs up to the reports that infection does a better job than vaccinations. If we add previous infection immunity, then we are giving a big thumbs up to the reports that infection does a better job than vaccinations. this supports that previous infection trumps vaccination. (vaccinated countries are foundering remember) and that vaccinating the youth will probably not impact much.... ?

Now how about this immunity.... you state 70%, not sure where you get this. However, UK is surely at or above this! Since we now agree that previous infection works (you attribute India's success to this) then take all of UK's vaccinations plus previous infections and you will certainly be well above 70%. They are 70.1% fully vaccinated so counting previous infections, they will be well over 70%. Very much over!

England

102M102,000,000

39.2M39,200,000

70.1%

Thus, previous infection, like youth, does not seem to support this situation does it? Or are you saying that the 71% vaccination gives little to no immunity?

So that leaves temperature. Hmmm. the biggest waves the US and UK have had have only been in cooler months??? No, there are summer outbreaks as well! How is India in August? Temps there average in the 80's to low 90's. Quite moderate yet still no big outbreaks! hmmm....

I guess we would need to see some statistical studies on this temperature idea to support it. Sounds like it might be pretty much "anecdotal" to me... now that is something you surely would not support nor spread around is it???? Seriously, this is does not seem scientifically supported as you seem to apply "scientific" to ivermectin.

So I find the temperature logic lacking and unsupported.... although not disproven any more than ivermectin.

So that leaves Jed's, "you cannot believe India data" as I previously mentioned???? Well, I am unsure why India reports show huge case load for a April - May and now very low. Was they only reporting during April and May? What has changed? All I can say is that it is the reported numbers by WHO and World o Meter. If one wants to bash these numbers, they can bash any World o Meter numbers I guess?

or.... ivermectin a distinct possibility! Is there anything else?

Display More

I think your discussion above is arrogant.

I started by saying that there is too much we don't understand, quantifying these factors, or even knowing what they are, that differentiate different countries R is a mugs game. for example, how many contacts does a typical person have? How likely are they to spread COVID?

There is a lot of uncertainty.

Now, you are not only ignoring the uncertainty, you are using words and vague hyunches to quantify stuff. I'd respect your analysis if for each factor you gave and estimated R value delta and an uncertainty:

e.g. UK - weather - +30% (+/- 20%).

BTW that is not my value for this. anything I wrote down would be a guess. I bet the same is true for you. There are some figures we know: the vaccination rate, estimates of the infection rate - but both of those get qualified by the fact that immunity of both types against infection wanes quite strongly (vaccination more than pre-infection immunity) and infection immunity is very variable - the more severe it is, the better the resulting immunity.

Do that for UK and India, show that what you have makes your point. I'd welcome that. It is mainly a way to realise how difficult it is to make these comparisons fairly - because there is too much we cannot quantify.

In this argument I am not saying I can do this, you are the one claiming evidence from these cross-country comparisons.

Till then you do this you are just using words to rationalise preconceptions.

India has low case count. Seriously? You think the india official case count is accurate? There are very many ways of estimating severity of COVID otehr than official figures, which in an undeveloped country without health care or testing (much of India) are vast underestimates. For example, people have looked at excess death rates - more reliable than COVID attributed deaths. Or random sample seropositivity. India was hit very hard by the delta wave and now most people there have had COVID. We can look at the various attempts to work out the true rates if you like, and compare those with corresponding estimates for UK? There is a lot of uncertainty but it supports my proposition that there has been more COVID there than in UK.

So that leaves temperature. Hmmm. the biggest waves the US and UK have had have only been in cooler months??? No, there are summer outbreaks as well! How is India in August? Temps there average in the 80's to low 90's. Quite moderate yet still no big outbreaks! hmmm....

You are here not doing quantitative analysis.

I said R was multifactorial and meant it.

A new COVID wave, if there is little immunity or vaccination, can start in winter or summer. Delta had R some 2X higher than alpha. The difference between UK highish infection rate and India v low infection rate can be just 10% on R. temperature and ventilation (Indian buildings will be better ventilated than Uk buildings even in Summer, for obvious reasons) can make much more than that. I am not saying i can quantify this - I am saying it is plausible and you cannot argue "that looks strange" on the basis of the evidence you have.

Quote from Fm1

Ivermectin Kills Antivaxxer!!!

They gave him 2 pills claimed he got worse, then stopped treatment. Bullshit headline

A rather predictable response...

Now maybe you'd like to engage your other braincell - and explain why above headline deserved a different treatment from that of the ridiculous article you posted yesterday:

Quote from Fm1

Two ivermectin success stories

Two ivermectin success stories Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite. Joel S. Hirschhorn Ivermectin trialsitenews.com

Ivermectin has been attacked by pro-vaccine interests despite it being a cheap, safe and proven medicine for COVID treatment and prevention. Despite a mountain of clinical and test evidence showing that it really works, Big Media, Big Pharma and Big Government have stubbornly fought its use. Its use in a number of countries, notably India, has proven its effectiveness against COVID. Here are recent stories of its successful use worthy of serious attention.

Story 1 Hospitalized Patients

Most work on IVM has been on its early use when a person first gets COVID, because of its positive impact on the initial virus replication stage of the infection. If you get stricken with COVID and are seriously ill your doctor and hospital will not provide ivermectin. But several cases have shown that courts can force hospitals to allow IVM use.

As the following examples show it has been found lifesaving for critically ill, hospitalized patients with little chance of survival when government-approved protocols are used. Yet hospitals have stubbornly refused to use IVM even when patients or family members have strongly requested its use as patients face probable death. In response to this awful situation, some gutsy people have used the judicial system to get hospitals to do what is justified by medical science, save lives by using IVM.

In Illinois, it took a court to force a hospital to capitulate to family demands to give a very sick elderly patient IVM. The hospital used the approved ways to treat the patient without success. These included the proven unsafe and very expensive drug remdesivir, intubation and ventilator use for a month in the ICU. None of it worked and the patient was given only a 10 to 15% percent chance of surviving.

Sun Ng, 71, who was visiting the United States from Hong Kong to celebrate his granddaughter’s first birthday. He became ill with COVID-19 and within days was close to death. He was hospitalized on Oct. 14 at Edward Hospital, in Naperville, Illinois.

Recognizing that her father was facing death, Ng’s only child, Man Kwan Ng, with a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering, did her own research and decided that her father should take IVM. But the hospital refused to administer IVM and denied access to a physician the family located who was willing to administer it. This is typical of virtually all US hospitals.

Frustrated and seeing her father near death, the daughter went to court on her father’s behalf and on Nov. 1 Judge Paul M. Fullerton of the Circuit Court of DuPage County granted a temporary restraining order requiring the hospital to allow IVM be given to the patient. And just like many other cases in the country, this hospital refused to comply with the court order. But the daughter and her attorney refused to give up. At a subsequent court hearing on Nov. 5, Fullerton said one physician who testified described Sun Ng as “basically on his death bed.” The judge was informed IVM can have minor side effects such as dizziness, itchy skin, and diarrhea at the dosage suggested for Ng. And the judge said that the “risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

The judge issued a preliminary injunction that day directing the hospital to “immediately allow … temporary emergency privileges” to Ng’s physician, Dr. Alan Bain, “solely to administer Ivermectin to this patient.” As of several months ago, Dr. Bain had treated over 40 patients with IVM. But the hospital resisted the order on Nov. 6 and 7, denying Bain access to his patient. But the fight continued.

An emergency report was filed with the court on Nov. 8 and Fullerton heard from both sides. The judge admonished the hospital and restated that it must allow Bain inside over a period of 15 days to do his job. Then the hospital filed a motion to stay the order, but judge Fullerton denied it, again directing the hospital to comply.

The hospital finally gave in. Ng showed signs of improvement almost immediately. He passed a breathing test that he hadn’t been able to pass in the prior three weeks, looked more alert and aware. The first dose of IVM showed immediate results and he got it from Nov. 8 through Nov. 12. He recovered from COVID-19 and was discharged by the hospital on Nov. 27, some six weeks after admission.

The drug “most definitely” saved the elderly patient’s life “because his condition changed right immediately after he took ivermectin,” said the attorney. Also recommended was that family members “find ivermectin themselves” and have it on hand “and use it when someone starts to develop symptoms.” Great advice.

The attorney in this case was Kirstin M. Erickson of Chicago-based Mauck and Baker.

Ivermectin was also at the center of three successful court cases in three upstate counties of New York involving hospitalized COVID patients – 65, 80 and 81 years old. All were given the drug under court order and recovered and were discharged. They were against hospitals in Buffalo, Rochester, and Batavia, N.Y. As in the Illinois case, the three patients were in ICUs and on ventilators when given IVM and had little chance of living.

The attorney for these cases was Ralph Lorigo. Not surprisingly, as he has helped many families, with about 40 similar cases nationwide, he was the subject of an article titled “Ralph Lorigo has built a potentially lucrative brand as the go-to guy for desperate people willing to buck science in the pandemic’s fourth wave. Now doctors are speaking out.” As he has succeeded in getting courts to overcome hospital stubbornness, some physicians have spoken out against him. A law website said this: “Hospitals reeling from surging Covid-19 cases are facing a new pandemic battle: lawsuits from guardians of patients on ventilators demanding treatment with ivermectin.”

Lorigo has become a much in-demand attorney for people across the country desperate to force hospitals and doctors to give dying loved ones IVM to do what the approved protocols have failed to do, namely save the lives of extremely ill COVID patients. In courts he has had to combat the mistaken beliefs of doctors and hospitals that IVM is not effective against COVID. The situation is stacked against lawyers but sometimes courts have gone against the medical establishment.

Lorigo said his cases were the result of “legitimate disputes” between hospitals, doctors and families, and called hospitals “arrogant” in the matter. “They only stick to their protocols,” he said. “It’s like they think they’re gods. They wear white coats, but they’re not God.” Absolutely correct.

The attorney has not always succeeded in saving lives with IVM. A Texas case sadly had a 74-year-old man die amid his family’s push for the hospital to give him IVM. Pete Lopez’s family said he was previously prescribed IVM at a VA hospital but was admitted before he was able to take it. The family sought a court order against Memorial Hermann in Sugar Land, Texas. Lopez had battled his COVID infection for almost a month and was put on a ventilator. His family won a court order for the hospital to treat him with IVM, but the hospital refused to administer the drug. And so, Lopez died. In this pandemic, hospitals to a large extent are killing machines.

Lorigo and other attorneys have to fight the notion that IVM is “unproven.” But medical science is on their side. There really is a mountain of medical evidence that lawyers can use in courts. One important example is a published medical 2021 study of patients hospitalized with confirmed severe acute COVID respiratory syndrome at a four-hospital consortium in South Florida. There were 280 patients with 173 treated with ivermectin and 107 in the usual care group. Analysis showed statistically significant lower mortality rates in the group treated with IVM as compared with the group treated with usual care: 15.0% vs 25.2%, respectively. That is a big reduction in deaths. The article noted: “Interpretation: Ivermectin was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19 patients, especially in patients who required higher inspired oxygen or ventilatory support.” Mortality was even lower for a subgroup of patients with severe pulmonary involvement (what most court cases are): 38.8% vs. 80.7% for IVM and usual care, respectively, a very significant result. The study emphasized: “We showed that ivermectin administration was associated significantly with lower mortality among patients with COVID-19, particularly in patients with more severe pulmonary involvement.”

All this explains why good judges have made the correct decision to give dying COVID patients a chance of surviving by letting them get IVM. Perhaps judges are paying attention to the huge number of COVID deaths of Americans, now approaching 800,000. Sounds like the medical establishment is not doing all that good.

Story 2 Early treatment with IVM

Here is what radio host and author Wayne Allyn Root said very recently: “Yes, it’s true. I beat COVID-19 in 48 hours with ivermectin.” He had a big wedding where he said: “Here’s the best story yet. I was healthy and strong at my wedding because of ivermectin. I caught COVID-19 for the first time a few weeks ago. I beat COVID-19 in 48 hours with ivermectin and massive doses of vitamins, including intravenous vitamin C. Ivermectin is truly a miracle drug. I had had COVID-19 for a day when I decided to take it. The virus was gone in 24 hours. Yes, ivermectin and vitamins turned the deadly, run-for-your-life, lock-down-the-economy, mask-up-for-life, vaccinate-or-die COVID-19 into a minor common cold. And then it was gone in a day. Ivermectin made my bout of COVID-19 so mild, I never missed a day of work.”

“And lest you think I got a mild case, on the first day I had a fever, chills, a bad cough, mucus filling my lungs, awful pain in every muscle of my body, terrible exhaustion, and I lost my sense of taste. Sound familiar? It’s every symptom of COVID-19. I took two tests just to be certain. I tested positive twice. One day of ivermectin and it was gone. No one ever knew. Until now.”

He also noted: “My treatment was pretty much exactly the same as that used by Joe Rogan and NFL quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Ivermectin plus mega doses of vitamins. The outcomes were the same, too. Ivermectin works like magic. It’s inexpensive. I never experienced any side effects. I thank God for ivermectin and mega doses of vitamin C, D3, zinc, quercetin, selenium, lysine, melatonin, garlic, liquid silver and probiotics.”

He added this: “No one has to fear COVID-19. No one has to be forced to take an experimental vaccine. No one ever has to choose between the vaccine and his job ever again. We have a miracle drug and a wonderful vitamin regimen that works fantastically. I’m exhibit A. Hey, liberals, are you listening? Have your heads exploded yet? Ivermectin works. It’s cheap, it’s effective and it has no side effects. India used it to make the worst COVID-19 outbreak in the world disappear almost overnight.”

On the political side he asked the reasonable question: “So why are President Joe Biden, the Democratic Party, Anthony Fauci and the CDC trying to hide the truth? Ivermectin can save millions of Americans from both COVID-19 and the risks of the COVID-19 vaccine. Ivermectin can save our economy. Ivermectin can save millions of jobs. Ivermectin can save trillions of dollars in costs from missed work, vaccines, hospitalizations and deaths. I’m playing the role of Paul Revere. ‘The ivermectin is coming, the ivermectin is coming.’ I want the whole world to know.”

IVM is not just coming; it is here and some great front-line doctors are using it successfully, including successful protocols of Dr. George Fareed and Dr. Brian Tyson. But most of the medical and public health establishment refuses to follow medical science and keeps letting hundreds of thousands of Americans die from COVID unnecessarily. Their government approved protocols and mindless advocacy for vaccines, that clearly have not worked well enough, spell death for very ill COVID patients. And it keeps many people from using IVM as an early treatment and preventive medicine

Display More

Quote from Wyttenbach

Ivermectin in humans has never been use for worms...

LOL. Why do people take take this idiot seriously? (If indeed any do...)

What do you think causes river blindness?

Rivers?

Quote from Bob#2

Ok so from the list we remove "worms" and youth.

There are millions of cases of worms in India, many undiagnosed. The population is manifestly young. So, you are saying "we can ignore reality and pretend things are the way I claim." You can, I guess, but people who are interested in facts and reality will not join your fantasy world.

Quote from Bob#2

or.... ivermectin a distinct possibility!

No, it is not. The double blind tests prove conclusively that it has no effect. You cannot just make up stuff and pretend the science does not work. Or, I should say, you can, but you cannot expect grown-ups to join you.

Quote from JedRothwell

There are millions of cases of worms in India, many undiagnosed. The population is manifestly young. So, you are saying "we can ignore reality and pretend things are the way I claim." You can, I guess, but people who are interested in facts and reality will not join your fantasy world.

No, it is not. The double blind tests prove conclusively that it has no effect. You cannot just make up stuff and pretend the science does not work. Or, I should say, you can, but you cannot expect grown-ups to join you.

Try these double blind trials jed, you must of missed them. I have 44 more double blind trials if need be

The effect of early treatment with ivermectin on viral load, symptoms and humoral response in patients with non-severe COVID-19: A pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial

DEFINE_ME

Effects of Ivermectin in Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

Effects of Ivermectin in Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

Given the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is a global urgency to discover an effective treatment for patients withthis disease. This study…

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Favorable outcome on viral load and culture viability using Ivermectin in early treatment of non-hospitalized patients with mild COVID-19 – A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial

Quote from Zeus46

A rather predictable response...

Now maybe you'd like to engage your other braincell - and explain why above headline deserved a different treatment from that of the ridiculous article you posted yesterday:

I think you might have sand lodged between your ears from climbing that dune if you don't see the difference

Quote from JedRothwell

There are millions of cases of worms in India, many undiagnosed. The population is manifestly young. So, you are saying "we can ignore reality and pretend things are the way I claim." You can, I guess, but people who are interested in facts and reality will not join your fantasy world.

No, it is not. The double blind tests prove conclusively that it has no effect. You cannot just make up stuff and pretend the science does not work. Or, I should say, you can, but you cannot expect grown-ups to join you.

???

Jed, I do not think you are reading my response.

I am not denying India has a lot of youth.... I am stating that youth does not stop infection rates. Even THH has stated that youth (5+) was a major component of UK's high infection rate.

So again... my statement is not that India has no youth, but the claim that India's low infection rate is due to youth is not valid. Young people still get covid. India's low infection rate is not because of young age.

Again, I do not know how many people in India have worms... I am stating worms make no difference in infection rates.... unless someone is taking ivermectin for those worms. It is not the worms but the ivermectin making the any possible difference.

Jed states "the double blind tests prove" but provides no links. There has been linked many, many times here 60+ trials that state ivermectin does have an impact... several of which are double blind RCTs. So I can also say that Jed is making things up when he states that ivermectin has no evidence that it works. There is more evidence that it works than does not. As with Remedisvir, there are those who say it works and those who say it does not (WHO)

Oh well.

Quote from Fm1

I think you might have sand lodged between your ears from climbing that dune if you don't see the difference

No response then? Telling. Although I didn't expect much better.

Ultimately one guy was given ivermectin and lived, another received it and died.

But Dr Fm1 (We.B) claims the first is 'bullshit' - but the second is worthy evidence of ivermectin's benefits.

Clearly he is unable to offer any sensible reasoning why this might be, or why one differs case differs from the other, from his viewpoint.

Quote from THHuxleynew

So that leaves temperature. Hmmm. the biggest waves the US and UK have had have only been in cooler months??? No, there are summer outbreaks as well! How is India in August? Temps there average in the 80's to low 90's. Quite moderate yet still no big outbreaks! hmmm....

You are here not doing quantitative analysis.

I said R was multifactorial and meant it.

A new COVID wave, if there is little immunity or vaccination, can start in winter or summer. Delta had R some 2X higher than alpha. The difference between UK highish infection rate and India v low infection rate can be just 10% on R. temperature and ventilation (Indian buildings will be better ventilated than Uk buildings even in Summer, for obvious reasons) can make much more than that. I am not saying i can quantify this - I am saying it is plausible and you cannot argue "that looks strange" on the basis of the evidence you have.

Display More

I never stated I was using quantitative analysis. I am looking at raw data and forming "possible" conclusions. I am also taking raw data and seeing how it stacks against some people's assertions.

I also never stated that you had done a quantitative analysis on India either. But I did point out that you have stated the low infection rates were likely due to youth, weather and immunity. All of which are not quantitative, are anecdotal and lacking....

all the very things you say against ivermectin.....

Indeed this is a very difficult thing to judge. You state that I am arrogant.. I think it is a bit arrogant that you dismiss so readily, 60+ trials and analysis' by people that have as much or more qualifications than you!

Do you not keep stating there is NO evidence that ivermectin works?! To me that is indeed a bit arrogant. My whole "India" thread is not meant to be quantitative, nor have I said it was. It is simply that there is evidence (circumstantial indeed, but quite significant) that ivermectin should be at least considered as one of the reasons why India is doing well..... yet you say there is NO evidence or reason to consider it.

That is my point and only my point. (and that the magnifying glass given to ivermectin is NOT applied to main stream pharma claims)

Signing off for today and I hope all have a good Holiday!

Quote from Fm1

Try these double blind trials jed, you must of missed them. I have 44 more double blind trials if need be

Read this:

Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted To Know

...

astralcodexten.substack.com

Quote from Fm1

A trial checking the efficacy of Albendazole which is now used to treat worms and ivermectin was just uploaded for publication.

This one?

Efficacy and safety of co-administered ivermectin and albendazole in school-aged children and adults infected with Trichuris trichiura in Côte d'Ivoire, Laos, and Pemba Island, Tanzania: a double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3, randomised controlled trial

https://www.thelancet.com/jour…-3099(21)00421-7/fulltext

Treatment with ivermectin–albendazole resulted in higher efficacy against trichuriasis than albendazole alone in Laos and Pemba Island but not in Côte d'Ivoire. We recommend implementation of this combination therapy for soil-transmitted helminth control in countries with high T trichiura prevalence and proven enhanced efficacy of this treatment, particularly where ivermectin is beneficial against other endemic helminthiases.