Display MoreThere are more "unexplainable" stories or to say "coincidences" related to IVM use and low Covid-19 infections, not only with young generation and low mortality....
How would you explain the causilty of using IVM after a break out of scabies in a care home in Toronto in Canada among the old residents, and there were infections with Sars-Cov2 among the younger (!) medical staff only? The amazing results were reached just with the normal IVM medication to treat scabies, not with a single or mutiple overdosing, or with the recommended dosage from FLCCC...
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
or in another report in a similar environment from France:
OK - apologies for not seeing the link previously!
I actually agree with the writers of this report, that this coincidence motivates further investigation (mildly) but no more.
Consider.
There must be 100s of 1000s of LTCFs throughout the (developed - since this is a well-written article) world.
Filter those by:
- uses ivermectiin for scabies treatment at same time as a COVID outbreak (strong but not very strong filter)
- has a COVID outbreak (weak filter)
You then get the number of samples for this sort of report.
Those that do not show a coincidence such as this will not be written up. Those which do show such a coincidence will attract interest and be written up as in this paper.
The coincidental p value here was 0.03, you would expect such a coincidence if (after the above filters) there were 1000 samples (or a total filter of 0.01).
The coincidence would be considered significant if (after the filters) there was more than 1 such case, since it is only juts significant.
This is typical of retrospective study evidence. It can be thought-provoking, and is interesting, but it is very difficult to attach much weight to its quantitative findings, because it is only the outstanding (coincidental) cases that you hear about.
THH