• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ivermectin no more effective than placebo for covid

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
74,512
Reaction score
43,806
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Journal of the American Medical Association


In this randomized clinical trial of early ivermectin treatment for adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 and comorbidities, we found no evidence that ivermectin was efficacious in reducing the risk of severe disease. Our findings are consistent with the results of the IVERCOR-COVID19 trial,17 which found that ivermectin was ineffective in reducing the risk of hospitalization.



I'm sure we'll see all sorts of apologies from the liars that shilled this bullshit right?
 

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
51,052
Reaction score
38,392
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who woulda thought?
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
32,172
Reaction score
31,253
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
OMG! Fake News!!! It saved Joe Rogan's life!!!

(That about sum it up?)
 

CaughtInThe

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2017
Messages
80,652
Reaction score
63,596
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We don't argue with people from the top shelf.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
11,790
Reaction score
2,626
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Journal of the American Medical Association


In this randomized clinical trial of early ivermectin treatment for adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 and comorbidities, we found no evidence that ivermectin was efficacious in reducing the risk of severe disease. Our findings are consistent with the results of the IVERCOR-COVID19 trial,17 which found that ivermectin was ineffective in reducing the risk of hospitalization.



I'm sure we'll see all sorts of apologies from the liars that shilled this bullshit right?
"28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09)"

There is a trick that is commonly used to "prove" that a treatment does not work -- you can simply under-power the study. For example, you can make sure the N, the number of subjects, is too small. It looks like that might be true of this study -- 3 died in the ivermectin group, vs 10 in the control group. The probability that this happened by chance was very small, and the difference between groups was quite near statistical significance. If the study were repeated with more subjects, the difference might have been significant.

I suspect that many of the studies "proving" that ivermectin does not work used the same trick. Because most people (including medical doctors) know nothing about statistics, they are easily fooled by bogus research.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
74,512
Reaction score
43,806
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
"28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09)"

There is a trick that is commonly used to "prove" that a treatment does not work -- you can simply under-power the study. For example, you can make sure the N, the number of subjects, is too small. It looks like that might be true of this study -- 3 died in the ivermectin group, vs 10 in the control group. The probability that this happened by chance was very small, and the difference between groups was quite near statistical significance. If the study were repeated with more subjects, the difference might have been significant.

I suspect that many of the studies "proving" that ivermectin does not work used the same trick. Because most people (including medical doctors) know nothing about statistics, they are easily fooled by bogus research.
So you want to debunk this study with "the sample size is too small". This study echos the finding of another study. They do mention that in the article. I guess that study's sample size might be too small for you to come out exactly the same as this one.
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
109,294
Reaction score
27,298
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
"28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09)"

There is a trick that is commonly used to "prove" that a treatment does not work -- you can simply under-power the study. For example, you can make sure the N, the number of subjects, is too small. It looks like that might be true of this study -- 3 died in the ivermectin group, vs 10 in the control group. The probability that this happened by chance was very small, and the difference between groups was quite near statistical significance. If the study were repeated with more subjects, the difference might have been significant.

I suspect that many of the studies "proving" that ivermectin does not work used the same trick. Because most people (including medical doctors) know nothing about statistics, they are easily fooled by bogus research.

Ivermectin doesn't work.
 

Ishm

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
1,642
Reaction score
1,484
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Lets face it. The rest of the world, where they don't care what Trump and the US anti Dems think, aren't massively using this comparitively cheap and available drug. Instead spending 100's of $millions more on more expensive treatments. Many of those other countries with medical experts just as good as in the US assessing that Inver doesn't work enough to use as a covid treatment. They don't have any political axe to grind. If it is available, cheap, and actually worked, it would be getting used everywhere.
 

Lovebug

Be humble and kind
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
32,381
Reaction score
17,376
Location
south
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other

Old 'N Chill

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Messages
19,457
Reaction score
28,496
Location
USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Journal of the American Medical Association


In this randomized clinical trial of early ivermectin treatment for adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 and comorbidities, we found no evidence that ivermectin was efficacious in reducing the risk of severe disease. Our findings are consistent with the results of the IVERCOR-COVID19 trial,17 which found that ivermectin was ineffective in reducing the risk of hospitalization.



I'm sure we'll see all sorts of apologies from the liars that shilled this bullshit right?
Conspiracy nutters don't need any evidence, they're allergic to facts, reality and obviously vaccines. 🤡
 

armycowboy

The Dark Lord
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
13,983
Reaction score
10,118
Location
Corpus Christi, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Journal of the American Medical Association


In this randomized clinical trial of early ivermectin treatment for adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 and comorbidities, we found no evidence that ivermectin was efficacious in reducing the risk of severe disease. Our findings are consistent with the results of the IVERCOR-COVID19 trial,17 which found that ivermectin was ineffective in reducing the risk of hospitalization.



I'm sure we'll see all sorts of apologies from the liars that shilled this bullshit right?
Who didn't see this coming?
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
11,790
Reaction score
2,626
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Lets face it. The rest of the world, where they don't care what Trump and the US anti Dems think, aren't massively using this comparitively cheap and available drug. Instead spending 100's of $millions more on more expensive treatments. Many of those other countries with medical experts just as good as in the US assessing that Inver doesn't work enough to use as a covid treatment. They don't have any political axe to grind. If it is available, cheap, and actually worked, it would be getting used everywhere.

The whole world is influenced by the WHO, and the WHO is under the control of Gates, who pushes vaccines.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
38,952
Reaction score
28,091
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Even if that were true, which it isn't, conservatives are among the least healthy Americans and have the most comorbidities.

More than half of all Americans have at least one co-morbidity. 42% have more than four!
 

beefheart

Ice Cream for Crow?
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
51,942
Reaction score
47,531
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
"28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09)"

There is a trick that is commonly used to "prove" that a treatment does not work -- you can simply under-power the study. For example, you can make sure the N, the number of subjects, is too small. It looks like that might be true of this study -- 3 died in the ivermectin group, vs 10 in the control group. The probability that this happened by chance was very small, and the difference between groups was quite near statistical significance. If the study were repeated with more subjects, the difference might have been significant.

I suspect that many of the studies "proving" that ivermectin does not work used the same trick. Because most people (including medical doctors) know nothing about statistics, they are easily fooled by bogus research.
Oh, it was a conspiracy, because you know.... because you passed the statistics class.

And, by the way, you got vaccinated.
 
Top Bottom