- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New study proves ivermectin works
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:55 am to CasualBystander
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:55 am to CasualBystander
quote:
Not a comprehensive list of false claims, but a good start.
LMFAO! What a sham of an article you linked. Good Lord. Do better.
0
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:56 am to the808bass
quote:
Which one of 102 manufacturers do you think is paying?
Vitamedic. They reported it.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:56 am to News4you
Fauci has taken every side of every issue WRT covid19. How can that even be mistaken for science?
They were all vaccine deniers until they co-opted the vaccine for themselves. They could easily do the same thing with Ivermectin and these same retards, like BamaATL, will be here lauding the efficacy of it.
They were all vaccine deniers until they co-opted the vaccine for themselves. They could easily do the same thing with Ivermectin and these same retards, like BamaATL, will be here lauding the efficacy of it.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:57 am to BamaAtl
quote:
BamaAtl
You seem very ant-science and close minded with your dismissiveness.
Why are you only for mask, social distancing, vaccines and mandates when early treatment is also available?
Why are you so against early treatment?
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:57 am to CasualBystander
quote:
My only point is this: do not accept as definitive a single study
There are literally HUNDREDS of studies that support the use of Ivermectin for prevention and early use.
You are a moron.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 9:57 am to BamaAtl
its way too early to be high, bro.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:01 am to Vacherie Saint
Just wait until he/she figures out who funds these “legit” medical journals.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:02 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
There are literally HUNDREDS of studies that support the use of Ivermectin for prevention and early use.
You are a moron.
They cant find these stories on Google, so lets help them out.
Fauci says NIH is studying whether ivermectin is effective against COVID-19
This is just a few months after the FDA tweeted a crude horse joke about the drug. But these are the esteemed scientists we need to trust.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:02 am to the808bass
It is from an organization of physicians distinguishing themselves from the Frontline Doctors. That's all it is, and not an endorsement of all of their recommendations.
If you want to believe a dentist who claims to have successfully treated 500 covid patients with HCQ and a z-pack, that's great. Be you.
If you want to believe a dentist who claims to have successfully treated 500 covid patients with HCQ and a z-pack, that's great. Be you.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:03 am to BamaAtl
You’re playing a little fast and loose with the facts. Vitamedica had paid two of the doctors in the past.
If we’re using that standard, almost every Pharma paper published in the US is compromised.
If we’re using that standard, almost every Pharma paper published in the US is compromised.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:03 am to BamaAtl
quote:
BamaAtl
I find it odd that you don't spend as much time researching studies of the "approved" treatments for Covid as you do for other treatment modalities that don't fit the politically correct agenda.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:04 am to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
How can they be fined for selling legal medicine with a scrip?
This question stems from the predication that government decisions and regulations should make sense...
I am laughing to keep from crying...Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:05 am to CasualBystander
quote:
If you want to believe a dentist who claims to have successfully treated 500 covid patients with HCQ and a z-pack, that's great. Be you.
I don’t. How is Douglas Deibele associated with America’s Frontline Physicians?
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:06 am to Revelator
quote:
New study proves ivermectin works
quote:
My pastor’s wife got covid this week, and her doctor prescribed Ivermectin to her.
She couldn’t find a pharmacy that issued it and called my wife, a pharmacy tech, for help.
The wife found her a compound pharmacy named Floyd’s in Ponchatoula that made it, so she went there to get it.
It’s criminal that so many pharmacies won’t sell it.
Stop looking at what the facts tell you. This is not a conspiracy! I repeat, this is NOT a conspiracy.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:07 am to Vacherie Saint
The anti-early treatment brigade really hates positive news if the subject matter if it is not mask, social distancing, vaccines and mandates.
The OP is positive news for early treatment so this knee jerk reaction to a positive ivermectin story is totally expected. In fact I myself like to post positive early treatment news just to elicit a reaction from the anti-early treatment brigade as they dig their heels in further. It's just more and more rope to hang themselves.
The OP is positive news for early treatment so this knee jerk reaction to a positive ivermectin story is totally expected. In fact I myself like to post positive early treatment news just to elicit a reaction from the anti-early treatment brigade as they dig their heels in further. It's just more and more rope to hang themselves.
This post was edited on 1/25/22 at 10:11 am
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:07 am to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
Apart from an understandable skepticism of the group behind this study and a lack of true peer review, are there specific criticisms of the data and the study design you can point out that lead to the conclusions you are drawing?
Absolutely.
The study is published in a pay-to-publish 'journal' with false peer-review.
The study is a population-level observational study with limited ability to discern any characteristics that may have subjects self-select into either of the 2 study groups and arbitrary study start/stop dates (Jul 30...why? what happened July 29th?, when the program ostensibly started Jul 8/9).
The study didn't have an IRB until data collection was complete but claimed to have a protocol at the beginning of the study period which makes it not a prospective study as the authors claim.
The study protocol changed halfway through for no reason explained by the authors and conveniently sliced the non-intervention group n in half.
The study authors admitted they had no way to track adherence and this prophylaxis dose could have been unused by a significant proportion of the intervention group. The city of Itajaí recorded and posted how many subjects picked up subsequent dose series. Of the 140k initial ivermectin group only 80k returned for dose pack 2, and only 8k completed the 5-pack regimen recommended.
The study has numerous errors in the data presented in the tables - subgroup counts change with no explanation, and their exclusion criteria don't match up - e.g. no deaths under 30 occur before 'matching' but somehow 3 deaths under 30 occur after 'matching'.
The study used an opaque propensity score matching scheme that wasn't necessary and somehow reduced the intervention mortality n from 62 to 25, but left the non-intervention n preserved at 79.
The study matched interventions to the controls in order to fudge their numbers, when normally you do the opposite.
Finally, the first 2 authors listed on the study disclose that they are being or have been recently funded by the company that produces ivermectin (Vitamedic) and have a history of unethical work.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:07 am to the808bass
Ask him if anyone stands to profit from the use of a widely manufactured, cheap generic. Then ask him if anyone stands to profit from the suppression of said generic in lieu of pricey new patented drugs. Who is more likely to manipulate a study?
This shouldnt be hard to answer, since they've already been caught manipulating studies.
This shouldnt be hard to answer, since they've already been caught manipulating studies.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:08 am to the808bass
quote:
You’re playing a little fast and loose with the facts.
I see you're still an expert at crawfishing when you're wrong.
When you have dozens of studies saying it doesn't work, but one study with bad data saying it does, and that one study has 2 lead authors funded by one of the companies that would profit from their contradictory view....that's a red flag.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:10 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
I find it odd that you don't spend as much time researching studies of the "approved" treatments for Covid as you do for other treatment modalities that don't fit the politically correct agenda.
Early treatment of covid is not part of their agenda. Any stories that are positive toward early treatment elicit a swift emotional reaction from the anti-early treatment brigade.
Posted on 1/25/22 at 10:10 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
find it odd that you don't spend as much time researching studies of the "approved" treatments for Covid as you do for other treatment modalities that don't fit the politically correct agenda.
Almost none of the others are this glaringly bad at their research design and assumptions. The ones that are inevitably come from this same group.
This post was edited on 1/25/22 at 10:11 am
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News