this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2021
32 points (92.1% liked)

Technology

34442 readers
207 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] redbook@lemmy.ml -4 points 3 years ago (15 children)

https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/26/bmjebm-2021-111678

This article basically says that the methodologies for the studies on ivermecitn are not sound. Ok but this doesn't prove that ivermectin is either good nor bad for treating covid-19 - just that there isn't reliable evidence for ivermectin treating covid-19. Hence why I said in the past post that ivermectin COULD be good against covid-19 and also why I said that there needs to be more research into ivermectin as a treatment for covid-19 to reach a definitive conclusion on it.

The study that I cited is in my view the most reliable study there because its double blind randomized placebo controlled and uses a bigger sample size that most of the other studies with 363 completing follow up.

Granted I'm by no means a scientist, but why is there hardly any good studies on ivermectin as a treatment for covid-19 and why is it that all the studies done on ivermectin don't use good methodologies? Please feel free to share some 'good' studies on ivermectin use for covid-19 because the website https://ivmmeta.com/ has all the studies for ivermectin usage for covid-19 (as far as I am aware) but even I will say that a lot of the studies done on ivermectin are unreliable because most of them use a very small sample size, but there are some that are good such as the one I mentioned above which as far as I am aware hasn't been 'debunked' anywhere.

Feel free to watch the following videos by Dr. John Cambell on youtube, the first video he notes that its quite weird that Australia are outright banning ivermectin and the second he looks at a meta analysis of ivermectin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gndsUjgPYo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j7am9kjMrk

Please also note that I am not advocating for or against ivermectin. I'm simply saying that there needs to be more research into this drug because it could potentially be useful against covid-19 based on the studies that are already done on the drug, granted if we are to believe the bmj article you listed unreliable, but that's all that we can go on at the moment.

[–] kinetix@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (13 children)

NO! This is the problem - WHY do you, or anyone, give a crap about Ivermectin? Because you've been manipulated in to thinking that it's a thing. Here's some other questions you could ask:

Where's the studies about chocolate chip cookies and their effect on COVID-19? Where's the studies about Vitamin-C and it's effect on COVID-19? Where's the studies about dog poop and it's effect on COVID-19?

They are all just as equally valid as your concern about Ivermectin - it's manufactured by misinformation trolls. And they all play exactly the same role in the treatment of COVID-19.

[–] redbook@lemmy.ml -5 points 3 years ago (7 children)

If the scientists who have diplomas and PHDs put in a lot of time and effort to study ivermectin thought it was important enough then they must have had a reason to study its effects and the study that I mentioned seems to show that ivermectin in combination with doxycycline seems to have some benefit at treating covid-19. Maybe I'm missing something here... I'm open for discussion, but even you have to say that from all the studies that are done on ivermectin it seems to point to it being at least better than nothing for treating covid-19.

Is ivermectin really just a source of misinformation? You can see why an laymen that looks at the studies on ivermectin can conclude that ivermectin is effective against covid-19? And like I said why is it that there are not any 'good' studies on ivermectin to put the whole thing to sleep? Why is it that the good studies I could find on https://ivmmeta.com/ shows that ivermectin at least has some potential for treating covid-19?

This isn't me spreading misinformation, I'm just curious why the studies on ivermectin seem to point to it being at least better than nothing for treating covid-19? Ok yes they are perhaps unreliable, yet they still show that ivermectin shows some promise against covid-19?

[–] fartech@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

And if you have extraordinary claims you are the one who needs to provide extraordinary evidence. So don't talk to us, just go prove it since it's so obvious that an entire planets worth of humans fail to see it

[–] roastpotatothief@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 years ago

It's not so extrodinary. A new use can be found for a old drug. If anything it's ordinary.

And he did back it up with the research article. If you want to refute it, you should provide a higher quality of evidence, like a newer article. Otherwise you have nothing substantial to say.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)