Re: No data available to suggest a link between India’s reduction of COVID-19 cases and the use of ivermectin

[Ted]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:31:19 -0700, Rudy Canoza <j...@phendrie.con>
wrote:
> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
ivermectin suggests
> that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
May 2021,
> there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
is beneficial
> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new
evidence
> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
ivermectin and the
> decrease of cases.


>
https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/


> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.



Thank you, Rudy.

[Bud Frawley]

Ya, Rudey doant know shit.

[Dechucka]

> How do you know?
>
The science shows it works in vitro not in vivo

[BeamMeUpScotty]

I thought the Subject line said there was no available data?

Which means in an EMERGENCY we should use the anecdotal information
rather than rolling the dice and deciding blindly what to do to save
lives. And if it looks like it's working and there are no serious side
effects then prescribing Ivermectin has very little down side and
possibly a huge upside....







--
That's karma

You know there is a point when you're adding water to the soup, that you
no longer have soup you just have water...

That's true for Democrats also, at some point when you're adding
Democrats to anything, you reach the point where you end up with just a
pile of shit.

Look at San Francisco, my theory is that it reached critical Democrat
"STUPID" mass, and has transmutated into a huge pile of shit like cold
fusion only it's real.

I'm also working on the *THEORY OF EVERYTHING STUPID* and that
Space/Time and /stupid/ are infinite... and that Democrats are an
integral part of that theory of STUPID. It may prove a new quantum
partical that I'm calling "dunce democrat" particals that will join
quantum physics and the theory of stupid to become the theory of everything.

[Scout]

"Ted" <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:almarsoft.3783...@news.easynews.com...

Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues to run
rampant...

I assume we could just consider it a fluke and ignore all the clinical
studies that strongly suggest otherwise.

But then Rudy loves to ignore anything that contradicts his opinions.

[Scout]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <NOT-...@idiocracy.gov> wrote in message
news:YCF2J.25882$j52....@fx18.iad...

>
>>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:31:19 -0700, Rudy Canoza <j...@phendrie.con> wrote:
>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
>>> ivermectin suggests
>>>> that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
>>> May 2021,
>>>> there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
>>> is beneficial
>>>> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new
>>> evidence
>>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>> ivermectin and the
>>>> decrease of cases.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
>>> ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
>>> n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>
> I thought the Subject line said there was no available data?
>
> Which means in an EMERGENCY we should use the anecdotal information
> rather than rolling the dice and deciding blindly what to do to save
> lives. And if it looks like it's working and there are no serious side
> effects then prescribing Ivermectin has very little down side and
> possibly a huge upside....

Actually there is quite a bit of available data but people like Rudy would
never admit it.

https://c19ivermectin.com/

You will note that if you check the information, you will find links to all
the source material. IOW, you can verify the contents if you're willing to
do a bit of work to look at, read and understand the source material.
Something Rudy simply can not do.


Overall studies show a marked reduction in risk of 40-86% reduction in risk
depending on catagory with the greatest results being seen when you use the
drug to prevent catching the disease, early treatment, and a reduction of
mortality by over 50%.

What's the down side?

It's a cheap, generic, and easily produced drug which does NOT produce
massive profits for specific drug companies.

Otherwise, it's a generally safe medication with generally mild to moderate
side effects, some conditions should be cleared with your doctor before use.

Find more details at:

http://drugs.com/ivermectin.html

Standard warnings and disclaimers apply, check with your doctor before use,
use at your own risk, use only medications you are prescribed by your
doctor, etc.

[Matt Singer]

On 9/22/2021 6:40 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Ted" <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:almarsoft.3783...@news.easynews.com...
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:31:19 -0700, Rudy Canoza <j...@phendrie.con> wrote:
>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
>> ivermectin suggests
>>> that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
>> May 2021,
>>> there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
>> is beneficial
>>> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new
>> evidence
>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>> ivermectin and the
>>> decrease of cases.
>>
>>
>>>
>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
>> ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
>> n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>
>>
>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you, Rudy.
>
> Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues to run rampant

No proof that where it *HAS* been used that it was the cause of any drop in
cases. You're engaging in shitty logic again, scooter.

[David Hartung]

On 9/21/21 10:31 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
> suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As
> of May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that
> ivermectin is beneficial in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article
> doesn’t provide new evidence supporting a causal link between the
> recommendation to use ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>
> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>
>
> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.

Then don't use it.

[Andrew]

"Matt Singer" wrote in message news:_BH2J.119056$rl3....@fx45.iad...
> Scout wrote:
>> "Ted" wrote:

>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>
>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
>>> ivermectin suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of
>>> new infection. As of May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin is beneficial in preventing or
>>> curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new evidence
>>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
>>> ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
>>> n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>
>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>
>>> Thank you, Rudy.
>>
>> Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues to run rampant
>
> No proof that where it *HAS* been used that it was the cause of any drop in cases.

We have documented worldwide evidence that it is the cause of cases dropping.

https://www.onedaymd.com/2021/08/what-countries-are-using-ivermectin.html

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Matt Singer]

On 9/22/2021 8:31 AM, Andrew wrote:
> "Matt Singer"  wrote in message news:_BH2J.119056$rl3....@fx45.iad...
>> Scout wrote:
>>> "Ted" wrote:
>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
>>>> ivermectin suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of
>>>> new infection. As of May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence
>>>> indicating that ivermectin is beneficial in preventing or curing COVID-19.
>>>> The article doesn’t provide new evidence
>>>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
>>>> ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
>>>> n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>>
>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you, Rudy.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues to run rampant
>>
>> No proof that where it *HAS* been used that it was the cause of any drop in
>> cases.
>
> We have documented worldwide evidence that it is the cause of cases dropping.

No, you haven't.

>
> https://www.onedaymd.com/

That's a lie site, you cunt.

[Andrew]

"Matt Singer" wrote in message news:mXH2J.119060$rl3....@fx45.iad...
> Andrew wrote:

>> "Matt Singer" wrote:
>>> Scout wrote:
>>>> "Ted" wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
>>>>> ivermectin suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of
>>>>> new infection. As of May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin is beneficial in preventing
>>>>> or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new evidence
>>>>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l
>>>>> ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti
>>>>> n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you, Rudy.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues to run rampant
>>>
>>> No proof that where it *HAS* been used that it was the cause of any drop in cases.
>>
>> We have documented worldwide evidence that it is the cause of cases dropping.
>
> No, you haven't.

We do.

We have documented worldwide evidence that it is the cause of cases dropping.

https://www.onedaymd.com/2021/08/what-countries-are-using-ivermectin.html

It works.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 9/22/21 11:26 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:

> It shouldn't be used, period.  It's medical malpractice to administer or
> prescribe a drug with no benefit.

It's side effect will be to kill any parasites and that will only make
you stronger and more able for your own immune system yo fight off the
Chinese/CCP virus.



--
That's Karma

*The first rule of SURVIVAL CLUB is we talk about it*
We hate censorship. Never trust what Democrats or Marxists tell you.
Make them prove it with actual verifiable facts and science. And if you
didn't find the duplicitous lies in what the Marxist-Democrats told you
then you didn't dig deep enough. The *Gruber Doctrine* is the
Marxist-Democrat plan that says it's "to the Democrats advantage to have
a lack of transparency and then lie about everything".
https://rumble.com/vkt8ld-call-it-the-stupidity-of-the-american-voter-or-whatever.-how-libs-exploit-t.html



*The next rule of SURVIVAL CLUB is*
149 - Socialism fails, because Socialists presume to know my needs
better than I know them.

[David Hartung]

On 9/22/21 10:26 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
> On 9/22/2021 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:

> It shouldn't be used, period.  It's medical malpractice to administer or
> prescribe a drug with no benefit.

For your consideration:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/

[Matt Singer]

No, you don't.

>
> We have documented worldwide evidence that it is the cause of cases dropping.

No, you haven't. You have nothing but anecdote and /post hoc/ fallacy.

Meanwhile, randomized clinical trials have *all* shown no benefit from ivemectin
against COVID-19.

[Rudy Canoza]

"A matched case-control study"

In other words, not a randomized controlled trial. RCT is the gold standard;
anything else is inconclusive.

Ivermectin is ineffective against COVID-19.

[Kurt Nicklas]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:50:32 -0700, Rudy Canoza <notg...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Nonsense.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

[David Hartung]

https://quantifyinghealth.com/cohort-vs-randomized-controlled-trials/
[...]
A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is an experiment controlled by the
researcher.

A cohort study is an observational study where the researcher observes
the events and does not control them.

In short, If you want to prove a causal relationship between a treatment
and an outcome, use a randomized controlled trial. If randomization is
not ethical or possible, a cohort study is your second best option.
[...]

It appears to me that once again you are demonstrating your own lack of
knowledge. I have no idea if Ivermectin is effective, all I know is that
there are studies which indicate that it may be. You have a long history
of rejecting out of hand that which does not support your view, this
appears to be another such situation.

[Bob Duncan]

Rudy Canoza wrote

> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
suggests

> that ivermectin didnÉ Tt slow down the rate of new infection. As of May
2021,
> there isnÉ Tt reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin is
beneficial
> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesnÉ Tt provide new

evidence
> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use ivermectin and
the
> decrease of cases.
>
> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-
between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-
hoft-gateway-pundit/
>
> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>
>

Only morons would try Ivermectin when everyone knows that the real miracle
cure is daily doses of hydroxychloroquine.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 9/22/21 12:59 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:

> Sorry, but that's an ivermectin propaganda site


Lucky for Rudy, Rudy isn't mandated to take the Ivermectin.

[Rudy Canoza]

And? It is considered the *gold standard* of clinical studies.

>
> A cohort study is an observational study where the researcher observes the
> events and does not control them.

Not as good.

Being the anti-science fuckwit you are, you think the RCT being "controlled by"
the researcher means "manipulated by" to get the desired result. It doesn't
mean that in the least. The experiment is "controlled by" the researcher to the
extent that he/she/they:

* decide what is going to be tested, e.g. HCQ, ivermectin, etc.
* decide the characteristics of the study subjects

The researchers do *not* decide who is in the experimental group and who is in
the control group — that's what "randomized" means, you stupid fuck.

RCT is the gold standard. This is not in dispute, except by anti-science stupid
fuckwits like you.

[!Jones]

OTOH, if you really would prefer to take a horse de-wormer as opposed
to a proven vaccine, knock your lights out... take a Lysol enema for
all I care... drink bleach.

[Dechucka]

snip

> Meanwhile, randomized clinical trials have *all* shown no benefit from
> ivemectin against COVID-19.

The original in vitro studies in Australia showed that Ivermectin and
many other drugs e.g. Ridaura had an effect on the SARS COVID-19 virus.
Sadly as for many drugs that are shown to be beneficial in vitro for
certain conditions when tried in vivo they don't work or are too toxic.

Ivermectin is a good drug for river blindness, strongyloidiasis,
trichuriasis, ascariasis, and lymphatic filariasis but sadly not COVID.

If you believe it works keep taking it but keep sanitising, wear a mask
and get vaccinated so you don't kill more of your mates.

[El Kabong]

FALSE!

A plentiful plethora of data proves that Ivimectin is 95%
effective at preventing covid, as long as you're vaxxed!

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message
news:_BH2J.119056$rl3....@fx45.iad...

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/thedesertreview.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/19/319aa24e-f95c-11eb-9c83-27c7330f1f77/6111a3f98b7fb.image.jpg

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/indias-ivermectin-blackout/article_e3db8f46-f942-11eb-9eea-77d5e2519364.html

Well, all I can say is that it's interesting to note the MASSIVE drops in
cases and deaths were it has been used on a wide scale.

I suppose you're going to tell me it's just a miraculous coincidence?

You ask what is the motivation?

How about several BILLION dollars, and those getting rich from that?

After all Pfizer has already made well over $10 Billion in profits just from
this one vaccine so far.

Further, there's the profits to be made in controlling the market and
knowing when stores will open/close and what businesses will be allowed to
continue operations uninterrupted.

[Scout]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <NOT-...@idiocracy.gov> wrote in message

news:NkJ2J.119260$rl3....@fx45.iad...

Nice how he just dismissed it out of hand, even though they link to each and
every study they document where you can read the research for yourself.

Then of course, he can't explain how the portions of India that used
Ivermectin on a large scale has all but eliminated Covid cases and deaths,
while one that didn't is still battling with the disease.

Look at this one chart as an example of what Rudy choose to ignore.

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/thedesertreview.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/19/319aa24e-f95c-11eb-9c83-27c7330f1f77/6111a3f98b7fb.image.jpg

Sure would seem to suggest it's doing something, but Rudy will never know
because he can't be bothered to even look at the data... if it doesn't
confirm to his predetermined position... it 'has' to be propaganda.

Of course, that does raise the question of how, or if, Rudy would ever
figure out the truth is someone lied to him, or convinced him some
propaganda was actually true. He would remain ignorant and delusional
because of his inherent decision to deny everything that he thinks he
already knows... I'm sure Rudy is the sort of person that still believes the
Earth is flat... because after all everyone KNEW the earth was flat, all the
experts said so at one time.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:mXH2J.119060$rl3....@fx45.iad...

Show that anything has been falsified. Simply calling it a "lie site" proves
nothing.

He presented his data, it's now your turn to show what's wrong with his
data... even if it comes from a "lie site".

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/indias-ivermectin-blackout/article_e3db8f46-f942-11eb-9eea-77d5e2519364.html

Show that any of the numbers or charts presented are falsified.

[Scout]

"Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:zTH2J.173396$TtV7....@fx07.ams4...

Take a look at this source that digs into the numbers and shows the
effectiveness.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/indias-ivermectin-blackout/article_e3db8f46-f942-11eb-9eea-77d5e2519364.html

Certainly seems to look like large scale, real world, confirmation of the
study results.

Where India used Ivermectin, Covid is all but gone despite very low
vaccination rates. Here? It's still all over despite very high vaccination
rates.

Which method seems to work better in the real world?

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:wfI2J.41555$ol1....@fx42.iad...

Well, let me prove that to be a lie.

https://c19ivermectin.com/

You will note you can look up the actual research for each study because
they include links in every case.

[Scout]

"David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-dGdncSU5dDr0tb8...@giganews.com...

" Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg with a gap of 72
hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among
healthcare workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance
in the containment of pandemic."

73% reduction... seems relevant to me. Means you only have about 1/4 the
cases, which means less exposure, which means less chance to spread.

With an estimated 31% of the population having already had Covid, then would
put us at around 82% herd immunity. given even those most infectious
diseases require 70-90% immunity that would put over or very close to herd
immunity. Allowing us to stop the disease in it's tracks and if we continue
our current practices in 2-4 weeks would could be all but over this whole
thing other than those bring it into the country.... Which would mean
controlling our Southern boarder and requiring all international travelers
to go into isolation for a period of time, or start them on Ivermectin 2
weeks prior to entry.

[Scout]

"David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:rbydnb_m0NPMyNb8...@giganews.com...

Then allow me.

Randomized

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8415509/pdf/ajt-28-e601.pdf

"Our study shows agreement with other research
groups regarding positive findings in the use of ivermectin for the
treatment of COVID-19 that deserves
further studies about repurposing ivermectin."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03000605211013550

": Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection treated with ivermectin
plus
doxycycline recovered earlier, were less likely to progress to more serious
disease, and were
more likely to be COVID-19 negative by RT-PCR on day 14"

Cohort

https://www.cureus.com/articles/63131-ivermectin-as-a-sars-cov-2-pre-exposure-prophylaxis-method-in-healthcare-workers-a-propensity-score-matched-retrospective-cohort-study

"These results suggest that compassionate use of weekly ivermectin could be
an option as a preventive method in healthcare workers and as an adjunct to
immunizations, while further well-designed randomized controlled trials are
developed to facilitate scientific consensus."

Your next objection will be?

And if you want to see wide scale real world testing look at what happened
in districts in India were Ivermectin was used vs the one district that did
not.

Uttar Pradesh on Ivermectin: Population 240 Million [4.9% fully vaccinated]
COVID Daily Cases: 26
COVID Daily Deaths: 3

Delhi on Ivermectin: Population 31 Million [15% fully vaccinated]
COVID Daily Cases: 61
COVID Daily Deaths: 2

Uttarakhand on Ivermectin: Population 11.4 Million [15% fully vaccinated]
COVID Daily Cases: 24
COVID Daily Deaths: 0

Then let's contrast that with the district that chose the US approach

Tamil Nadu off Ivermectin: Population 78.8 Million [6.9% fully vaccinated]
COVID Daily Cases: 1,997
COVID Daily Deaths: 33

and let's throw the US in just for good measure

The United States off Ivermectin: Population 331 Million [50.5% fully
vaccinated]
COVID Daily Cases: 127,108
COVID Daily Deaths: 574

Well shit... looks like it's certainly doing something positive.....

[Matt Singer]

The claim at the lie site is unsupported. Nothing shows that use of ivermectin
resulted in a decline in COVID-19 cases and deaths in India. All that's there
is a repetition of unsupported claims by anti-science right-wingnuts.

[Matt Singer]

That's a political site, not a valid science site. They are *advocates* for
ivermectin. The source is polluted.

[Matt Singer]

On 9/23/2021 7:29 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:-dGdncSU5dDr0tb8...@giganews.com...
>> On 9/22/21 10:26 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>> On 9/22/2021 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 9/21/21 10:31 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
>>>>> suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
>>>>> May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
>>>>> is beneficial in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide
>>>>> new evidence supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>>
>>>> Then don't use it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It shouldn't be used, period.  It's medical malpractice to administer or
>>> prescribe a drug with no benefit.
>>
>> For your consideration:
>>
>> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/
>
> " Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg with a gap of 72 hours
> was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare
> workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the
> containment of pandemic."

This is not a randomized controlled study. No drug would ever receive approval
off the results of this study. At most, this study would lead to multiple
rigorous RCTs being undertaken.

There are methodological flaws, and bias, in every study purporting to show a
benefit from using ivermectin either prophylactically or therapeutically for
COVID-19.

[Matt Singer]

Nope.

"Intensive Treatment With Ivermectin *and Iota-Carrageenan* as
Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for COVID-19"

Sorry. You need to test ivermectin *alone*.

>
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03000605211013550
>
> ": Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection treated with ivermectin plus
> doxycycline recovered earlier,

"Plus doxycycline" — same flaw as above.

>
> Cohort
>
> https://www.cureus.com/articles/63131-ivermectin-as-a-sars-cov-2-pre-exposure-prophylaxis-method-in-healthcare-workers-a-propensity-score-matched-retrospective-cohort-study
>
>
> "These results suggest that compassionate use of weekly ivermectin could be an
> option as a preventive method in healthcare workers and as an adjunct to
> immunizations, while further well-designed randomized controlled trials are
> developed to facilitate scientific consensus."

Observational study — no good.


Let's face the obvious fact: you're fishing. You don't know science, you don't
know how to interpret these scattershot "nih" citations you keep hooking. You
don't know what you're doing.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:EH03J.77367$Dr.2...@fx40.iad...

Well, then by THAT standard, there's nothing to show the vaccine resulted in
any decline in Covid cases or deaths in the US.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:rI03J.77417$Dr.5...@fx40.iad...

"You will note you can look up the actual research for each study because
they include links in every case."

Yea, they are such liars that they will actually link you to the studies
that back up every word of what they present.

Oh, but that's right, you don't do facts.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:VY03J.142222$o45....@fx46.iad...

Isn't that EXACTLY what you said was necessary above?

"A cohort study is an observational study where the researcher observes the
events and does not control them."

" In short, If you want to prove a causal relationship between a treatment
and an outcome, use a randomized controlled trial. If randomization is not
ethical or possible, a cohort study is your second best option."

I produced 2 of the former and one of the later, and now you seem to be
claiming that they are flawed because the researcher did NOT interfere but
merely observed... as you said needed to be done.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:HU03J.69283$VZ1....@fx08.iad...

It is a randomized controlled study. Further you didn't ask for enough to
authorize use, you asked for evidence it works.

That is EXACTLY what you were given, even after you told us exactly the type
of study you felt was most objective and relevant.

Now that you've got it in hand... you're back to inventing excuses to ignore
the evidence YOU HAVE IN YOUR HAND.

>
> There are methodological flaws, and bias, in every study purporting to
> show a benefit from using ivermectin either prophylactically or
> therapeutically for COVID-19.

Please list for us the methodological flaws and bias that you assert exists
and then be sure to include your credentials to make such a conclusion.

I predict neither will be presented.

You asked for what you received, now are trying to say it's not what you
asked for.

[Matt Singer]

No, dummy. I said a randomized controlled trial is needed, not an observational
study.

[AlleyCat]

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/

The claim that ivermectin *caused* a reduction in COVID-19 morbidity/mortality
is pure /post hoc/ fallacy stuff.

scooter: "India started administering ivermectin, and COVID-19 cases and deaths
went down. Golly, ivermectin must have caused that."

That's pure fallacy. But that's how scooter always thinks.

[Don Kresch]

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 08:17:58 -0700, Matt Singer
<out.o...@wyebur.con> scrawled in blood:

>On 9/23/2021 7:29 AM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:-dGdncSU5dDr0tb8...@giganews.com...
>>> On 9/22/21 10:26 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>> On 9/22/2021 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 9/21/21 10:31 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
>>>>>> suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
>>>>>> May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
>>>>>> is beneficial in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide
>>>>>> new evidence supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then don't use it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It shouldn't be used, period.  It's medical malpractice to administer or
>>>> prescribe a drug with no benefit.
>>>
>>> For your consideration:
>>>
>>> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/
>>

>> " Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 ?g/kg with a gap of 72 hours

>> was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare
>> workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the
>> containment of pandemic."
>
>This is not a randomized controlled study. No drug would ever receive approval
>off the results of this study. At most, this study would lead to multiple
>rigorous RCTs being undertaken.

So.....how was it that the "vaccines" were "approved"?


Don
aa#51
o- DNRC
Jedi Slackmaster

[Dechucka]

Science

[Matt Singer]

Only one vaccine has been fully approved. The others received EUA after going
through a lot of RCTs, but not yet enough to receive full approval. That's coming.

The morons who claim the vaccines haven't been "tested" don't know what they're
talking about. They've been tested, and they continue to be tested in RCTs and
other types of studies. Only one so far has done enough Stage 3 clinical trials
to receive full approval.

[Andrew]

"Dechucka" wrote in message news:8LOdne9s3sdIaNH8...@westnet.com.au...
> Don Kresch wrote:
>> Matt Singer scrawled in blood:
>>> Scout wrote:
>>>> "David Hartung" wrote:
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:

>>>>>> David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
>>>>>>>> suggests that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
>>>>>>>> May 2021, there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
>>>>>>>> is beneficial in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide
>>>>>>>> new evidence supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>>>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use->>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then don't use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It shouldn't be used, period. It's medical malpractice to administer or
>>>>>> prescribe a drug with no benefit.
>>>>>
>>>>> For your consideration:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/
>>>>
>>>> " Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 ?g/kg with a gap of 72 hours
>>>> was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare
>>>> workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the
>>>> containment of pandemic."
>>>
>>> This is not a randomized controlled study. No drug would ever receive approval
>>> off the results of this study. At most, this study would lead to multiple
>>> rigorous RCTs being undertaken.
>>
>> So.....how was it that the "vaccines" were "approved"?
>
> Science

Yes, depopulation science.

[Dechucka]

Yet the vaccinated aren't dying as much as the vaccinated from COVID

[Rudy Canoza]

Bullshit.

*You* need to be depopulated.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 9/24/2021 6:50 AM, oozing scarlet red maxipad attempted - and *failed* - to
bullshit:

>> On 22 Sep 2021, Rudy Canoza <notg...@gmail.com> posted some news:chI2J.41556$ol1....@fx42.iad:

>>> On 9/22/2021 8:44 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 9/22/21 10:26 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>> On 9/22/2021 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:

>>>>>> On 9/21/21 10:31 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended

>>>>>>> ivermectin suggests that ivermectin didnā?Tt slow down the rate of
>>>>>>> new infection. As of May 2021, there isnā?Tt reliable clinical

>>>>>>> evidence indicating that ivermectin is beneficial in preventing or

>>>>>>> curing COVID-19. The article doesnā?Tt provide new evidence

>>>>>>> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
>>>>>>> ivermectin and the decrease of cases.
>

>>>>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/

>
>>>>>>> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>
>>>>>> Then don't use it.
>

>>>>> It shouldn't be used, period.Ā It's medical malpractice to

>>>>> administer or prescribe a drug with no benefit.
>
>>>> For your consideration:
>
>>>> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/
>

>>> "A matched case-control study"
>
>>> In other words, not a randomized controlled trial. RCT is the gold
>>> standard; anything else is inconclusive.
>

> Rudy the scholar will love this--
>
> A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness
>
> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/

This is a preprint, you fuckwit. But just to play along a little:

"Larger trials will be needed to confirm these preliminary findings."

Way to go, maxipad.

The "research" purporting to find ivermectin to be effective is shoddy:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351359435_Ivermectin_COVID-19_Miracle_Cure_or_Cruel_Hoax

[Scout]

"AlleyCat" <a...@aohello.con> wrote in message
news:QX53J.80980$z%4.3...@fx37.iad...

With hundreds of millions of people involved... seems like that would be a
pretty massive coincidence that seems to be repeated over and over when
Ivermectin is being used.

After all, you've got nothing better for the vaccines. I mean who's to say
the vaccines really did anything? I mean you have no actual proof under your
standards.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:QI53J.116096$lC6....@fx41.iad...

Which I gave you two of.. then because you said this was the next best
thing, I offered you this as well.

That's THREE studies that meet your stated criteria.

You now have multiple studies showing the results you claim don't exist with
ivermectin or an Ivermectin/ Doxycycline bend that produce significant
positive results.

Which you then dismiss out of hand because you didn't think anyone would
actually produce the studies you demanded.

Well, I did and we see your response. You care nothing about saving
lives.... only pushing the government narrative.

[Scout]

"Don Kresch" <no...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:hbtpkg1h9vbed430u...@4ax.com...

WHAM!!!!

Why to go Don.. Bet you won't get an answer.

[Matt Singer]

No, scooter, you gave me an observational study.

[Matt Singer]

On 9/24/2021 8:37 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "AlleyCat" <a...@aohello.con> wrote in message news:QX53J.80980$z%4.3...@fx37.iad...
>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>
>>
>> The claim that ivermectin *caused* a reduction in COVID-19 morbidity/mortality
>> is pure /post hoc/ fallacy stuff.
>>
>> scooter: "India started administering ivermectin, and COVID-19 cases and
>> deaths went down.  Golly, ivermectin must have caused that."
>>
>> That's pure fallacy. But that's how scooter always thinks.
>
> With hundreds of millions of people involved... seems like that would be a
> pretty massive coincidence that seems to be repeated over and over when
> Ivermectin is being used.

scooter, you can't even prove that ivermectin *is* being widely used in India,
or anywhere else. You're repeating the unsupported claims of someone else whose
credibility you are in no position to evaluate.

Cut the shit, scooter — you have no fucking clue how to read and evaluate shit
you stumble onto at ncbi.nih.gov. You're bullshitting.

[Matt Singer]

No, he fucked up, again. The vaccines, all of them, have *been* through
randomized controlled studies, and in the case of the Pfizer one, through enough
of them and with enough success that the vaccine has received *full* and
unconditional FDA approval. The Pfizer vaccine is no longer under an EUA.
scooter is lying when he says it is.

The EUAs never would have been issued if the vaccines had not been through at
least several Stage 3 RCTs. That's a fact.

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:7So3J.61783$tG6....@fx39.iad...

> On 9/24/2021 8:37 AM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "AlleyCat" <a...@aohello.con> wrote in message
>> news:QX53J.80980$z%4.3...@fx37.iad...
>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>
>>> The claim that ivermectin *caused* a reduction in COVID-19
>>> morbidity/mortality is pure /post hoc/ fallacy stuff.
>>>
>>> scooter: "India started administering ivermectin, and COVID-19 cases and
>>> deaths went down. Golly, ivermectin must have caused that."
>>>
>>> That's pure fallacy. But that's how scooter always thinks.
>>
>> With hundreds of millions of people involved... seems like that would be
>> a pretty massive coincidence that seems to be repeated over and over when
>> Ivermectin is being used.
>
> scooter, you can't even prove that ivermectin *is* being widely used in
> India, or anywhere else.

And when the facts no longer matter, Wannabe just starts inventing excuses.

I acknowledge your lose and your utter inability to even look at the
information presented with fully supports ALL that you are now asking for.,

<plonk>

[Scout]

"Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message

news:zQo3J.61782$tG6....@fx39.iad...

Which is exactly what you asked for.

But since it doesn't show what you wanted to see, you are now attempting to
deny the very proof you asked to be presented.

You're such a slime.

But luckily the lurkers have hopefully learned something, including how
those who are pushing the vaccine, and ONLY the vaccine, are utterly afraid
to look at alternatives.

We can only wonder why....

[Matt Singer]

On 9/24/2021 12:18 PM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Matt Singer" <out.o...@wyebur.con> wrote in message
> news:7So3J.61783$tG6....@fx39.iad...
>> On 9/24/2021 8:37 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "AlleyCat" <a...@aohello.con> wrote in message
>>> news:QX53J.80980$z%4.3...@fx37.iad...
>>>> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The claim that ivermectin *caused* a reduction in COVID-19
>>>> morbidity/mortality is pure /post hoc/ fallacy stuff.
>>>>
>>>> scooter: "India started administering ivermectin, and COVID-19 cases and
>>>> deaths went down.  Golly, ivermectin must have caused that."
>>>>
>>>> That's pure fallacy. But that's how scooter always thinks.
>>>
>>> With hundreds of millions of people involved... seems like that would be a
>>> pretty massive coincidence that seems to be repeated over and over when
>>> Ivermectin is being used.
>>
>> scooter, you can't even prove that ivermectin *is* being widely used in India,
>> or anywhere else.
> And when the facts no longer matter,

It is not established as a fact that ivermectin is in widespread use in India,
scooter. You have *no hope* of establishing that as a fact, scooter.

You lose, scooter, as usual. Usual...did I say usual? Sorry, my error. I mean
*always*: as always.

[Matt Singer]

No, scooter, I did not. I *criticized* your offer of an observational study,
scooter, because it is insufficient to establish what you're claiming.
Observational studies can point in the direction of sound RCTs, scooter, but
they are not a substitute for them, and *no* drug is ever approved, not even
EUA, without numerous Stage 3 RCTs, scooter.

scooter, you don't know one thing about this. I'm certainly not objectively an
expert in it, but relative to you, scooter, I am an expert.

[Ted]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:40:10 -0400, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> "Ted" <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:almarsoft.3783...@news.easynews.com...
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:31:19 -0700, Rudy Canoza <j...@phendrie.con>

wrote:
> >> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
> > ivermectin suggests
> >> that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As of
> > May 2021,
> >> there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin
> > is beneficial
> >> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide new
> > evidence
> >> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
> > ivermectin and the
> >> decrease of cases.
> >
> >
> >>
> >
https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l

> >
ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti

> > n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
> >
> >
> >> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
> >
> >
> >

> > Thank you, Rudy.


> Meanwhile where Ivermectin hasn't been used the disease continues
to run

> rampant...


> I assume we could just consider it a fluke and ignore all the
clinical
> studies that strongly suggest otherwise.


> But then Rudy loves to ignore anything that
> contradicts his opinions.


Rudy's opinions are always spot on correct.
He's phenomenally intelligent.

[Ted]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:36:28 -0700, Bud Frawley
<bud_fr...@aggregoat.con> wrote:

> On 9/21/2021 9:00 PM, Ted wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:31:19 -0700, Rudy Canoza <j...@phendrie.con>
wrote:
> >> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended
> > ivermectin suggests
> >> that ivermectin didn’t slow down the rate of new infection. As
of
> > May 2021,
> >> there isn’t reliable clinical evidence indicating that
ivermectin
> > is beneficial
> >> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesn’t provide
new
> > evidence
> >> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use
> > ivermectin and the
> >> decrease of cases.
> >
> >
> >>
> >
https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-l

> >
ink-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermecti

> > n-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/
> >
> >
> >> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you, Rudy.

> Ya, Rudey doant know shit.


LOL

[Bob Duncan]

Rudy Canoza wrote

> Epidemiological data from other countries that recommended ivermectin
suggests

> that ivermectin didnÉ Tt slow down the rate of new infection. As of May
2021,
> there isnÉ Tt reliable clinical evidence indicating that ivermectin is
beneficial
> in preventing or curing COVID-19. The article doesnÉ Tt provide new

evidence
> supporting a causal link between the recommendation to use ivermectin and
the
> decrease of cases.
>
> https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-
between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-
hoft-gateway-pundit/
>
> Ivermectin doesn't work against COVID-19.
>
>

Only morons would try Ivermectin when everyone knows that the real miracle
cure is daily doses of hydroxychloroquine.

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]

[Bob Duncan]