I think it's pretty clear that COVID treatments and preventatives whose patents have expired are generally not going to be getting a lot of attention (or worse, have information about their efficacy actively suppressed) for obvious reasons. That being said, taking a prophylactic (practically forever) for COVID sounds kind of silly. But for those who cannot get the vaccine (for whatever reason), it should be on the table.
Both of the hyped generic drugs have been studied and came out with no benefit for treating covid. There however is one generic drug, not hyped, and actually has a pathway (anti inflammatory drug) on why it can help with covid treatment may actually help. It has two small studies that show benefits. The largest study is still in progress and will conclude soon. Prelim data is promising. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-08-18/fluvoxamine-covid The largest and most painstaking trial produced the most scientifically valid results. That’s a just-completed trial in Brazil with 1,472 patients randomly divided into fluvoxamine and placebo groups. The so-called Together Trial has been testing several purported treatments; we reported recently on its findings that neither Ivermectin nor hydroxychloroquine had any therapeutic effect on COVID-19. The results on fluvoxamine were strikingly different. “This is the first drug we’ve tried out that found a significant effect,” Edward J. Mills, who oversees the Together Trial out of McMaster University in Canada, told me. The fluvoxamine patients experienced about a 30% reduction in risk — defined as longer than six hours’ observation in an emergency department or hospitalization — compared with the placebo group. The results yielded a 99.6% probability that fluvoxamine works better than a placebo, Mills told a National Institutes of Health symposium on Aug. 6. That’s a worthy goal, since keeping patients out of the ER or inpatient wards will help to alleviate the sort of surges in cases being seen throughout the country now. The 10-day treatment of 200 milligrams per day used in the Together Trial would cost about $4, Mills told his audience. “So we have an intervention here that potentially provides a very large treatment effect at a very low cost,” he said. The full 28-day observation period of patients in the Together Trial won’t be complete until Aug. 25, Mills says, at which point the full results will be submitted for publication.
Yet you also don't know the longterm effects of taking Ivermectin. How do you know that taking that drug, that also isn't approved as a COVID-19 treatment or preventative isn't doing more damage? I'm glad you did your own research but this seems like cherry picking data from something that has been studied far less than the vaccines in regard for COVID-19 treatment. The vaccines went through all phases of the clinical trials and even before they were issued for widespread use had had larger Phase III trials than most drugs. Since then 100's of millions have taken then with very rare side effects, on par with 1 out of multiple million. You're more likely to get in a car accident on your way to getting a vaccine than you are to get a severe side effect from it.
That's what seems odd to me. He doesn’t want to to take a booster (perhaps twice a year), but will take a drug every month. He doesn't know the long term effects of the vaccine, but also doesn't know the long term effects of ivermectin.
"American Frontline Doctors". Sound safe enough? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Frontline_Doctors
Not sure about extended/long term use, but ivermectin has been around a very long time. I'd say its risk profile is a lot leaner than any given brand new drug (not that the vaccines in particular are dangerous).
Right... but, generality ivermectin is taken once. There may be a follow up dosage taken months later than that first dose.
IIRC Ivermectin's most common use is as a monthly preventive in animals like dogs, cats, horses, etc. Not human data of course, but it's something.
I am aware of that. It is just odd to me that someone is wary of long term effects of a vaccine (understandable), yet doesn't appear to be wary of a drug that is not designed for long term usage in humans as well as usage against COVID.
FWIW, there has been long-term use of ivermectin in humans. Annual or twice a year dosage over at least a decade for at-risk groups in endemic areas (with helminth infection). Don't know about long-term side effects of those groups. But again, studies show it has no clinical value to covid19 patients.
I have more stuffs involved Ivermectin and COVID for you, when I have time, I will post them. This link is about Ivermectin, it is a very detailed read about this life saving drug and the safety records. The off label used for COVID info is harder to find, it is easier to find the negative stuff they want you to read than the multiple trial studies that have already been done.
Why are you assuming I just want to read negative stuff? I try to find both sides of a story rather than the one that fits a particular narrative.
For me the decision was easy after what I saw the way my cousin recovered from COVID thanked to this drug. Like I’ve told you, I don’t take prescription drugs and for me to do this I have to weigh to risks and benefits really carefully with the inputs from my doctor. I’ve taken it for less than a year so only about 10 or 11 dosages( I have to check my records). Of course, I am wary of the potential long term side effects of it. I may want to stop and just use it when I need it, I’ve asked my doctor and he said it is no problem but it is up to me. Perhaps, when this latest spike is settled. The vaccine side effects short terms and long terms, I would not want to deal with it, but that’s just me.
You’ve misread intent, I did not mean you, I was talking about whoever they are out there, they don’t want you to have easy access to the good studies about Ivermectin and want you to see the negative results only. I have to find this podcast for you if I have time. Two Filipinos doctors are discussing about this drug usage in their country, fascinating podcast.
You see, that's what gets me. All the excuses I hear about not taking the vaccine ("side effects"), but it's okay to hype up a drug that (may? will?) help you after Covid kicks you down because you weren't vaccinated. You don't trust the vaccine but you look to the expensive less readily-available solution later. For every, say, Eric Clapton with his bad experience, there are many millions who take the vaccine with no problem. Some get sick for a day but it goes away. Thankfully my mom finally consulted her doctor ("but my diabetes, my neuropathy"; "just get the f***ing shot" [paraphrase]).
I appreciate you for this post, well thought out with good reasoning without bullying and shaming people who don’t or can’t take this vaccine. For me, I’ve done this Ivermectin protocol even before the vaccine came out, I’ve spent almost 2 months researching it so I did not do it blindly. I have a cousin who lives overseas and this drug saved him from COVID and I was sold after that. Taking prophylactically is another story but I’m doing under doctor’s supervision and you’re right, taking forever is silly so I am considering stopping it when this spike is settled and have it on hands just in case. I just wish everyone here nothing but to be safe and healthy in whatever route you’re taking, whether it’s the vaccine or preventative drug therapy.
Dude no one is hyping this drug. Half of my extended family is taking the vaccine, I will never fault them or trying to to stop them. This is strictly a personal decision. The anger from both sides of the crowd is just insane. BTW- the drug is not expensive, 3mg for 8 tablets at $9.96( US pharmacy discount card pricing), I use it monthly at 12mg a dose so that’s about a couple of coffee. The natural supplements to go with this drug cost me a lot more. Hey, but that’s just me.
