[-] Harko-Luxa | 57 points | Apr 04 2020 04:25:58

Sounds like bullshit to me. I hope that it’s not.

[-] mrestiaux | 36 points | Apr 04 2020 04:33:56

Do you have any training that merits your opinion?

[-] X-003 | 74 points | Apr 04 2020 04:58:54

Absolutely. I've been a naughty baker now for 17 years and my opinion is that ass cakes are both delicious and easy to frost.

[-] mrestiaux | 16 points | Apr 04 2020 05:05:20

Fair.

[-] DirtyProjector | 13 points | Apr 04 2020 08:46:13

They have a feeling, so it must be right. The other day they had a feeling they were hungry and it turned out to be true, when after eating 2 cheeseburgers and a popsicle, the feeling went away.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 11:44:08

Because no one ever makes fake posts and claims on massively talked about topics to get tons of likes or spread fake news to be assholes?

[-] DirtyProjector | 3 points | Apr 04 2020 15:18:14

Not sure what that has to do with this article, which references a highly respected scientist and the study itself is well done and applauded by physicians. It may not work, but this guys “feeling” doesn’t really have any impact on whether it is or not because he or she likely has no clue about the subject.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 0 points | Apr 04 2020 19:36:27

I have never heard of this "highly respected" scientist so why would that matter not that you couldn't just look up a highly respected scientist and put their name down. I'm not saying I have massive ties into the science community, but I do like science news and generally the scientists name is mentioned but I've never heard of this one so he must not be that respected because I've never heard of them.

[-] DirtyProjector | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 20:10:40

You haven’t heard of him because it’s a woman, you sexist moron. https://research.monash.edu/en/persons/kylie-wagstaff

I read science articles so I know things durrrr

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 0 points | Apr 04 2020 21:00:55

I'm sexist because I accidentally mistook Kylie for kyle? "I didn't make this single mistake so I'm better than this person durrrr". Also you gotta put parentheses or it looks like that's just how you talk 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[-] DirtyProjector | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 22:57:58

Do you know how people say “I’m not racist, i have a black friend”? You just did this with science literature. You do realize no person who could be taken seriously would ever say “I read a lot of science articles I know all the well respected scientists” especially if they can’t even properly read someone’s name and gender an articles author just based off preconceived notions.

[-] Skelly_YT452 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 20:09:20

The can’t be so highly respected argument is bs. The average public doesn’t know even the most popular scientists he doesn’t need to be highly respected in magazines if he’s highly respected by people who work with him.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 20:54:55

Can you tell me why he's highly respected? I researched him and couldn't find much. And if he's only highly respected by the people who work with him that doesn't actually mean much. I highly respected my coworkers before I got laid off too and they weren't even good at their jobs lol (I don't miss taco Bell)

[-] Walpurgisborn | 1 points | Apr 05 2020 02:41:27

If we were making tacos, I would take your highly respected taco makers into consideration. If we are dealing with biologics, I would take the recommendation of biologists on who should be considered highly respected.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 05 2020 10:37:34

But my reasoning is if he was that highly respected he should have been mentioned at some point, and I haven't even seen any news of this. It's just hard to believe without a good source

[-] Walpurgisborn | 2 points | Apr 05 2020 13:43:55

She. Dr. Wagstaff is a woman.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/search/advanced?qs=Kylie%20Wagstaff&show=100

She seems to specialise in Cell Transport physiology, and while Monash lists her specialty as Cancer research, many of her most recent papers are involving the use of importin inhibitors as antivirals. Since ivermectin is an importin inhibitor, makes sense that her or her team would have hit on this as a possible treatment option.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 2 points | Apr 05 2020 17:39:10

Upvoting for being logical and not toxic

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 05 2020 17:38:20

Yeah I was corrected earlier but much less civil lol. I thought it said Kyle lol, but I think I got the same results. I agree that it made sense but I still think it's worded to be more amazing than it is and while the theory is sound they haven't been able to go through with the actual effects on the body.

[-] Walpurgisborn | 1 points | Apr 05 2020 18:17:48

Yeah, it's still early, although since it's a medication already considered safe for human use, I think that will speed efficacy testing.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 05 2020 18:38:39

Very important to know! This isn't fully considered safe. I suck at technology so I can't repost it but there is a comment made earlier that explains why .

[-] hazzagt3 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 11:41:11

With feelings like that it’s a shame they didn’t get a feeling that a virus is gonna hit the world

[-] Harko-Luxa | 11 points | Apr 04 2020 04:39:21

Yeah bro, it seems too good to be true. I really hope that it works, I do. Just sounds like bullshit.

[-] Doc04 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 11:23:28

there is a lot of drugs that already do that in lab. The provlem is to know if it can work within a body, in a dose that is not toxic for the patient. I am no scientist but my guess is that enough bleach would kill the virus in a tube...

[-] Mesnaga | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 10:29:28

Ah yes, opinions. Those ones that need backup and training. Not to be confused with facts or statements.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 19:40:25

He did say he hopes it's not bullshit why get so defensive?

[-] mrestiaux | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 20:10:25

I wasn’t getting defensive. I was asking if he had any prior training in the matter. An honest no was fine lol.

[-] goosey27 | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 16:36:11

What is bullshit about this? They are not touting it as a cure to COVID-19 or even that it works in humans, just performed a study to show that Ivermectin in vitro reduced viral loads in cultured cells infected with the virus.

Since this medication is already widely available and manufactured for safe use in humans for a variety of parasitic infections with most commonly mild adverse effects, it should prompt a clinical trial investigating it's efficacy at a variety of dosing strategies for COVID-19 patients. Sure it may underperform in those trials if they happen like many of the previously touted "covid-19 medicines" but it's just another possibility and worth further investigating.

[-] PM_YOUR_WALLPAPER | 2 points | Apr 21 2020 10:26:31

Well it's not. First human study just completed 70% reduction in deaths for those treated with it in a study..

The principal outcome was to assess the association of ivermectin administration with survival in COVID-19. Results: The cohort (including 704 ivermectin treated and 704 controls) was derived from 169 hospitals across 3 continents with COVID-19 illness. The patients were matched for age, sex, race or ethnicity, comorbidities and a illness severity score (qSOFA). Of those requiring mechanical ventilation fewer patients died in the ivermectin group (7.3% versus 21.3%) and overall death rates were lower with ivermectin (1.4% versus 8.5%; HR 0.20 CI 95% 0.11-0.37, p<0.0001).

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3580524

[-] 49orth | 21 points | Apr 04 2020 04:45:12

From the article:

A Monash University-led study has shown a single dose of the drug Ivermectin could stop the SARS-CoV-2 virus growing in cell culture.

[-] WaldenFont | 53 points | Apr 04 2020 05:07:29

Well, so does bleach. This is still a long way off.

[-] baskerzeke | 33 points | Apr 04 2020 06:12:09

Except this is already used in people. Bleach isn’t normally given to people to treat illnesses...I hope

[-] extentics | 18 points | Apr 04 2020 08:08:11

so you mean I shouldn’t be drinking bleach to prevent getting corona virus?

[-] Taurol | 9 points | Apr 04 2020 11:19:28

I think there was a pastor in like South Africa or somewhere that was advocating drinking some chemical cleaner to prevent corona. Like a bunch of people died.

[-] GrizzlyGoober | 6 points | Apr 04 2020 12:15:10

What an idiot, everyone knows you actually have to put it up your arse.

[-] wakamoto1105 | 4 points | Apr 04 2020 13:07:15

^ this guy takes medicines

[-] whats_your_style | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 14:34:45

Or drugs

[-] Walpurgisborn | 2 points | Apr 05 2020 02:37:41

You mean our president, a pool cleaner, and some poor bastard in Alabama.

[-] baskerzeke | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 14:34:55

Technically it will get rid of it.

[-] pirate_door91 | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 18:24:42

But you know some idiot Facebook mom will share the shit out of this information.

[-] Fixtit | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 18:40:10

Wait, you want to tell me, that you are not doing this already?

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 19:51:48

Shit I thought i was smart

[-] rydenaaron | 1 points | Apr 27 2020 04:39:58

Well, Trump says yes

[-] baskerzeke | 2 points | Apr 27 2020 06:03:41

Well played.

[-] DirtyProjector | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 08:46:55

A long way off? As long as they can get funding and find a proper dose it’s ready to go the moment they do.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 3 points | Apr 04 2020 19:54:50

No they didn't actually prove it works. It's just worded to get you excited it just worked to slow the virus and make cells less stressed to fight it. That might still not work inside the human body as there are many other factors to consider that are added then.

[-] DirtyProjector | 4 points | Apr 04 2020 20:11:55

They proved it worked in vitro, which is not proving it works in vivo. I never said it would work, i said if they find a correct dose they don’t have to go through a long clinical trial because it’s already safe for humans.

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 21:05:55

You said as long as they have the funding it's ready to go. If you meant it's good to go for experimentation you should say that, but if not this comment is false. And that's not actually what you said.

[-] PM_YOUR_WALLPAPER | 1 points | Apr 21 2020 10:26:52

This is still a long way off.

Well it's not. First human study just completed 70% reduction in deaths for those treated with it in a study..

The principal outcome was to assess the association of ivermectin administration with survival in COVID-19. Results: The cohort (including 704 ivermectin treated and 704 controls) was derived from 169 hospitals across 3 continents with COVID-19 illness. The patients were matched for age, sex, race or ethnicity, comorbidities and a illness severity score (qSOFA). Of those requiring mechanical ventilation fewer patients died in the ivermectin group (7.3% versus 21.3%) and overall death rates were lower with ivermectin (1.4% versus 8.5%; HR 0.20 CI 95% 0.11-0.37, p<0.0001).

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3580524

[-] Hashbrownsplease | 4 points | Apr 04 2020 08:59:18

Common horse antibiotic, good for chickens too

[-] jdsundevils | 20 points | Apr 04 2020 04:01:19

🙏🏽 Please let this be it!

[-] Donnakebabmeat | 18 points | Apr 04 2020 03:34:50

Fantastic news! Proven to reduce effects of Covid-19 in 24 hours, and kill it in 48hours..

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 19:55:18

Proven?

[-] Donnakebabmeat | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 22:36:41

Yes, this is why I posted it.

[-] okstatevette | 12 points | Apr 04 2020 11:49:03

Oh lord, people are gonna start taking their dog’s heartguard next...

[-] thatgreenmaid | 2 points | Apr 05 2020 02:52:53

this was my first thought....lol

[-] adifromnyc | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 11:46:39

More on this: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-04/monash-researchers-hopes-for-coronavirus-drug-treatment-warning/12121578

[-] dirty_spider_95 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 21:30:44

This is super important, read this!!!

[-] Hannub | 5 points | Apr 04 2020 11:52:17

Oportunity for a bunch of uneducated ignorant arrogant to comment that this is fake news and that is nothing but horse antibiotics.

[-] EndOfHummanity | 3 points | Apr 05 2020 23:47:00

Its like they want to have no hope. I dont get it.

[-] Hannub | 1 points | Apr 06 2020 00:04:43

Me neither. They should at least have some decency to go do some research before commenting.

[-] AddlebrainedChow | 3 points | Apr 04 2020 09:59:19

fakenews

[-] MrJamesAndWatch | 3 points | Apr 04 2020 12:11:05

But does it work outside of that lab?

[-] PM_YOUR_WALLPAPER | 2 points | Apr 21 2020 10:27:33

Yes

The principal outcome was to assess the association of ivermectin administration with survival in COVID-19. Results: The cohort (including 704 ivermectin treated and 704 controls) was derived from 169 hospitals across 3 continents with COVID-19 illness. The patients were matched for age, sex, race or ethnicity, comorbidities and a illness severity score (qSOFA). Of those requiring mechanical ventilation fewer patients died in the ivermectin group (7.3% versus 21.3%) and overall death rates were lower with ivermectin (1.4% versus 8.5%; HR 0.20 CI 95% 0.11-0.37, p<0.0001).

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3580524

[-] CandyNJ | 2 points | Apr 04 2020 14:00:24

Sounds encouraging, thanks for the post

[-] Skelly_YT452 | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 20:12:10

This would still take a while if it can become a vaccine as this virus is also known for reducing the infected persons ability to clear the infection.

[-] curtydc | 1 points | Apr 04 2020 22:47:41

I swear there is a new article every week about a drug that kills Covid-19, I want it to be real, but at this point I don't believe it.

[-] sallysloan | 1 points | Apr 08 2020 04:36:27

Ivermectin is a common anti-parasitic for goats.

[-] dkjfhalskdjfh | 1 points | May 19 2020 08:36:23

I'm trying very hard to figure out why this community exists, and moreover why its only post with more than literally 3 comments, half of which have more upvotes than there are subscribers, is full of people who seem mostly hostile and skeptical to the subject of the subreddit, and obscure as fuck drug. Can you help me?

[-] sexyama | 1 points | May 19 2020 09:48:02

not sure what you're asking, the sub has no agenda and what people upvote or comment is outside of my control

[-] dkjfhalskdjfh | 1 points | May 19 2020 19:24:09

It was a queston from genuine confusion and not meant to be leading. It looks like this thread was crossposted to r/upliftingnews, and all the participation came from there.

I found this place because I was searching for recent mentions of the YouTube channel MedCram, because he reported yesterday that he was having videos removed by YouTube, and I wanted to see if any appropriate outrage had started around that yet (unfortunately seems like not).