massimaux | 15 points
Efficacy and Safety of Ivermectin for Treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19 Pandemic (2020-11-13 EGYPT)Link: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-100956/v1
Study design: A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial (RCCT) study design was carried out on on 600 subjects; 400 patients and 200 health care and household contacts at Benha and Kafrelsheikh University Hospitals.
Study setting: Benha and Kafrelsheikh University Hospitals (COVID-19 Isolation Hospitals).
Study period: The study was carried out from 8th June to 15th September 2020.
*Study population (Sampling Design and Sample Size):
The study was conducted on 600 subjects; 400 patients and 200 health care and household contacts that were divided into 6 groups:
4 treatment groups: 2 with IVM+SoC and 2 with HCQ+SoC
Group I: 100 patients with Mild/Moderate COVID-19 infection received a 4-days course of Ivermectin plus standard of care;
Group II: 100 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care;
Group III: 100 patients with severe COVID-19 infection received Ivermectin plus standard of care;
Group IV: 100 patients with Severe COVID-19 infection received hydroxyxholorquine plus standard of care. Routine laboratory investigations and RT-PCR were reported before and after initiation of treatment.
2 prophylaxis groups: IVM+PPE and PPE only
Group V stick to personal protective equipment (PPE) plus Ivermectin 400mcg / kg to be repeated after one week, and
Group VI stick to PPE only and both groups V&VI were followed for two weeks.
Results:
[-] strongerthrulife | 5 points
Has this been posted in COVID19
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 3 points
Yes, here. Well-received! Add comments please.
Edit: It has not been posted to /r/coronavirus.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 4 points
I was surprised to find this study posted to /r/medicine. I was permanently banned from that sub for a post about the Egyptian and Argentine prophylaxis studies, for posting misinformation (they apparently didn't bother to follow the links I provided). This is the sole post at this time:
I'm posting this here hoping some of you may notice anything... suspicious or unreliable with these results. Thanks!
If it's a good result for ivermectin, there MUST be something wrong with the study! 😡
/u/massimaux, would you please post your entire post there?
Edit: The same redditor posted the study to the science sub here.
Edit: The study was removed on /r/science.
Hi tazcel, your post has been removed for the following reason(s)
It does not include references to new, peer-reviewed research. Please feel free to post it in our sister subreddit /r/EverythingScience.
/u/massimaux, would you please post your entire post there?
You mean, posting my entire text as a comment here?
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 3 points
Yes! 307 thousand read that sub! This is a great study to put before them, and a lot won't bother to look at the paper. Maybe put the punchline at the top, like the /r/covid19 post.
0% (vs 4% in ctrl group) died from (initially) MILD COVID
2% (vs 20% in ctrl group ) died from SEVERE COVID
2% of household members...
Done
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 2 points
Thanks! Now do /r/coronavirus! :)
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 2 points
/r/coronavirus has 2.3 million readers!
It removes it automatically.
Sorry, this post has been removed by the moderators of r/Coronavirus**.**
Moderators remove posts from feeds for a variety of reasons, including keeping communities safe, civil, and true to their purpose.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 1 points
WTF? Ask the moderators to restore the post. It's 100% legit!!!
Please, you do it because for me this is the situation:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/comments/ju5j4i/efficacy_and_safety_of_ivermectin_for_treatment/
Please wait until your account is at least a couple of days old and has at least 200 comment karma. You can get karma at /r/FreeKarma4U
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 1 points
Sorry, I didn't see this.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 1 points
327 thousand readers; the sub has gained 20K since I last looked.
Just come and see what these first-world-RCT-dogmatics are discussing. Unfuckingbelievable.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 1 points
I'm not asking you to go back into the lion's den -- but it would be interesting to ask /r/medicine in that thread "Which drugs do you think are better, for covid19 therapy and prophylaxis?" and "Given the dearth of available treatments, and the weak evidence for Remdesivir -- in the face of these results, why wouldn't you give ivermectin a try, esp. given it's outstanding safety record?"
Look, I'm so pissed, I don't want to discuss with them in a civil manner. They are f.ckers.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 2 points
Unfortunately, it's not their loss, it's their patients loss. I hear statement after statement from doctors and public health people that there are no drugs for prophylaxis or outpatient treatment and only a couple of inpatients -- and want to SCREAM. Fucking ivermectin!!!
Yeah, but how do you know ivermectin works?
Have there been huge ivermectin studies conducted by first-world research groups led by big names and published in prestigious medical journals?
No. So, how can you possibly claim that ivermectin saves lives?
Isn't this argument logical and based on facts?
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 4 points
What an excellent post, Mass! Thanks a lot!
[-] Reddie_Mercury | 2 points
Mild COVID
IVM 0% vs 4% in ctrl group died
Severe COVID
IVM 2% vs 20% in ctrl group died
WOW!
[-] No_Entertainment_764 | 1 points
Was this clinical trial registered anywhere?
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 2 points
I searched the WHO portal for the title, didn't find it. That doesn't prove anything because the report title doesn't necessarily match the registered title.
[-] pairyhenis | -1 points
Of course it wasn't
Only thing not expected in this trial was the terrible results in early dosing for HCQ. 22% progression and 4% deaths is way below the usual early treatment results of HCQ specially if you read the Egyptian STD care that was given with the HCQ included Zinc and Zmax.
Also one question for home use of IVM. Dr. Chang from Peru says to avoid Paracetamol while this trial used very high doses in all groups. Which is the ideal usage of antipyretics?
Actually I'm quite appalled. There is so much empirical evidence that the HCQ+ and IVM+ cocktails are most effective because of the cat-ionic zinc and the macrolide antibioticum. AND that it should be used at the earliest stage possible of the disease. It is beyond me why they didn't include the reportedly most effective protocol in their study. Unforgivable as more deaths could have been prevented.
[-] TrumpLyftAlles | 1 points
antibioticum
I've never heard of this. Are there HCQ + antibioticum or IVM + antibioticum trials?
[-] strongerthrulife | 11 points | Nov 14 2020 12:46:36
This is by far the most encouraging yet!
permalink