TehCaster | 4 points
WHO: We recommend not to use ivermectin in patients with COVID-19 except in the context of a clinical trial.https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-therapeutics-2021.1
[-] TheInterceptor007 | 7 points
No surprises here WHO is useless from the beginning of the pandemic
[-] PeruvianPotato | 5 points
[-] Hovercraft_Time | 5 points
The least surprising event of the pandemic.
Although the cost may be low per patient, the GDG panel raised concerns about diverting attention and resources away from care likely to provide a benefit such as corticosteroids in patients with severe COVID-19 and other supportive care interventions. Also, use of ivermectin for COVID-19 would divert drug supply away from pathologies for which it is clearly indicated, potentially contributing to drug shortages, especially for helminth control and elimination programmes. Other endemic infections that may worsen with corticosteroids should be considered. If steroids are used in the treatment of COVID-19, empiric treatment with ivermectin may still be considered in strongyloidiasis endemic areas, at the discretion of clinicians overseeing treatment, albeit not for treatment of COVID-19 itself.
[-] stereomatch | 14 points
It seems the reasons given areunrelated to the efficacy of Ivermectin:
we will run out of drug for river blindness - so they are sensing such organic enthusiasm for ivermectin that it will run out but steroids will not run out? Both are generic by the way. Ivermectin may be produced in even higher volume because of it's large scale use for farming animals
it will detract doctors from using steroids (!) - how did they even think of this? Was there a possibility of this? Steroids are essential for post-day-8 inflammatory syndrome and are complementary. All known protocols using ivermectin advocate using steroids.
completely ignores the early treatment niche - or treatment-at-home - for which ivermectin is suitable also, and where it has no competitors because there is no early treatment policy endorsed by WHO etc.
All in all a very illogical set of arguments.
This is another gem:
Applying the agreed values and preferences (see Section 5), the GDG inferred that almost all well-informed patients would want to receive ivermectin only in the context of a randomized trial, given that the evidence left a very high degree of uncertainty in effect on mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for hospitalization and other critical outcomes of interest and there was a possibility of harms, such as treatment-associated SAEs. The panel anticipated little variation in values and preferences between patients when it came to this intervention.
Gee WHO, thank you very much for inferring for me what I would want. And for everyone in Phillipines. And everyone in South Africa.
So, we have a medicine with better safety profile than ibuprofen, and according to WHO's document there's now low quality evidence it's 81% effective in reducing mortality.
How the fuck you get to "almost all well-informed patients would want to receive ivermectin only in the context of a randomized trial"? And yes, 100% agree that maybe it would be good to ask the patients instead of deciding for them...
[-] iloveviggo123 | 1 points
..but they will allow experimental mRNA vaccines on to the public. yeah.
[-] akaariai | 7 points | Mar 31 2021 16:47:32
Strange that Andrew Hill's meta analysis had 18 RCTs listed, WHO's analysis has just five.
EDIT: Answering my own question, the five included in the plot are the ones comparing IVM to standard of care. The rest compare to something else.
Their point estimate is 0.19 risk of mortality when using ivm, and this is statistically significant. But due to risk of bias they recommend no use.
permalink
[-] Haitchpeasauce | 3 points | Apr 01 2021 04:40:50
"Standard of care" is such a slippery term, since in many countries where Ivermectin was studied used HCQ as part of their standard of care. Does the WHO consider Remdesivir standard of care? Are studies excluded that used Doxycycline or Azithromycin in either the treatment or control arms? In the very next table we see HCQ is associated with no clinical benefit and some trend to harm. Whether that is true or not, the benefits are clearly evident with Ivermectin if HCQ is considered as good as a placebo or standard of care.
permalink
[-] iloveviggo123 | 1 points | Apr 04 2021 03:59:00
very good questions. more controls are needed to isolate the ivermectin effect. but the studies i’ve read show it is very effective at reducing covid symptoms
permalink