An example of shallow reading of papers by physicians - here he is quoting the failed Colombia JAMA paper:

https://twitter.com/FaheemYounus/status/1377226823277363201?s=19

Myth: Ivermectin works because my doctor gave it to me and I got better Fact: You got better by chance, not by ivermectin Read below. 476 patients studied. Showed no benefit. Knowing what doesn’t work is also important to avoid unnecessary treatments https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389

permalink

What a turd 🤦🏻‍♀️

So late to the party . . .

permalink

It is not this physician's fault - not all physicians are committed enough to research everything on their own.

Most rely on a network of trust to inform them correctly.

He is going by what he superficially hears from his info sources. He probably does not have the time to do his own analysis.

 

For completeness I will give the reasons his argument is incorrect:

The paper he has chosen to bank on is the flawed Colombia JAMA paper - which had numerous issues:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bz5gd7Y6w0 Protocol violations in Colombian ivermectin study compromise results

March 25, 2021

MedicalUpdateOnline

Dr David Scheim explains how multiple protocol violations and widespread use of over-the-counter ivermectin could have compromised the results of a recent controlled trial of ivermectin for covid-19 in Colombia. ​

 

They did the trial in Cali, Colombia - where the mayor was distributing ivermectin to everyone. Why did they pick this place?

Both arms ie Ivermectin and placebo did unexpectedly well (because even placebo people were taking no risk and were taking Ivermectin on the side probably!).

Their paper outlines problems with trial protocol as well - they found even placebo group was given ivermectin (how does that happen!).

They say they removed those data points but it raises questions about the legitimacy of the rest of the trial.

As soon as it was published - on cue the NYTimes CNN issued very definitive headlines "ivermectin doesn't work" - when that was not the takeaway from the paper which simply found little difference between both arms.

FDA went out of it's way to say to not take ivermectin - but also concedes they haven't studied it (why haven't they studied it?).

Merck the co-discoverer of ivermectin - went out of their way to say it doesn't work - reason? Because they are working on a proprietary version called Molnupiravir (a problematic drug still to be vetted).

Meanwhile ivermectin - it is generic.

The existence of an acknowledged treatment could put the Emergency Use Authorization of drugs like Remdesivir on hold (earned $3 billion so far for Gilead while not being considered effective).

Some people point to vaccines as also being dependent on Emergency Use Authorization - however governments could put in place exceptions to enable vaccines to still be used - since they would lower the burden on the healthcare system.

Knowing what doesn’t work is also important to avoid unnecessary treatments

I wonder if this particular physician will be as dismissive of Remdesivir as an "unnecessary treatment".

permalink