New Ivermectin study

[Dwatted Wabbit]

Originally Posted by Navyshow

I had one of the worst colds or viruses in years. I am on week 3, pretty much recovered but still with some residuals. I am vaxxed. I had full faith in Ivermectin's abilities based on studies and reports of people turning around immediately in their early stages of Covid or Flu. As soon as I felt this slight sore throat coming on, I started the published Ivermectin protocol for early stages of sickness. Along with increased levels of C and zinc. Have been doing Vit D/K supplementation as well all along.

Results: NADA. Ivermectin turned out to be a huge nothing burger. Husb took Nyquil and Afrin spray (no Ivermectin or supplements) and his case was milder/shorter than mine. I haven't been that sick in a long time. Even if this were not Covid, a rhinovirus is the same family of virus that Covid is. Ivermectin is reported as an antiviral against these viruses. Ivermectin did not work for me.

But at least now I know.

A study of two is not a study. It's "what happened at my house."

Sorry you got so sick. Obviously it's all your husband's fault.

[Good4Nothin]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

That is /not/ what clinical trials are, at all. A clinical trial will hypothesize:

"We have this thing. We think it will do that. Please find out if it will or not, and the risks involved, and side effects, and all other details you can find on it."

You're not giving the scientist the conclusion and ordering them to prove it. That's junk science. I can prove that water is a deadly toxin, with junk science. I'd be correct too. 100% spot on accurate.

The drug industry pays scientists to conform that their drugs work and are safe. There are lots of tricks that can be used. And if all else fails, don't publish the research that went the wrong way.

[Medical Lab Guy]

Originally Posted by Good4Nothin

The drug industry pays scientists to conform that their drugs work and are safe. There are lots of tricks that can be used. And if all else fails, don't publish the research that went the wrong way.

So you want the federal government to pay for the studies instead? You want the rich drug companies to propose on paper a drug and then have the federal government and the taxpayers pay for the safety and efficacy studies. That's great. If they show good results then the drug company can make a lot of money. If the drug doesn't work then the federal government loses money.

As far as publishing failed studies by private drug companies you want one drug company to publish stating that the drug did not work after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars doing the research so another competing company can read all the research they have done and then not waste a dime of their own money and carry on from there. Why would Apple show all of their research failures and successes and have Microsoft learn from all of that only to outcompete them in the end?

What country uses your proposed model? North Korea?

[Good4Nothin]

Originally Posted by Medical Lab Guy

So you want the federal government to pay for the studies instead? You want the rich drug companies to propose on paper a drug and then have the federal government and the taxpayers pay for the safety and efficacy studies. That's great. If they show good results then the drug company can make a lot of money. If the drug doesn't work then the federal government loses money.

As far as publishing failed studies by private drug companies you want one drug company to publish stating that the drug did not work after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars doing the research so another competing company can read all the research they have done and then not waste a dime of their own money and carry on from there. Why would Apple show all of their research failures and successes and have Microsoft learn from all of that only to outcompete them in the end?

What country uses your proposed model? North Korea?

Where did I propose anything? I just stated how it works. The system is utterly corrupt. But replacing it with central planning totalitarianism would be even worse.

What we can do, within a supposedly free society, is to at least become aware of the corruption. Stop thinking that because an RCT showed a drug is safe and effective, therefore it is safe and effective.

The FDA is supposed to verify the drug industry findings, but the FDA is now owned by the drug industry. This is well known and not controversial. Does it make sense to accept rampant corruption? Between the drug industry and the financial industry, and mainstream news, we have pretty much stopped being a free country.