Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It can be a clue. A good or bad one. But garbage in garbage out, depending on the grouping of included studies.
Instead of being vague, let's be specific.
What's wrong with the grouping of studies?
Quote:
Database of all ivermectin COVID-19 studies. 128 studies, 83 peer reviewed, 65 with results comparing treatment and control groups.
And it's updated in real time. If a meta-analysis is done, peer reviewed, and one of those studies they used is pulled, it's then outdated unlike this one.
And it's updated in real time. If a meta-analysis is done, peer reviewed, and one of those studies they used is pulled, it's then outdated unlike this one.
All studies listed.
I'll let you do all the work. I believe that ivermectin has some use in some selected patients presenting early. No panacea, but safe. The overall outlook based on a multitude of studies and IMO is that is of some benefit.
I'll let you do all the work. I believe that ivermectin has some use in some selected patients presenting early. No panacea, but safe. The overall outlook based on a multitude of studies and IMO is that is of some benefit.
Well then we're in agreement. I believe it's safe and has benefit. And best of all, can be combined with other treatments or vaccinations.
People have shown you a lot of data that ivermectin works for Covid and you have ignored all of it. There is no point in even trying to discuss it with you.
Low quality studies are not evidence that Ivermectin has significant benefits against COVID. Try again.
Low quality studies are not evidence that Ivermectin has significant benefits against COVID. Try again.
Your opinion on what constitutes a low quality study is suspect, since the studies you presented were all low quality (some were terrible, and admitted it) and 4/6 showed benefit of IVM, so you didn't even read them or don't know how to read.
Your opinion on what constitutes a low quality study is suspect, since the studies you presented were all low quality (some were terrible, and admitted it) and 4/6 showed benefit of IVM, so you didn't even read them or don't know how to read.
This in not my opinion. It is a FACT that we have no HIGH quality studies showing SIGNIFICANT benefit of using Ivermectin. You still have failed multiple times to provide any data showing otherwise.
This in not my opinion. It is a FACT that we have no HIGH quality studies showing SIGNIFICANT benefit of using Ivermectin. You still have failed multiple times to provide any data showing otherwise.
Learn what fact and opinion means.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
