top | item 28978264

(no title)

kdtop3 | 4 years ago

I think the point of the article is that if some government DID spend the money to properly research this, it would take time, as in MANY years. I remember many decades ago that Vitamin E was thought to be a great supplement to reduce coronary heart disease etc. It was then studied by following 10,000 people for 4.5 years [1] and it was determined that the hint of benefit seen in observational studies turned out to be false hope. So with much time and money, it could be found that there is benefit in ivermectin. But the current state is that the FDA [2] and CDC [2] recommend AGAINST ivermectin use for treatment or prevention of SARS-COV2 infection / Covid-19.

Like the article says: science is slow, pandemics are fast.

[1] https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminE-HealthProfessiona... [2] https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-shoul... [3] https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2021/pdf/CDC_HAN_449.pdf

discuss

order

marklubi|4 years ago

> it would take time, as in MANY years

So just like the time required to create the COVID vaccines that are "safe" and "effective"?

Snark aside, I'm exhausted hearing how hard it is to do some things, but other's are "science" and don't warrant further exploration.

murphy214|4 years ago

Not to mention the Merck therapeutic that just got emergency use auth that study was done on < 1000 people I think lol