(no title)
apinstein | 4 years ago
I don’t care what the outcome is, treatments are treatments. I have no hope for a particular outcome. It’s just bad science. And I might argue bad faith science.
Potential biases: for instance in Brazil there is a very high level of prior Covid infections. What I’d previously infected people were more likely to opt in to treatment bc they are more afraid of reinfection, and the result came from reduction due to prior immunity? What if people that took the Medecine behaved differently than non-takers?
nradov|4 years ago
While this study is rather weak and doesn't give us any really definitive results it is a useful data point that can be rolled into future meta analyses.
apinstein|4 years ago
> Results: Of the 223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered for the study, a total of 159,561 subjects were included in the analysis: 113,845 (71.3%) regular ivermectin users and 45,716 (23.3%) non-users.
That reads to me like 160k people participated, and 113k optionally choose to take Ivermectin as prophylaxis.
Am I missing something ?
incrudible|4 years ago
I'm not aware of any double-blind placebo-controlled trial that is powerful enough to determine risk reduction for death or severe disease in vaccines, much less over several months.
iandanforth|4 years ago
cloutchaser|4 years ago