Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More! | ivermectin thailand | ร้านขายหนังใหม่ที่ดีที่สุด

Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More! | ivermectin thailand.

[penci_button link=”#” text_color=”#000000″]ชมวิดีโอโดยละเอียดด้านล่าง[/penci_button]

รูปภาพที่เกี่ยวข้องกับบทความ Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More!.

Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More!
Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More!

ข้อมูลที่เกี่ยวข้องกับหัวข้อ ivermectin thailand.

Ivermectin และ COVID-19 เผยแพร่ใน JAMA (วารสารสมาคมการแพทย์อเมริกัน)! วัตถุประสงค์ทบทวนการศึกษาอย่างครบถ้วน! อภิปรายเพิ่มเติมเกี่ยวกับ JAMA, การศึกษาอื่นๆ เกี่ยวกับ Ivermectin, วิธีการทำงานของ Ivermectin และอื่นๆ Ivermectin มักใช้เป็นยาต้านปรสิตทั่วโลก พบว่ามีคุณสมบัติต้านไวรัสในหลอดทดลองได้ แต่ไม่เคยมีการใช้ในปริมาณมากในการติดเชื้อไวรัสในอดีต ตั้งแต่เดือนเมษายนที่ผ่านมา 2020 Ivermectin ได้รับการศึกษาถึงประสิทธิภาพในการป้องกันและรักษา COVID-19 เราได้ครอบคลุมการศึกษาเหล่านี้หลายสิบชิ้น (ลิงก์ในเพลย์ลิสต์ด้านล่าง!) บางส่วนได้รับการตีพิมพ์และบางส่วนยังอยู่ระหว่างการพิมพ์ล่วงหน้า ในช่วงไม่กี่เดือนที่ผ่านมา Ivermectin ได้รับความสนใจจากการศึกษาจำนวนมากขึ้นซึ่งพบว่ามีประโยชน์ใน COVID-19 รวมถึงบุคคลและองค์กรจำนวนมากที่สนับสนุนการใช้ Ivermectin เมื่อเร็ว ๆ นี้ มีการเผยแพร่ผลการศึกษาใน JAMA เพื่อดูการใช้ ivermectin ใน COVID-19 ที่ไม่รุนแรง ในวิดีโอนี้ เราจะคุยกันก่อนว่าทำไมการเผยแพร่ใน JAMA จึงได้รับความสนใจอย่างมาก การศึกษาครั้งนี้ก็ไม่มีข้อยกเว้น จากนั้นเราจะเจาะลึกการศึกษาเพิ่มเติมที่ศึกษา Ivermectin ใน COVID-19 รวมถึงประเทศที่กำลังใช้ Ivermectin ใน COVID-19 จากนั้นเราจะทำภาพรวมโดยสังเขปเกี่ยวกับวิธีที่ Ivermectin อาจใช้ในการรักษาหรือป้องกันการติดเชื้อ COVID-19 สุดท้าย เราจะเจาะลึกลงไปในการศึกษาใหม่ล่าสุดนี้ รวมถึงความคิดของเราเกี่ยวกับสิ่งที่การศึกษานี้อาจแสดงให้เห็นจริงๆ ดูวิดีโอสำหรับรายละเอียดทั้งหมดและอื่น ๆ ! ลิงก์ไปยังเพลย์ลิสต์ของเราเกี่ยวกับ Ivermectin และ COVID-19 ทั้งหมด: ลิงก์ไปยังการศึกษาของ JAMA: หากคุณชอบเนื้อหาและรู้สึกเอนเอียง คุณสามารถสนับสนุนเราได้ด้วยวิธีต่อไปนี้ เงินทุนจะนำไปใช้ในการซื้ออุปกรณ์/ซอฟต์แวร์ที่ดีขึ้น อุทิศเวลาให้กับช่องมากขึ้น และมุ่งมั่นที่จะนำช่องนี้ไปสู่อีกระดับต่อไป! PayPal: Buy Us A Coffee: ไซต์เจ๋งๆ ที่คุณสามารถบริจาคเงินไม่กี่ดอลลาร์ให้กับครีเอเตอร์ที่คุณเลือกเพื่อเป็นเคล็ดลับ! แท็บสมาชิกภาพ YouTube: มีปุ่ม “เข้าร่วม” ที่มุมบนขวาของหน้าแรกของช่องของเรา เราขอขอบคุณคุณ! เป็นผู้อุปถัมภ์ WBDR Patreon: รับสิทธิพิเศษ สินค้า และอื่นๆ อีกมากมาย! เราชอบที่จะมีส่วนร่วมในโลก #FOAMed ผ่าน Twitter เช่นกัน มาดูเราสิ เราชอบที่จะได้ยินจากคุณ! @ WhiteBoardDoct1 จะมีซีรีส์วิดีโอที่กำลังดำเนินอยู่ซึ่งใช้ข้อมูลล่าสุดเกี่ยวกับ COVID-19 แต่นี่เป็นช่องที่กำลังพัฒนา และวิดีโอใหม่อาจออกมาขัดแย้งกับข้อมูลก่อนหน้านั้น นั่นเป็นเรื่องปกติและเป็นลักษณะของสถานการณ์ทางคลินิกที่ดำเนินไปอย่างรวดเร็วและมีการพัฒนา อยู่กับเราในขณะที่เราทำงานเพื่อเปิดเผยความซับซ้อนของ COVID-19 มันคือความสำคัญทางคลินิก และผลกระทบทางสังคม *** นี่เป็นการศึกษาอย่างเคร่งครัดและอย่าเข้าใจผิดว่าเป็นคำแนะนำทางคลินิก โปรดตรวจสอบข้อมูลทั้งหมดด้วยแนวทางปฏิบัติที่เป็นที่ยอมรับและรูปแบบการปฏิบัติ *** การปฏิเสธความรับผิดวิดีโอนี้ไม่ได้ให้คำแนะนำทางการแพทย์ ข้อมูล ซึ่งรวมถึงแต่ไม่จำกัดเพียง ข้อความ กราฟิก รูปภาพ และเนื้อหาอื่น ๆ ที่มีอยู่บนเว็บไซต์นี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อให้ข้อมูลเท่านั้น ไม่มีเนื้อหาในเว็บไซต์นี้ที่มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อทดแทนคำแนะนำทางการแพทย์ การวินิจฉัย หรือการรักษาจากผู้เชี่ยวชาญ ขอคำแนะนำจากแพทย์ของคุณหรือผู้ให้บริการด้านสุขภาพที่มีคุณสมบัติเหมาะสมอื่น ๆ เสมอสำหรับคำถามใด ๆ ที่คุณอาจมีเกี่ยวกับเงื่อนไขทางการแพทย์หรือการรักษาและก่อนที่จะดำเนินการระบบการรักษาสุขภาพใหม่ และอย่าเพิกเฉยต่อคำแนะนำทางการแพทย์จากผู้เชี่ยวชาญหรือล่าช้าในการแสวงหาเพราะสิ่งที่คุณมี . อ่าน ดู หรือฟังในวิดีโอนี้ หรือวิดีโอ รายงาน ทวีตข้อความหรือแหล่งอื่นๆ ..

สามารถดูข้อมูลที่เป็นประโยชน์เพิ่มเติมได้ที่นี่: https://erynkruegermekash.com/movie

>>Erynkruegermekash.com เราหวังว่าข้อมูลนี้จะมีคุณค่าอย่างยิ่งสำหรับคุณ ขอบคุณมากที่รับชม.

ivermectin thailand – การค้นหาที่เกี่ยวข้อง.

#Ivermectin #COVID19 #Review #JAMA #Study #Updates #Mechanisms.

ivermectin for coronavirus,ivermectin to treat covid,ivermectin covid,ivermectin study in jama,review of the new ivermectin study in jama,ivermectin dosage,ivermectin dose in covid 19,flccc,studies on ivermectin for treating coronavirus,randomized trials ivermectin for covid,how does ivermectin work,antiparasitic drug for corona,updates on ivermectin for covid,new studies ivermectin to treat covid,covid news,jama,countries using ivermectin for covid

Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More!

ivermectin thailand.

หวังว่า ความรู้ ในหัวข้อ ivermectin thailand นี้จะ เสนอมูลค่า มาสู่คุณ ขอบคุณมาก.

47 thoughts on “Ivermectin In COVID-19: Review Of JAMA Study, Updates, Mechanisms, And More! | ivermectin thailand | ร้านขายหนังใหม่ที่ดีที่สุด”

  1. Thanks for checking out the video!

    @WhiteBoardDoct1

    http://www.patreon.com/WBDR

    https://www.buymeacoffee.com/WBDR

    https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=UQN2JGSYSQJEG

    YouTube Members  Join On HomePage!

    Overview of COVID-19: Virology, Pathogenesis, Symptoms, Laboratory Work Up, Transmission, Treatment, Long Term Effects:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsGCmZbEOMQ

    Ivermectin Videos:

    Review Of 18 Studies on Ivermectin and COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOpiMasSvSE

    Randomized Double Blind Trial IVM and Early COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-4mNFH2dbU

    Ivermectin Immunosuppressive Effects in COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KZSOkaqSNg&ab_channel=WhiteboardDoctor

    Second Interview With Pioneering Researcher Dr. Carvallo!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar-OaKEhsog

    IVM and Doxy in COVID-19 Patients with Cancer:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djc3OW5BCFk

    IVM Early Outpatient Treatment: Randomized Trial:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_oYKtn8jeg

    High Dose Ivermectin And COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsJPZPB93Qc

    IVM, IVM and Doxy, Versus Placebo For Hospitalized COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7rwWY371ac

    IVM and HCQ for mild, moderate, severe disease AND prophylaxis!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE2RfRbUBIc

    IVM, HCQ, or Vitamin C Prophylaxis for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1TGzbr_RDo

    Four Different Mechanisms of Action Of IVM:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bgcgiutrw8

    Ivermectin, Azithromycin, And Vitamin D Early Outpatient COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4UWnxUrE7I

    IDEA Trial (Ivermectin, Dexamethasone, Enoxaparin, Aspirin) Mild, Mod, Sever COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX14ol0FYHg

    Ivermectin to Treat Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UvZHJh_wdk

    Ivermectin Post-Exposure Prophylaxis:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJyyISQg85M

    ICON Trial:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryWcke_-Fjs&t=388s

    HCQ +/- Azithromycin Videos:

    RECOVERY Trial HCQ for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viF14-W_1MM

    Low Dose HCQ to treat COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihEkCddeLOA

    Outpatient use of HCQ for early COVID-19

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0_PkRkq3p4

    HCQ and Azithromycin 3,737 patient in France

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My8PY97ZuAI&t=1040s

    Henry Ford Hospital Study decreased mortality with HCQ and HCQ+Azithro:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSEtu5VUJQA

    Zinc Videos (+/- HCQ/Azithro):

    Does Adding Zinc to Hydroxychloroquine Improve Outcomes?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS9gj6sWxY8

    HCQ, Azithro versus HCQ, Azithro, and Zn in Hospitalized COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFAM97cW1jo

    Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine, and Azithromycin for early COVID-19 in outpatients:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eR0oV0Yqwo

    Triple Therapy Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine, and Azithromcyin:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwS3BajTFDY&t=1347s

    Remdesivir Videos:

    SOLIDARITY Trial HCQ, Remdesivir, Lopinavir, Interferon COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0YwriRD_50

    Final Report Remdesivir NEJM:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgXAafDAbFk

    Steroid Videos:

    Methylprednisolone to Prevent Critical COVID-19 Respiratory Failure:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO9nRmdg8rk

    Meta-analysis on Steroids in Severe COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1NVQD_7H1I

    The RECOVERY Trial on Dexamethasone in COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfu2Nt8WroI

    Inhaled Therapies:

    Inhaled IFNb (SNG001) for COVID-19

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKvbuWplCw8

    Inhaled nitric oxide for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2zQkjZcfO4

    Inhaled Corticosteroids:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REZCbgvmPgA&t=1000s

    Vaccines:

    Moderna Antibody Longevity After 119 Days:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrB_YQyaku0

    Moderna Vaccine 94.5% Efficacy Phase 3 Trial:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fenHYjI6UBQ

    Pfizer Vaccine BNT162b2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D0kDMxIIFU

    ChAdOx1 Vaccine Phases 1 and 2 Trial:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwTuHm4yk9g

    Other Therapies:

    Tocilizumab COVACTA, EMPACTA, REMAP CAP, CUROMINO-TOCI-1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsQlZX6PFYA

    Treating with ARB Telmisartan:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oksavmjHoKU

    Aviptadil/RLF-100 Emergency Use Study Decreased Mortality:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7MTo49kSP0

    Melatonin for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgD6DSZ7feo

    Nitazoxanide for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouiW-EldJ-M

    NAC for prevention or treatment of COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjDNzhS-mc0

    Carrageenan and Xylitol Inhibits SARS-CoV-2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t4xGa5hhC8

    Favipiravir for COVID-19, New Data:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4hYJ9OgKyA&t=26s

    Aspirin and COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_CDx5zTbQs

    LY-COV555 Monoclonal Antibody and COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoPuQSNsmx8

    Vitamin D Supplementation to treat COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuvZCscApM4

    Icatibant Bradykinin Pathway COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWgV0K23PhM

    Large Convalescent Plasma Study COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xlr7JreV3zI

    Colchicine For COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGfD6BZFsNo

    Randomized Trial Bromhexine:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NMy289l4II

    New Study on Pepcid/Famotidine Use For COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQkJKDUUctM

    Lactoferrin as therapy for COVID-19

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwTUb2x0C4k&t=6s

    COVID-19 and NSAIDS:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37VVxsqCmRM

    Interferon to treat COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7CRurg7id4&t=1s

    COVID-19 Management Strategies Beyond The Treatments:

    Proton Pump Inhibitors and COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaZ58xzEkPo

    Should you keep taking your statin with COVID-19?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTDfYU5Wpd0

    ACEI/ARBs in COVID-19: Helpful, Hurtful, or Neither?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IFqRLtQrIQ&t=151s

    Proning COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHW_bxXKAtI

    Splitting Ventilators:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Lsv7mxbd1o&t=62s

    Organ Systems:

    COVID-19 Affecting the Heart:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iRA7kGc_Pw&t=19s

    COVID-19, The Brain, and The Blood Brain Barrier:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30p7q082Qqw&t=72s

    COVID-19 and it’s effect on the kidneys:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=capCRENmDMc&t=336s

    COVID-19 and the Lungs:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrHn4SzUl1U&t=23s

    COVID-19 and Gastrointestinal Symptoms:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGtWff0EOzg&t=2s

    Pathophysiology of COVID-19:

    Vitamin C and COVID-19: Prevention, Treatment, and Risk

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMhvyu4NKwM

    New SARS-CoV-2 South African Variant:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMwy5stGinc

    New SARS-CoV-2 UK Viral Variant:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWHIqO1OUEw

    Immune Cell Activation, Cytokine Levels, STAT Pathway COVID vs Flu:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9nwFlff23w

    Blood Clotting and Antiphospholipid Syndrome COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yliOvBXiNTo

    Neuropilin-1 Receptor increased SARS-CoV-2 Infectivity:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlF8oyiiugw

    Is The Cytokine Storm Real?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neqAJZZtpzk

    Bradykinin, ACE2, and Respiratory Failure in COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92JklQjTluc

    COVID-19 Reinfection With Different Viral Strains:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTpPZdHBpdk

    Memory T Cell Response to COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS9SspyZcK8

    COVID Toes or Chilblains:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxaIgfmdKmA

    Waning immunity against SARS-CoV-2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B7-T_5a8Hk

    ABO Blood Types and Other Genetic Predispositions

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTXZz-H-t6w

    SARS-CoV-2 and human hemoglobin molecules, do they interact?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm_up_2Vg7w&t=1s

    COVID-19 and ARDS, The Syndrome That Is Killing People:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrHn4SzUl1U&t=23s

    COVID-19 and the ACE2 Receptor:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoguCgaVIVQ

    Pediatrics:

    Update on Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome from 86 children across USA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwzXH60tbDM

    Epidemiology/Transmission of COVID-19:

    Viral Shedding In Immunosuppressed Patients:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xITVfTXMK6A

    UVC To Inactivate SARS-CoV-2:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo6Zh5xWh8Y

    Survival on Dollar Bills, Steel, Glass, Vinyl, and Cotton:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIlk3uflzYw

    How Long Does SARS-CoV-2 Survive in the Body?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjbDnDh9aRc

    14 Common Masks Efficacy:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0D3q9Xvo1M

    Pre-symptomatic and Asymptomatic Transmission:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsCivIt2hGQ

    Testing/Diagnosing for COVID-19:

    CSF Leak After Nasal Swabbing:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gFRWEXWFlc

    Interpreting Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM2pfY2EuYU

    COVID-19 laboratory work up:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM5Jr4aHmQc

    COVID-19 symptoms, labs, imaging overview:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m6zTn6RXdI

    Post-Recovery and Long Haulers after COVID-19:

    Characterizing “Long Haulers”: Incidence, Duration, Prevention:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI44deFpaqc

    Long Haulers, Symptoms To Expect, And Treatment:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HEdKQ6hFdw

    Healthy Athletes with Myocarditis after COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4G9ZmxF9Tk

    Persistent symptoms after healing from COVID:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieZ6lNwkFqs

    Reply
  2. It was a fairly well designed, with specific intended outcome in mind, trial, I think. I also think it is important to always say "statistically significant" as opposed to significant when describing the outcomes. Looking closely at the data I see that there was, in fact, still a reduction in nearly every catagory for the ivermectin group. Here's the thing, when dealing with data sets that would not show much variance then variation differences have greater significance not less. You obviously touched on that point by stating that it would need far larger numbers for such differences to become apparent. The idea that active physicians would engage in the same, head-line reading only behaviour as us common folk, doesn't bare thinking about.

    Reply
  3. Regarding silver bullets, I think you could say the same about Covid vaccines, none of them are 100% effective. So I don’t really see your point. I don’t think anyone is expecting a silver bullet study. But I love your videos and analysis.

    Reply
  4. Much appreciated – a review free of hyperbole and sensationalism. That said, you guys must have been biting your tongue. If I had the hypothesis that Ivermectin was ineffective at reducing symptoms and was bought and paid for enough to want to prove it whilst appearing legitimate then this is, more or less, the study I'd design to prove that.

    1. Ignore completely the hypothesis advanced by the pro-Ivermectin lobby. That of prophylactic or early (immediately post PCR/LFT positivity) prescription having the greatest effect on EASILY measurable positivity —-> hospitalisation rates.
    2. Choose an outcome based on worsening symptoms up to 7 days old, therefore including in your study many people whose viral loads are likely at approaching or at their peak – well after the cellular binding event that Ivermectin is hypothesised to prevent.
    3. Choose a cohort least likely to generate ANY of the extreme events (severe symptoms/hospitalisations) that would lead to more obvious signals between the placebo and treated arms.
    4. Allow people who may have been on Ivermectin as recently as 7 days ago into your placebo group again likely equalising/dulling any obvious signal differences between placebo and treatment arms.
    5. Include a whole host of subjective or easily distorted inputs including not even observing your test subjects taking the drug you're testing the efficacy of.

    This subject is SO easily put to bed but the people who funded THIS study simply don't want to see it put to bed – and that kinda tells you they know the answer.

    Reply
  5. This study is fairly flawed.
    Lets start with a significant point u have forgotten. The Dosis on empty stomach, it lowers the absorption by around 60%.
    Using an unknown substance, not commonly used? Where does this substance come from, who has produced this? I would understand that, if it were something new but IVM is around for decades.
    Not making sure patients take the Medicine?
    There are older studies around that shows Ivermectin stays longer in the organism than 5 days. A large OCT with two Dosis of IVM at day one and 72hr later in India, showed that the Infections rate in the IVM was reduced by 84% after 1 month observation….
    Deterioration: 7 to 4? I mean what numbers do u need, to show efficacy with a P value of 0.05 with such low numbers.
    The age and health of the people and so on, if i continue writing everything flawed and the implication about this study down here, it will be an article on its own.

    Just summing up all the possible flaws and things that can go wrong, the uncertainty of this study is ridiculous huge.
    Although that would be sufficient, to not even get peer reviewed in my opinion, this study, with a massive conflict of interest, also has a questionable design, that allows to easily manipulate the outcome.
    I absolutely cant understand your position about this study with a single fiebre of my body.
    With Billions and Billions are at stake here.
    How can believe u, there was no attempt to use this flaws, to manipulate the outcome, when facing such a low quality study.

    Reply
  6. Let's not forget the massive conflict of interest. Funding from Merck, J&J, GSK and Gilead.

    "Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr López-Medina reported receiving grants from Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen and personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur during the conduct of the study. Dr López reported receiving grants from Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen and personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur during the conduct of the study. Dr Oñate reported receiving grants from Janssen and personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Gilead outside the submitted work. Dr Torres reported receiving nonfinancial support from Tecnoquímicas unrelated to this project during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported."

    Reply
  7. The JAMA study was sponsored by 5 drug companies, including Gilead and Merck who make therapeutics. The conclusions did not mention that the age of the patients was 37 years old. It was no accident. The time to recover of 10 days for ivermectin 0.3 mg/day for 5 days is too long and would actually be about 5 days. There were no comparable studies mentioned. This was a drug company plant to discredit ivermectin, accomplished with help from JAMA. The AMA and JAMA know about it and did nothing. Others are investigating. You should too.

    Reply
  8. I don't "choose to trust this study integrity"… With that many "mistakes" and "coincidences" (they all shown side effects from ivm), there's only 2 possible causes: corruption or incompetence…

    Reply
  9. Traditionally, to test the efficacy of a treatment, Doctors would replicate that treatment, and look for the same results. Somehow, we must have permission now from 'expert studies & trials' to see if what is working in the field is REALLY working, or just our imagination. If we go with what works, that is the best approach, especially with serious illnesses. Let the confirmation from studies come later.

    Reply
  10. Hi Whiteboard Doctor,

    Really like your in depth video's and well observed comments.
    I think that this study should never have been published by Jama and that they have done a quite a lot of damage and fueled the fires against Ivermectin.

    Any study involving young healthy subjects recovering from mild covid is not going to show huge benefits from being given Ivermectin halfway through. I think that a two day benefit to recovery overall is pretty much what I would expect to see.

    Add into the mix that it would be highly likely that some of the placebo group had Ivermectin in their system as it lasts a lot longer than five days. The FLCCC regime for prophylaxis is one dose day one, one dose day three and then one dose every two weeks for as long as you need it. You can buy Ivermectin in Columbia without prescription and a lot of people aready take it.

    The WHO and CDC are all demanding Ivermectin trials with thousands of patients and conducted to their gold standard before even giving them any consideration in the middle of a pandemic.

    How can anybody say that this disaster of a trial comes anywhere near that standard, are Jama serious? Who did the peer review the Marx Brothers? Laurel and Hardy?

    I am really cheesed off with all these reports and articles in the media regurgitating completely false and misleading information, so I have set up a basic one page online guide at:

    http://www.idiotsguidetoivermectin.com

    Reply
  11. River blindness is endemic in Columbia and it is one of the areas where Mark has traditionally given a free dose of ivermectin to everybody once a year. I don’t know if it’s over the counter but it may be. The rule about no I’ll make it in five days makes me think people were taking it and no wonder their symptoms were already better from Covid.
    This is a useless study except for it is going to set us back on using ivermectin another six months because this is theonly study the main stream is going to quote. We are screwed.

    Reply
  12. I can see a flaw in the study. The a number of the inclusion group was already protected by ivm., due to the fact that the country had distributed ivm to the general public, with the exclusion criteria of 5 days clear of ivm use. Well, when you x reference the imath+ protocol for the prophylaxis dose …. (200 ug/kg day 1, then day 3 and then every 4
    weeks) . So, the exclusion criteria should have been 32 days instead of 5 days.

    Reply
  13. The suggestion that maybe the patients in the control group had been taking Ivermectin is rather spurious. Isn't it claimed that Ivermectin prevents Covid? If they had been taking it, they shouldn't have got Covid unless it doesn't prevent infection after all. And the time to resolution of symptoms doesn't seem any shorter than normal in either arm of the trial.

    Reply
  14. Thanks for the balanced nuanced review – in contrast to mainstream media. By the way, there is a critique of the study highlighting its potential shortcomings on OSFpre-prints, "Protocol violations in Lopez-Medina et al.: 38 switched ivermectin (IVM) and placebo doses, failure of blinding, widespread IVM sales OTC in Cali, and nearly identical AEs for the IVM and control groups" by David Scheim, Jennifer A. Gibbered, Juan Chamise-Quintero.

    Reply
  15. Wait! At 32:44, you can see 0 (zero, none) death in the ivermectin group and 1 (one) death in the placebo group. That is absolute difference, no statistical tricks would blur it. But at 54:12 you say: "…some patients on ivermectin did less well than those on placebo…" What? IMHO the patient on placebo who died did really less well than those all survivors on ivermectin. Death is not a subjective assesment of symptoms reported on telephone, it is a hard fact! And the bribery (oops, I should have say "personal fees"), even when acknowledged, is still bribery! And regarding JAMA (how much they got from Merck, J&J, Sanofi… to publish such faulty study?), I would be really very surprised if JAMA would publish any of those stronger and positive studies on ivermectin. Your evaluation of this paper is overly indulgent…

    Reply
  16. You were WAY too nice to the study authors and JAMA itself, and their conclusions, about this study. They said it doesn't work and you basically gave that opinion your seal of approval. Nobody is going to listen to your statement about they tested the wrong age group.

    Reply
  17. My question is this: were PCR tests done and were they done only after symptoms developed. Then how long did it take for test results to come back? It is most likely that the population studied were already improving or already getting worse by the time ivermectin was administered ie ivermectin was started later than it should have been. Besides that, this study is based ENTIRELY on subjective reporting of symptoms. Many people exaggerate and others minimize, so that is a ridiculous parameter to use to determine efficacy. And returning an empty bottle is supposed to confirm an enrollee actually took the ivermectin is a ridiculous method of verification.

    Reply
  18. Ivermectin IMO as a dr should be reserved for people over the age of 50 and/or with known comorbidities. We are trying to keep people out of the hospitals and from DYING. The population that is at risk is not made up of younger healthy individuals.

    Reply
  19. Trial only included young, fairly healthy patients who have good immune systems with no comorbidities that IVM could have mitigated and cured.
    1. The design of the trial tended to lead to a statistically insignificant outcome from the outset based on the insufficient sample size for the number of patients who would have benefitted from IVM.
    2. Was not designed to study the response of IVM in commonly used methods (tablets) and prescription (with food, preferably fatty foods for better absorption).
    3. IVM was discovered mishandled and given to all patients in one period, although discovered, but this means that it could possibly have been the case too without being detected. Reports of similar adverse event levels for both the control and study group seem to point towards this.
    4. the study was not conducted in a supervised condition: patients might or might not have taken the prescription or might have taken other additional products on their own.
    5. Although only patients who had not taken IVM in the previous 5 days are included in the study, IVM has a long lag time, meaning that IVM taken longer than that could still continue to effect the outcome of the study, especially if covid morbidity has something to do with parasitic infections (we do not know yet).
    6. IVM was given only for the first 5 days, meaning that after 10 days, the effect of IVM, by the same token above, should no longer have effect on the outcome of the symptoms of patients (in other words, points 5 & 6 are mutually exclusive). IVM should have been given for the duration of the study for a proper resolution. After 8 days, both the study and control group were effectively the 'same' unless there was a lag time for IVM drug effects and the benefits of IVM used earlier continued forward.
    7. Only mild cases are studied, meaning IVM effect for more serious cases were not included, this discounted IVM major benefits such as its anti-inflammatory properties, anti-parasitic properties, etc.
    8. Research were funded by some Pharmaceutical companies which indicated a conflict of interest.
    9. Trial goal (outcome) was changed 6 weeks into the trial, which would normally indicate the design of the trial was not optimal.
    10. In spite of all these, all the study factors actually showed improvement:
    (a) Mortality improved 100%: 1 death control 0 death IVM
    (b) Duration of disease decreased 17%: 12 days control, 10 days IVM
    (c) Proportion of patients requiring escalation of care were reduced 33%: from 6 to 4 patients.
    (d) Patients who required escalation of care with IVM required on average 7 days fewer under escalation of care.
    (e) All these are not statistically significant due to the sample size and the design of the trial for healthy, young patients with mild symptoms (that skewed the statistics). If these results continued to be true for a large sample size of more seriously ill patients, it would have been significant, since all symptoms pointed to benefits (none the other way).

    Reply
  20. what about protocol violations in the study, including 38 switched ivermectin and placebo doses, failure of blinding and other considerations, such as the fact that there are widespread over the counter (OTC) ivermectin sales in the same city where the trial site is located?
    There is a DOI preprint from Dr. David E Scheim identifying the violations on this study:
    https://osf.io/u7ewz/

    Reply
  21. Chief Editors "decide" what the public sees in ALL public media.
    We have to realize that ALL Chief Editors are biased because they are individuals and everyone has their own opinions and motivations.
    We also know that Chief Editors can be influenced by the Corporate Owners agenda.
    We have to be aware of that in all information we receive from the Corporate owned media.

    Reply
  22. What is missing from this analysis is that these BELIEVERS IN THE VACCINES never take into consideration is profilactic treatments and what are the risks/safty benefits of other treatments!!

    Reply
  23. trial has many defects for conclusions incld subject powering (popln predom young, healthy & only with #C19Early).
    As UV & sunlight in Columbia are globally among highest, no estimation of % rural population / outdoor employment, active #vitD ,VitC, #zinc status or skin melanin
    All these are confounding factors in study design.
    No attempt was made to eliminate subjects who had received hydroxychloroquin either prophylactically or as part of treatment protocol with hyperdosed ( therapeutic) levels of vit C vitD or zinc

    Reply
  24. The fact that both groups showed a mirror image of common adverse affects expected from Ivermectin would indicate that both groups were getting the ivermectin throughout the study, though they only reported one screw up.
    Also, since Ivermectin is/was available over the counter in that country, it's Not beyond reason to think there were people in the placebo group "self medicating". The one test that was not on the study was a blood test to test for Ivermectin in both groups.
    That would have given conclusive evidence, but the drug companies don't want conclusive evidence.
    They would,prefer to cloud the Ivermectin issue with BS.
    I don't know if they used One pharmacy to provide the meds in this study, or One Pharmacist, but it would probably be easy to persuade a pharmacist to provide Ivermectin to Both groups to give false results.
    And for JAMA to publish exclusively, and with authority the results of a study coming from Columbia, an illegal drug cartel controlled country, I think the study should be looked at skeptically. In other words, I'm calling Bull Pucky !
    If the doctors can't trust JAMA, who the hell are they going to trust? Hopefully their instincts and the doctor around the world who have done their own research with Ivermectin and do not have Any Conflicts of interest.

    Reply

Leave a Comment