
Anti-parasitic drug, Ivermectin, eliminates SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures in lab - origgm
https://www.monash.edu/discovery-institute/news-and-events/news/2020-articles/Lab-experiments-show-anti-parasitic-drug,-Ivermectin,-eliminates-SARS-CoV-2-in-cells-in-48-hours
======
johnmyleswhite
This headline is somewhat misleading; just changing to the wording of "cell
cultures" instead of "cells" would make the stage that this work is in more
clear.

~~~
cwojno
It's absolutely misleading and dangerous.

~~~
amluto
Hypochlorous acid (bleach) destroys SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture, too. So do
ethanol and soap.

~~~
yk
A revolver destroys the virus in-vivo. (At least vivo at the beginning of the
study.)

~~~
amluto
That xkcd comic confuses me. Does a revolver really kill pathogens or does it
just scatter them?

A flamethrower, on the other hand...

------
uxp100
This one of those effective outside the human body tests that have a long way
to go. We shall see.

But I mainly commented to say that it worked well on my scabies years ago.
Good for keeping your guinea pigs parasite free too.

~~~
verganileonardo
Yes. Title should better reflect the current stage of the drug (pre-trial).

------
bulletsvshumans
Ivermectin is approved by the FDA, but not (yet?) for treating COVID-19, and
not at the doses shown to stop the virus in experimental conditions. The dose
shown to be effective against COVID-19 is much much higher than the dosage
approved by the FDA for other purposes.

~~~
readhn
from the paper: "..no toxicity was observed with ivermectin at any of the
concentrations tested....

Ivermectin has an established safety profile for human use and is FDA approved
for a number of parasitic infections1, Importantly, recent reviews and meta
analysis indicate that high dose ivermectin has comparable safety as the
standard low-dose treatment, although there is not enough evidence to make
conclusions about the safety profile in pregnancy.

The critical next step in further evaluation for possible benefit in COVID
patients will be to examine a multiple addition dosing regimen that mimics the
current approved usage of ivermectin in humans. As noted, ivermectin was the
focus of a recent phase III clinical trial in dengue patients in Thailand, in
which a single daily dose was found to be safe but did not produce any
clinical benefit. However, the investigators noted that an improved dosing
regimen might be developed, based on pharmacokinetic data. Although DENV is
clearly very different to SARS-CoV-2, this trial design should inform future
work going forward. Altogether the current report, combined with a known-
safety profile, demonstrates that ivermectin is worthy of further
consideration as a possible SARS-CoV-2 antiviral. "

~~~
giardini
Years ago a friend invited me to help him brand his cattle. We rounded 'em up
and sent each through a chute where we applied a dose of ivermectin to their
back. The procedure was: measure, pour directly on their back and then spread
it around with bare hands. We did this for an indeterminate number of cattle.
He seemed unconcerned that _we_ were getting quite a dose through our skin
too.

This friend has lived a remarkably healthy life - he was over 70, never got
sick, and could toss hay bales with the best of them. Seeing how Ivermectin is
applied, I'm fairly certain there wasn't (and isn't) a single parasite in his
body, in his clothes, his pickup truck or his mobile home.

------
wyxuan
In vitro things usually work out pretty well, but as soon as you hit human
trials it becomes really difficult. Hydroxochloroquine worked well against
covid in vitro (had a lower toxicity than remdesivir) but turned out that it
could be fatal with certain diabetes drugs and actually increased ventilator
time needed.

~~~
honksillet
Source? HCQ has been used for a long time. It is a medication that is usually
ordered for chronic conditions. So people might be expected to be on HCQ for
YEARS. (Unlike COVID were they could be on the same doses for just days.) It
has a well documented side effect profile and drug interact profile known well
before COVID came onto the scene.

~~~
wyxuan
Et voila:
[https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.31.018556v1....](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.31.018556v1.full.pdf)
Also here's a source on the ventilator time:
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/8b2govfsa6n0xbq/NEJM_Clinical%20Ou...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/8b2govfsa6n0xbq/NEJM_Clinical%20Outcomes%20of%20Hydroxychlorquine%20in%20Patients%20with%20COVID19.pdf.pdf.pdf.pdf?dl=0)

~~~
honksillet
"Confidential: Destroy when review is complete" A look behind the curtain.

~~~
wyxuan
Yep. Ding ding ding! Tried to post this link onto hn but it couldn't accept
for some reason. This was a leaked paper submitted to NEJM.

------
unsrsly
Previously:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22782980](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22782980)

------
Someone1234
So does bleach. Neither one is a proven treatment for COVID-19 in vivo though.

Almost all in vitro (i.e. in a Petri dish) results are of limited value. A lot
of things kill viruses in vitro, including air and water, but aren't actually
treatments inside people. Until they do at minimum a phase 1 trial (to show
basic safety) and have even draft results showing efficacy, I'd hold off on
assuming this is relevant to the discussion /at all/.

------
mam2
I'm pretty sure "heavy fire" can kill cell cultures in lab too.

------
toomanybeersies
To paraphrase XKCD [1], a handgun also eliminates SARS-CoV-2 in cells.

[1] [https://xkcd.com/1217/](https://xkcd.com/1217/)

~~~
missedthecue
And in people as well

