Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There where several reviews mislead because: “ The hype around ivermectin is driven by some studies where the effect size for ivermectin is frankly not credible, and this has driven the conclusions in other reviews. The study with a huge effect has now been retracted as fake. Careful appraisal is the cornerstone of Cochrane’s work, and with such extreme public demands for a drug to work during the pandemic, it remains vital that we hold onto our scientific principles to guide care.” https://cidg.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-review-ivermecti...

Looking at those same 41 trials: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/

“Eight studies had an open-label design, six were double-blind and placebo-controlled. Of the 41 study results contributed by included studies, about one third were at overall high risk of bias. Ivermectin doses and treatment duration varied among included studies.“

“We are uncertain whether ivermectin compared to placebo or standard of care reduces or increases mortality”

“Authors' conclusions: Based on the current very low- to low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID-19. The completed studies are small and few are considered high quality. Several studies are underway that may produce clearer answers in review updates. Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 outside of well-designed randomized trials.”

It’s easy to understand why people where mislead by a fake study, but in 2023 we just have better data and better treatments.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: