The first large, well-done RCT on ivermectin for mild COVID-19 has been published, and has found no benefit for the drug https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389 …pic.twitter.com/tCNpFrLHss
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
The argument about "6.1x" is obvious nonsense - you can't compare people in a study (who are carefully tested and screened) to the general population like that, it's just poor understanding of how RCTs work
You could argue that there are smaller benefits for IVM than the study was designed to measure, which is potentially true, but instead the thread tries to argue that there are large benefits that this study couldn't find (incorrect)
One of the lines of unreasoning (is that a word?) is based on ignoring the nicely reported cleanup of the mistake (of treating the control group during a couple weeks) and further baselessly speculating that the mistake was repeated. It's horrible, really. 1/2
Thanks for responding (again)!
I am sorry, but I don't see any argument about "6.1x" in that thread. 
If you mean this, https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1367854834536357889?s=20 …, it appears to me as an argument about low statistical power (by low event frequency in both groups monitored), for which it should be relevant.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.