I mean, financial interests are quite clearly not trying to suppress ivermectin research, given that there are now some really large trials of the drug being performed and out. And people regularly accuse me of being a paid shill, so it's a useful lie to address
-
-
"there are now some really large trials of the drug being performed and out." The real question is: are these trials designed to succeed or to fail?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
You design trials to test a question - succeed or fail is a rhetorical position, not a scientific one
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Disagree. You design a trial based on what you already know about the question. When you think a medication could have an antiviral activity (I don't speak here specifically about IVM) and test it, you don't recrute late stage patients, unless your goal is to fail.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If the claim is "ivermectin can be used to treat mild/moderate COVID-19 patients" which is the claim made by many (FLCCC, BIRD, etc etc etc) then you can test that claim without aiming to fail
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
There are plenty of reasons a trial can fail, we all know it. Underpowered, weak protocol, bad posology, bad choice of outcome, bad choice of population being tested, etc, etc, etc...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
These are reasons that a trial can answer the wrong question - that is not 'failing'. That being said, the Together trial answered the question "does ivermectin reduce the risk of hospitalization/death if given to outpatients with mild disease?" quite admirably
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
I haven't seen the publication, where can I find it?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Thus far there are only slides presented, I believe the preprint should be out this week. Protocol is online in several places i.e.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2779044 …
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Your judgement on a trial is based on slides, not data??? You're completely biased. Plus protocol isn't good at all, based on what groups like FLCCC advocate.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Sigh. These arguments are just so tediously repetitive
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @sudokuvariante and
It's just an endless cavalcade of random people who'd rather insult me than take even a second to read some evidence and consider whether I might have a point. I've had this same discussion at least a dozen times today, not having it again. Cheerio!
4 replies 0 retweets 10 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.