"There's enough behind ivermectin for COVID-19 that there must be something there"
This is a point that I find fascinating 
-
-
Anyway, this doesn't mean that we should stop the ongoing large trials into ivermectin, but I do think it's an interesting point worth considering. Take away the fraud, rewind to the actual evidence, and what remains?
Show this thread -
What got me thinking about all of this is that we excluded lopinavir/ritonavir as a treatment based on not that much more null evidence than we now have for ivermectin. We need to finish the bigger trials, for many reasons, but still interesting
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I thinking a fair number of grifters know you can make a lot of money selling ivermectin prescriptions.pic.twitter.com/GsbnxA8WuU
-
You could do that with any drug, though. Or random herbs. Or magic water... It is weird that ivermectin took off so hard. Probably sheer luck, but who knows.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's a great question. It's weird how the public latches onto specific ones. Like, for example TOGETHER seems to be showing a benefit for fluvoxamine. But you don't see its sales going through the roof...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Honestly, I think the biggest difference between ivermectin and HCQ is that you can get vet-formula ivermectin without a scrip. If the doc says no to Stromectol, they get paste at a feed store. And when some of them survive (because statistically, most will) correlation=causation
Thanks. 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.
