Today I decided to look at some of the terrible observational studies on ivermectin that I've mostly ignored, and wow So far, one with Cohen's d of 2, another with d of 2.9 These are just...gibberish
-
Show this thread
-
In one study, every single person in the ivermectin group got better immediately, and every person in the control got much, much worse. In another, 100% of the ivermectin group stayed in hospital for a shorter amount of time than the control
3 replies 16 retweets 153 likesShow this thread -
These studies are just so wildly implausible that it's hard to understand why no one has raised these questions before. Either a single ivermectin pill entirely cures COVID or there's something fishy there
11 replies 20 retweets 217 likesShow this thread -
We've found definite fraud in the RCTs and larger observational trials, but I think it's worth noting that there is a very high probability that there are many more fraudulent studies in the mix as well. We simply do not have time to check every single one
10 replies 16 retweets 173 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
Would you mind citing those studies? It's sort of strange how you constantly mention them without referring to the authors names.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GabinJean3
How about this - you've got an ivermectin/covid account, why don't YOU got through the evidence-base and identify which of the studies on ivmmeta dot com are reliable and put together a list
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
We rely on published, peer-reviewed meta-analysis; we also take into account preclinical data, epidemiological data, as well as obs data, case series and testimonials from MDs. We care a lot about risk / benefit: to us, it's about lives potentially saved. What about you?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GabinJean3
That's a non-response with a ridiculous leading question. If you care one whit about lives saved, you'd do your basic due diligence and examine the evidence-base with a critical eye because without good evidence you might literally be killing people
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Not with a safe medicine, no, that's precisely the point. The one exception is if someone attempted to replace vaccination with IVM, which is not something we advocate for. Our drive is compassion. Yours seems to be the narcissistic bliss that comes from winning arguments.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GabinJean3
Lol, that's just insulting. It's also quite boringly wrong - even safe medicines cause rare adverse events, and if it is ineffective but given to 100s of millions then those rare events will add up. If the medicine is ineffective, you may be killing people unnecessarily
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
This is why it is important to base your opinions on evidence, if you were wondering 
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @GabinJean3
Interesting that you add the term unnecessarily because that's true for all drugs.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 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.