Because my point is that politicians and even M.D.s are not research scientists. Efforts taken by doctors to save lives are not the same as data an organization needs to revise its recommendations.
-
-
Replying to @ThugaManLaForge @davideyoungmd and
The FLCCC doctors include clinicians who are research scientists. Are you a clinician and research scientist?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Bertie_222 @davideyoungmd and
Every meta analysis, even then ones I think are poorly done, indicate that more trials are needed before they can definitively say that Ivermectin works.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ThugaManLaForge @davideyoungmd and
*Every* competently done study acknowledges the need for more research. Ivermectin is being held to a different standard. Nothing is definitive about many other treatments being used. How many had their lungs blown out early on? Ivermectin has strong support and low downside
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Bertie_222 @davideyoungmd and
There is a reason why the COVID-19 treatment guidelines are so vague in so many areas. Because doctors are going to, must, do what they think is best. That isn't a sufficient argument to change the guidelines. Its being held to the standard everything should be held to.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ThugaManLaForge @Bertie_222 and
The FLCCC would get farther faster if they didn't talk exactly like HCQ pushers. Sayjng "If you take this you will not get sick in front of congress is thr kind of reckless talk that, even if it later turns out to be true, leaves you twisting in the wind because you lack data.
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ThugaManLaForge @davideyoungmd and
They clearly believe what they are promoting, so you can disagree with them about the studies, but it is petty to question their right to promote what they believe based on the studies. They have an excellent success rate compared to others. They are the experts
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Bertie_222 @ThugaManLaForge and
They clearly believe, and have supporting evidence, in ivermectn's efficacy. They are ICU doctors, not marketing professionals. Their expertise is in treating COVID patients, not how to pitch their protocol. I assume they're telling it straight—that ivermectn obliterates COVID19.
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JaiKanta22 @yodelodwho and
As was the case with
#hydroxychloroquine in March, I am currently agnostic about#ivermectin. As with HCQ then, my best guess for ivermectin now is that it probably either doesn't work or only has a modest effect on#COVID19. As with HCQ then, I'd be happy to be proven wrong.7 replies 2 retweets 16 likes
What I object to is the massive overselling of #ivermectin without good evidence as, in essence, a miracle cure for #COVID19, just as many of the same people were doing for #hydroxychloroquine several months ago (and some are still doing).
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @JaiKanta22 and
Balanced against 3,000+ dying daily from COVID. When you compare risks and benefits the answer is clear. If it were your loved one dying of COVID, I have a hunch you'd find the evidence adequate. You're an oncologist. Drs. Marik, Varon, and Kory have the ICU expertise.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @yodelodwho @gorskon and
And not to go off-topic, but ivermectin does have potential as a cancer therapy too.https://jeccr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13046-019-1251-7 …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
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.