[bayesian_horse]

"Everyone" is not necessary. That the only successful such studies are in areas with high incidences of Ivermectin-treatable parasitosis is a notable coincidence, isn't it?

Ivermectin failed in large studies with populations that didn't have worms.

[elif]

Can you link a non-observational study that says so? I believe you may be conflating prophylactic and responsive medicine here.

https://ivmmeta.com provides an updated-weekly meta analysis following new publications and retractions showing significantly positive prophylactic efficacy over control in 83% of papers.

[jjeaff]

Taking a look at the list of peer reviewed studies gives you a bunch of tiny, tiny population studies. I read a twitter thread from a researcher that was rather critical of the methods that site is using. Notice how the larger the study, the less effect ivm seems to have. Also, some of the largest studies actually show no or negative effect.

I think it is notable that you can go down the list of all the drugs on the right where they apply similar meta analysis to the treatments and they find that many drugs seem to be effective against covid. Even aspirin seems to treat covid effectively.

https://c19aspirin.com/meta.html

[ivan_gammel]

I don’t know why you were downvoted, so would like to add some support to this comment. Plenty of people on HN have seen this publication.

[marcodiego]

Probably Brazillian HNers. This subject became a matter of faith in Brazil.

[skinkestek]

FWIW for many it is also seems to be a matter of faith to proclaim that Ivermectin does not work, and this has been going on since the drug was first linked to the Trump camp.

The irrationality in this regard seems to match the irrationality of the concerns over masks in the pro Trump camp.

(I'm in the middle. Triple vaccinated, never took Ivermectin but find it really ugly that every single discussion about it ends in a flag, downvote and shouting competition that makes it impossible to find out what the facts are. The best I've found so far is Scott Alexanders findings but I guess there could be a lot more to learn if people weren't so busily either shouting or flaggind down the stories.)

[shatnersbassoon]

^ 100%

[naasking]

> Ivermectin failed in large studies with populations that didn't have worms.

It has not really been studied as a prophylactic as in this study.

[artificialLimbs]

I had fiber internet installed a week ago. The installer and I got to talking about Covid. He said he got it and started suffering strong-but-not-hospitalish symptoms for about 2 weeks. He got ahold of Rx grade ivermectin and within 3 hours of ingesting started feeling better. His co-worker, who regularly works with cattle and administers ivermectin (getting it all over his skin inevitably), says he’s never had Covid. 2 small anecdata points, but I hear many other stories of its success and I wonder why people are so vehemently against its use.

[beardicus]

i regularly handle doggie treats, because i have a good doggo, and i have never had covid.

the same is true for my wife. 2 small anecdata points.

if you'd like more information about our doggie treats, so as to start a prophylactic course of treatment, please let me know.

[gilbetron]

Even if it did work, it wouldn't work within 3 hours. You probably also took a Tylenol or Advil at the same time. Or maybe it made you feel better later because you had some parasite.