Finally, a cure I can get behind

[AirFrame]

I encourage all of the anti-vaxxers here to embrace this new COVID treatment.

https://boingboing.net/2022/01/10/forge ... urine.html

[Vaticinator]

There will almost certainly be dummies who will try this without questioning it. Just like if the government said to do it, there would be dummies who would try it without questioning it also. They're only slightly more dumb than this author revealed themself to be with the "horse dewormer" line.

[CpnCrunch]

There will almost certainly be dummies who will try this without questioning it. Just like if the government said to do it, there would be dummies who would try it without questioning it also. They're only slightly more dumb than this author revealed themself to be with the "horse dewormer" line.

Is it not horse dewormer?

[Vaticinator]

Is it not for humans also? I grew up on a horse farm. If you didn't want to take medicines because they were also given to horses, you'd be in trouble.

Play as coy as you want, but you probably realize it's very disingenuous to call it that in this context. And if you don't realize that, you're as dumb as the author.

Corticosteroids are an approved covid treatment. My dog got prescribed them a few months back. If you get covid, watch out for that dog medicine.

[CpnCrunch]

Is it not for humans also?

Yes, but not for covid.

Play as coy as you want, but you probably realize it's very disingenuous to call it that in this context. And if you don't realize that, you're as dumb as the author.

No, it's not disingenuous. The reason for calling it "horse dewormer" is because idiots are claiming it is a covid treatment when it hasn't been approved anywhere, and coming up with fake news about Japan using it, etc. So it's just poking fun at those idiots.

[Vaticinator]

It's an extremely safe and cost effective drug that has been proven to prevent viral replication of covid 19. The National Institute of Health in the US does not recommend either for or against its use in treating covid. The only context in which it is not disingenuous to refer to it as a horse dewormer, is when deworming horses.

it hasn't been approved anywhere

https://www.msn.com/en-my/health/medica ... ar-AALpXHu

According to Forbes magazine, many countries around the world, particularly in Latin America and South Africa as well as the Philippines and India, have approved Ivermectin for use against Covid-19.

Perhaps clinical studies will amount to nothing. But there seems to be enough promise there to justify more research. Why would anyone want to deprecate something that might yet actually be of help in this mess? This is not akin to drinking bleach or piss.

[photofly]

It's an extremely safe and cost effective drug that has been proven to prevent viral replication of covid 19.

I don't think it has been proven to do anything of the sort. If it has, could you provide some reputable studies?

[Vaticinator]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7129059/

Taken together these results demonstrate that ivermectin has antiviral action against the SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate in vitro, with a single dose able to control viral replication within 24–48 h in our system.

[photofly]

In vitro.

[BTD]

In vitro.

So…

Vaticinator made a claim and when you asked backed up exactly what he said.

The fact that you assumed some further interpretation isn’t his fault.

[Vaticinator]

In vitro.

I had a feeling you'd pick on that. So I kept this one on standby. (I've spent a lot of time surfing PubMed in the last year.) It doesn't focus solely on viral replication, forgive me. It goes much, much deeper than that.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... po=8.82353
It's a long, heavy one. Here are some highlights:

Considering the urgency of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, detection of various new mutant strains and future potential re-emergence of novel coronaviruses, repurposing of approved drugs such as Ivermectin could be worthy of attention. This evidence-based review article aims to discuss the mechanism of action of ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2 and summarizing the available literature over the years. A schematic of the key cellular and biomolecular interactions between Ivermectin, host cell, and SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 pathogenesis and prevention of complications have been proposed.
...
In such a scenario, where this “jump” has been made from animal to human, it seems only logical to review a drug that has worked efficiently against a disease-causing agent and is available in a form that is safe for human consumption since the early 1980 s.
...
Drug repurposing, drug redirecting, or drug reprofiling is defined as the identification of novel usages for existing drugs. The development risks, costs as well as safety-related failure, are reduced with this approach since these drugs have a well-established formulation development, in vitro and in vivo screening, as well as pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Moreover, the first clinical trial phases of many such drugs have been completed and can be bypassed to reduce several years of development. Therefore, drug repurposing has the potential to reduce the time frame for the whole process by up to 3–12 years and carries great potential
...
Although several drugs received Emergency Use Authorization for COVID-19 treatment with unsatisfactory supportive data, Ivermectin, on the other hand, has been sidelined irrespective of sufficient convincing data supporting its use. Nevertheless, many countries adopted ivermectin as one of the first-line treatment options for COVID-19.

With the ongoing vaccine roll-out programs in full swing across the globe, the longevity of the immunity offered by these vaccines or their role in offering protection against new mutant strains is still a matter of debate. The adoption of Ivermectin as a “safety bridge” by some sections of the population that are still waiting for their turn for vaccination could be considered as a “logical” option.
...
Several doctor-initiated clinical trial protocols that aimed to evaluate outcomes, such as reduction in mortality figures, shortened length of intensive care unit stay and/or hospital stay and elimination of the virus with ivermectin use have been registered at the US ClinicalTrials.gov [7]. Real-time data is also available with a meta-analysis of 55 studies to date. As per data available on 16 May 2021, 100% of 36 early treatment and prophylaxis studies report positive effects (96% of all 55 studies). Of these, 26 studies show statistically significant improvements in isolation. Random effects meta-analysis with pooled effects using the most serious outcome reported 79% and 85% improvement for early treatment and prophylaxis respectively (RR 0.21 [0.11–0.37] and 0.15 [0.09–0.25]).
...
Statistically significant improvements were seen for mortality, ventilation, hospitalization, cases, and viral clearance. 100% of the 17 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) for early treatment and prophylaxis report positive effects, with an estimated improvement of 73% and 83% respectively (RR 0.27 [0.18–0.41] and 0.17 [0.05–0.61]), and 93% of all 28 RCTs.
...
The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive for the 55 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 23 trillion (p = 0.000000000000043). The consistency of positive results across a wide variety of cases has been remarkable. It is extremely unlikely that the observed results could have occurred by chance
...
Hypoalbuminemia is a frequent finding in patients with COVID‐19 and it also appears to be linked to the severity of lung injury [13]. Therefore, Ivermectin might be useful when used in such a setting.

There is evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin in decreasing mortality figures in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
...
This article aims to discuss the mechanism of action by summarizing the in vitro and in vivo evidence demonstrating the role of Ivermectin in COVID-19 as per the available literature over the years.
...
Chandler et al. considered Ivermectin to be free of potential neurological adverse drug reactions, except in situations of overdose
...
In principle, a molecule can act as an anti-viral drug if it “inhibits some stage of the virus replication cycle, without being too toxic to the body’s cells
...
The targets of activity of Ivermectin can be divided into the following four groups:
A.
Direct action on SARS-CoV-2
Level 1: Action on SARS-CoV-2 cell entry
Level 2: Action on Importin (IMP) superfamily
Level 3: Action as an Ionophore
B.
Action on host targets important for viral replication
Level 4: Action as an antiviral
Level 5: Action on viral replication and assembly
Level 6: Action on post-translational processing of viral polyproteins
Level 7: Action on Karyopherin (KPNA/KPNB) receptors
C.
Action on host targets important for inflammation
Level 8: Action on Interferon (INF) levels
Level 9: Action on Toll- like-Receptors (TLRs)
Level 10: Action on Nuclear Factor-κB (NF-κB) pathway
Level 11: Action on the JAK-STAT pathway, PAI-1 and COVID-19 sequalae
Level 12: Action on P21 activated Kinase 1 (PAK-1)
Level 13: Action on Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels
Level 14: Action on allosteric modulation of P2X4 receptor
Level 15: Action on high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1),
Level 16: Action as an immunomodulator on Lung tissue and olfaction
Level 17: Action as an anti-inflammatory
D.
Action on other host targets
Level 18: Action on Plasmin and Annexin A2
Level 19: Action on CD147 on the RBC
Level 20: Action on mitochondrial ATP under hypoxia on cardiac function

The direct “antiviral targets” may be useful in the early stages while the anti-inflammatory targets might be addressed in the later stages of the disease.
...
The development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 is centered around spike protein biology (virus targeted) and the recently documented “vaccine escape strains” have been a cause of worry. In such a situation, Ivermectin, is both, virus as well as host targeted and hence could act as a potential therapeutic against these new strains that could “escape” immunity offered by the vaccine.
...
Ivermectin, in presence of a viral infection, targets the IMPα component of the IMP α/β1 heterodimer and binds to it, preventing interaction with IMP β1, subsequently blocking the nuclear transport of viral proteins. This allows the cell to carry out its normal antiviral response
...
Ivermectin binds to the viral rdrp and disrupts it. The highly efficient binding of ivermectin to nsp14 confirms its role in inhibiting viral replication and assembly. It is well known that nsp14 is essential in transcription and replication.
...
Moreover, highly efficient binding of ivermectin to the viral N phosphoprotein and M protein is suggestive of its role in inhibiting viral replication and assembly
...
One such enzyme, 3 chymotrypsin-like proteases (3’cl pro/ Mpro) is responsible for working on this polyprotein causing other proteins to “librate” and carry out viral replication. Ivermectin binds to this enzyme and disrupts it. It also efficiently binds to both proteins, Mpro, and to a lesser extent to PLpro of SARS-CoV-2; therefore, it has a role in preventing the post-translational processing of viral polyproteins
...
Ivermectin inhibits the KPNA/KPNB1- mediated nuclear import of viral proteins allowing the cell to carry out its normal antiviral response
...
As a result, the cells surrounding the SARS-CoV-2 virus-infected cell “fail” to receive “critical and protective IFN signals” causing this SARS-CoV-2 virus to replicate and spread without any hindrance. This is one of the main reasons that, at this stage, COVID-19 infection is “hard to detect” clinically [39].

Ivermectin has been shown to promote the expression of several IFN-related genes, such as IFIT1, IFIT2, IF144, ISG20, IRF9, and OASL
...
Ivermectin inhibits lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced production of inflammatory cytokines by blocking the NF-κB pathway and improving LPS-induced survival in mice [42]. Therefore, using Ivermectin would be helpful in ICU settings where there are increased chances of bacterial infections (LPS mediated).
...
A study by Zhang et al. demonstrated that Ivermectin suppressed IL-6 and TNFα production, two major components of the detrimental cytokine storm induced by SARS-CoV-2 and “dramatically reduced” IL-6/IL-10 ratio modulating infection outcomes
...
The damage-associated molecular pattern high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), is released by damaged cells acting as an agonist for the TLR4 receptor and hence mediating lung inflammation associated with COVID-19 [59]. Ivermectin inhibits HMGB1 [60].
...
Ivermectin dramatically reduced the IL-6/IL-10 ratio in lung tissue, which likely accounts for the more favorable clinical presentation in treated animals [55]. Loss of smell has been reported as one of the common symptoms in COVID-19 [61]. Interestingly, majority of patients in India regained their sense of smell after a brief anosmic period during their clinical course. Ivermectin is being used in India as one of the first-line drugs for COVID-19 treatment. It could be hypothesized that Ivermectin might have a role to play in reducing SARS-CoV-2 induced olfactory deficit.
...
The mechanism for anti-inflammatory action of Ivermectin was explained as inhibition of cytokine production by lipopolysaccharide challenged macrophages, blockade of activation of NF-kB, and the stress-activated MAP kinases JNK and p38, and inhibition of TLR4 signaling [42, 61, 62]. Moreover, Immune cell recruitment, cytokine production in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, IgE, and IgG1 secretion in serum as well as hyper-secretion of mucus by goblet cells was reduced significantly by Ivermectin
...
Ivermectin directly inhibits STAT-3 and could play a role in the inhibition of COVID-19 complications.
...
The transmembrane receptor CD147, present on the red blood cell (RBC) along with ACE-2 has been recognized as a key binding site for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The SARS-CoV-2 does not internalize into the RBC but such attachments can lead to clumping [65]. Ivermectin binds to the S protein of the virus making it unavailable to bind with CD147. This action might also be beneficial in advanced stages of COVID-19 presenting with clotting/thrombotic phenomena.
...
SARS-CoV-2 has been a well-known cause for acute myocardial injury and chronic damage to the cardiovascular system in active infection as well as in long haulers [66]. Nagai et al. demonstrated that Ivermectin increased mitochondrial ATP production by inducing Cox6a2 expression and maintains mitochondrial ATP under hypoxic conditions preventing pathological hypertrophy and improving cardiac function
...
Conclusion
Considering the urgency of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, simultaneous detection of various new mutant strains and future potential re-emergence of novel coronaviruses, repurposing of approved drugs such as Ivermectin could be worthy of attention.

Emphasis added

Yup, just a stupid horse dewormer with no science behind it.

[CpnCrunch]

Why are you cherry picking? Do you have some kind of vested interest in it? The recent large clinical trials show no effect for viral load or mortality:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7921013571
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/ ... c7RcafX2Qc

The problem seems to be small low quality studies gave initial positive results:

https://www.cochrane.org/news/ivermecti ... r-ever-why

Saying "The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive for the 55 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 23 trillion" clearly is nonsensical, and shows a misunderstanding of the various biases and other errors.

[Aviatard]

“Could be worthy of attention” is certainly a ringing endorsement.

[Vaticinator]

Why are you cherry picking?

Lol, yeah. Cherry picking data from 55 studies, 100% of which showed improvement. I'm guessing you didn't read any of it, did you. By all means, prove anything in the article wrong. It explains in detail 20 ways in which it is allegedly beneficial. Feel free to refute any of them with evidence. I don't really care if it works for covid or not. It's just dumb to call it horse dewormer in the context of human medicine.

[Vaticinator]

“Could be worthy of attention” is certainly a ringing endorsement.

Good one.

[photofly]

Here's your "in vitro" study put in context:

Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit viral replication in vitro, but at
concentrations that may be unattainable with human therapeutic doses. Vero
cells (a non-human cell line) infected with SARS-CoV-2 and treated with 5 μmol/L
ivermectin at 2 hours post-infection showed a 5000X reduction in viral replication
compared to untreated controls. However, the 100% inhibitory concentrations of
ivermectin needed in vitro are approximately 50-55X higher than the maximum
plasma concentration of ivermectin after an oral dose of 12 mg in adults

Source: https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/as ... review.pdf

It's quite an interesting paper. A little long in the tooth now, but interesting.

[CpnCrunch]

Feel free to refute any of them with evidence.

Well first of all it's not really a meta-analysis, or even proper science. They reference ivmeta.com. Take a look at the data there for deaths. You'll see it has changed quite a bit since that "study" you referenced. But ivmeta is problematic itself. Have a look at the ref for the Together trial, which on ivmeta shows 18% reduction in mortality. But in reality that is from an unpublished non-peer-reviewed source (which they don't even reference). If you look at the website for the Together trial you'll see the study was terminated early due to "futility". A BBC article says the the treatment was found to have no effect.

So yeah, you can say 97% of trials are positive if you're fucking lying. If you're not fucking lying then you look at actual fucking science, like fucking cochrane and don't make me waste my fucking time trying to refute your fucking lying piss-ant excuse for science.

Can you tell I'm fucking pissed having wasted an hour of my time doing something you should have done yourself (check your fucking sources, which you'll see are full of shit).

[Inverted2]

Feel free to refute any of them with evidence.

Well first of all it's not really a meta-analysis, or even proper science. They reference ivmeta.com. Take a look at the data there for deaths. You'll see it has changed quite a bit since that "study" you referenced. But ivmeta is problematic itself. Have a look at the ref for the Together trial, which on ivmeta shows 18% reduction in mortality. But in reality that is from an unpublished non-peer-reviewed source (which they don't even reference). If you look at the website for the Together trial you'll see the study was terminated early due to "futility". A BBC article says the the treatment was found to have no effect.

So yeah, you can say 97% of trials are positive if you're fucking lying. If you're not fucking lying then you look at actual fucking science, like fucking cochrane and don't make me waste my fucking time trying to refute your fucking lying piss-ant excuse for science.

Can you tell I'm fucking pissed having wasted an hour of my time doing something you should have done yourself (check your fucking sources, which you'll see are full of shit).

Angry bro?

[Vaticinator]

Can you tell I'm fucking pissed having wasted an hour of my time

Awwww muffin. Can you tell I don't care?

['97 Tercel]

Feel free to refute any of them with evidence.

Well first of all it's not really a meta-analysis, or even proper science. They reference ivmeta.com. Take a look at the data there for deaths. You'll see it has changed quite a bit since that "study" you referenced. But ivmeta is problematic itself. Have a look at the ref for the Together trial, which on ivmeta shows 18% reduction in mortality. But in reality that is from an unpublished non-peer-reviewed source (which they don't even reference). If you look at the website for the Together trial you'll see the study was terminated early due to "futility". A BBC article says the the treatment was found to have no effect.

So yeah, you can say 97% of trials are positive if you're fucking lying. If you're not fucking lying then you look at actual fucking science, like fucking cochrane and don't make me waste my fucking time trying to refute your fucking lying piss-ant excuse for science.

Can you tell I'm fucking pissed having wasted an hour of my time doing something you should have done yourself (check your fucking sources, which you'll see are full of shit).

Have another booster...