So, let me show you how to really read these articles - beyond getting hyped up on the headline. It starts out by saying "could be worthy of attention" and "probable mechanisms". Meaning no hard evidence.
Then it goes on to say
"Ivermectin has rapid oral absorption, high liposolubility, is widely distributed in the body, metabolized in the…
So, let me show you how to really read these articles - beyond getting hyped up on the headline. It starts out by saying "could be worthy of attention" and "probable mechanisms". Meaning no hard evidence.
Then it goes on to say
"Ivermectin has rapid oral absorption, high liposolubility, is widely distributed in the body, metabolized in the liver (cytochrome P450 system), and excreted almost exclusively in feces" "peak plasma levels". "anti-inflammatory" This is all kinds of contradiction in terms, concepts and meanings.
We can simply start with digestion destroys molecules, rapidly. As for "peak plasma levels". If the body ingested marble dust - there would be a marble dust plasma presence. A presence doesn't mean it's doing anything. In fact, if it was doing something you wouldn't see it because it's inside a cell - and we don't have that technology yet.
To say Ivermectin is an "anti inflammatory" is odd. Ivermectin has plenty of known side effects - each cause inflammation...
Then the study you provided us with, in it's "Conclusion" states the following:
"We have summarized published results on the inhibition of multiple viral and host targets that could be involved in SARS-CoV-2 replication and the disease COVID-19. Although multiple antiviral and host target activities have been reported for ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, it is STILL UNCLEAR if any of these activities will play a role in the prevention and treatment of the disease. The controlled clinical trials that are underway will reveal if these activities will translate into clinical efficacy."
Many times it's easier to scroll down past all of the flub and get right to the conclusion notes.
I know, thanks to knowing physics chem and biology that ivermectin doesn't work. And all peer reviewed papers say the same thing. The problem is many of you don't know how to read the study properly. You think they are saying ivermectin works - but you skipped past the part where they say it works so far in a petri dish, in a lab (in vitro). You also miss the part where they ALL conclude that there is not enough evidence to say it actually works.
Official physician and CDC guidance was once positive for covid, go home, take acetaminophen, and wait until O2 levels drop and difficulty breathing sets in, then go to hospital.
Acetaminophen has a harsher side effect and risk profile than ivermectin, and on top of that it is in numerous cold medicines, so as an OTC compound, it is very likely to be used into the risk zone. Ivermectin, being prescribed at known safe, tested dosing, is quite unlikely to be causative of side effect injury. Its safety profile is better than acetaminophen.
Nevertheless, people were NOT allowed to take ivermectin "placebo" but were DIRECTED to take acetaminophen placebo, self-medicated, and with greater OD risk. That is NOT logical in any sense, nor is it ethical for a novel disease with no cure.
So, let me show you how to really read these articles - beyond getting hyped up on the headline. It starts out by saying "could be worthy of attention" and "probable mechanisms". Meaning no hard evidence.
Then it goes on to say
"Ivermectin has rapid oral absorption, high liposolubility, is widely distributed in the body, metabolized in the liver (cytochrome P450 system), and excreted almost exclusively in feces" "peak plasma levels". "anti-inflammatory" This is all kinds of contradiction in terms, concepts and meanings.
We can simply start with digestion destroys molecules, rapidly. As for "peak plasma levels". If the body ingested marble dust - there would be a marble dust plasma presence. A presence doesn't mean it's doing anything. In fact, if it was doing something you wouldn't see it because it's inside a cell - and we don't have that technology yet.
To say Ivermectin is an "anti inflammatory" is odd. Ivermectin has plenty of known side effects - each cause inflammation...
Then the study you provided us with, in it's "Conclusion" states the following:
"We have summarized published results on the inhibition of multiple viral and host targets that could be involved in SARS-CoV-2 replication and the disease COVID-19. Although multiple antiviral and host target activities have been reported for ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, it is STILL UNCLEAR if any of these activities will play a role in the prevention and treatment of the disease. The controlled clinical trials that are underway will reveal if these activities will translate into clinical efficacy."
Many times it's easier to scroll down past all of the flub and get right to the conclusion notes.
You still have been unable to present a single peer-reviewed article to support your claims. Do so or give it up, cold liver.
Every study you sent me was 2020 or 2021 - here is a more recent study provided by the Journal of American Medicine (JAMA);
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2801828
I know, thanks to knowing physics chem and biology that ivermectin doesn't work. And all peer reviewed papers say the same thing. The problem is many of you don't know how to read the study properly. You think they are saying ivermectin works - but you skipped past the part where they say it works so far in a petri dish, in a lab (in vitro). You also miss the part where they ALL conclude that there is not enough evidence to say it actually works.
Official physician and CDC guidance was once positive for covid, go home, take acetaminophen, and wait until O2 levels drop and difficulty breathing sets in, then go to hospital.
Acetaminophen has a harsher side effect and risk profile than ivermectin, and on top of that it is in numerous cold medicines, so as an OTC compound, it is very likely to be used into the risk zone. Ivermectin, being prescribed at known safe, tested dosing, is quite unlikely to be causative of side effect injury. Its safety profile is better than acetaminophen.
Nevertheless, people were NOT allowed to take ivermectin "placebo" but were DIRECTED to take acetaminophen placebo, self-medicated, and with greater OD risk. That is NOT logical in any sense, nor is it ethical for a novel disease with no cure.
The immune system is the only thing that can defeat covid, or cancer, or colds and flus etc.
Details here:
https://rev10.substack.com/p/vaccines-do-they-work-or-are-they