Ivermectin has no positive benefits for people suffering COVID-19 and likely makes things worse.
This is not true and is lazy reporting by the NYT. There were no statistically significant results (as far as i can tell). Yes there were areas where Ivermectin “did worse” but then why not point out that it “won” in terms of hospitalization events (14.7% to 16.3%)? Because the result isn’t significant. You can’t gloat about one non-SS result that’s in the favor of your argument and say it was “likely” while another non-SS result is called “proof it doesn’t work”
In fact Ivermectin was “better” in 12 of 15 sub-patient categories, no result of which was significant. Should the proponents be allowed to say it “likely” works based on that?
According to this study, Ivermectin shows no advantages, nor does it show disadvantages, for treatment. It’s a waste of money (Ivermectin for Covid treatment, i mean, not the study).
Yep! I just reading the article and supplementary materials. There isn’t a single BCI that doesn’t encompass no effect. And most credible intervals are relatively tight.
However I still disagree that it was a waste of money. As per my comment above, given the inconsistencies between smaller studies, additional evidence is valuable to build an irrefutable consensus.
I sort of wish they had included the known side effects of ivermectin in their measures.
To be fair, the study does say that people in the trial group were given 400 micrograms per kilogram of body weight, and I would bet that the people self-medicating with ivermectin meant for livestock were taking considerably larger, more harmful doses.
.