FDA Forced to Retract Statements Saying Ivermectin Does Not Work Against COVID

[Orangecat]

Go away, kitty.

Make me, Jackoff.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

when they say "little benefit" sure sounds to me like it works sometimes,,

are you up to speed and now know a virus is a parasite??

Just keep taking your ivermectin as a prophylaxis and BELIEVE

Oh...and please be considerate and leave some for the livestock.
I hear having worms sucks!

 

[hadit]

I don't need to provide evidence. In nonMAGA land this is not an issue. as noted, NO SELF RESPECTING MAGA should EVER EVER get a vaccination.


Excellent. You be you. The rest of us and the known world, will do something else.

Yes, because TRUMP! pushed the vaccine, fast-tracked it and got it out there as soon as possible. MAGA will not support TRUMP!.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Bullshit, Mr TDS man.

Go piss on someone else's leg.




Of course not. The lying fucktards at FDA would never admit they're lying fucktards.


No, you're here to make a fool of yourself. Leftards like you are a menace to society.

S'Matter scruf, ruffle your feathers?

Sorry, that's what the FDA settlement was about. Not the effectiveness of the drug.
Go spread your manure somewhere else.

 

[hadit]

silly statement ^^^^^

it prevents greatly illness, hospitalization, and or death.

But you, as a true MAGA, should not get vaxxed. I implore you and your friends not to.

Yes, MAGA will oppose TRUMP!, who fast-tracked the vaccine.

 

[progressive hunter]

Just keep taking your ivermectin as a prophylaxis and BELIEVE

Oh...and please be considerate and leave some for the livestock.
I hear having worms sucks!

I do love so much your incoherent rants when youve been proven wrong,,

and back to horse paste,, sad,,,

your ignorance is plastered all over your comments,,

but look on the bright side,,
yesterday you didnt know viruses are parasites and today you do,,

WINNING!!

 

[Independentthinker]

So when do the apologies come for all those elderly people who died but didn't have to.

‘Blood on Its Hands’: FDA Will Remove Anti-ivermectin Social Media, Website Posts Under Lawsuit Settlement Agreement

The FDA, which denied any wrongdoing, said it will remove content warning people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19 within 21 days. Plaintiffs called the settlement a big win for patients and the patient-physician relationship.

childrenshealthdefense.org

“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreed to take down its website and social media posts warning people not to use ivermectin to treat COVID-19 under terms of a settlement reached Thursday in a lawsuit alleging the agency exceeded its authority when it directed health professionals and patients not to use the drug.

Within 21 days, the agency will remove the consumer update, “Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19,” which pictures a doctor and a horse. The FDA posted the update on March 5, 2021.

The FDA webpage, still live, states repeatedly that the FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for treating COVID-19 and warns the drug can be “unsafe.” The page also includes language warning people not to use ivermectin “intended for livestock.”

The FDA will also delete social media posts from Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram posted in 2021 and 2022 with messages such as “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.””

Below: FDA post on Twitter implying that Ivermetin was only for livestock

A compendium of existing scientific literature on the use of Ivermectin for COVID, c19ivm.org, has long reported since the start of COVID that when Ivermectin is used:

“Statistically significant lower risk is seen for mortality, ventilation, ICU admission, hospitalization, recovery, cases, and viral clearance. All remain significant for higher quality studies. 61 studies from 55 independent teams in 25 different countries show statistically significant improvements.

Meta analysis using the most serious outcome shows 62% [51‑70%] and 85% [77‑90%] lower risk for early treatment and prophylaxis, with similar results for higher quality studies, primary outcomes, peer-reviewed studies, and for RCTs.

Results are very robust — in worst case exclusion sensitivity analysis 61 of 101 studies must be excluded to avoid finding statistically significant efficacy.”

It's rather ironic that the most misinformation out there was misinformation spread by the left or the censorship and first amendment rights violations were from the left.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

I do love so much your incoherent rants when youve been proven wrong,,

and back to horse paste,, sad,,,

your ignorance is plastered all over your comments,,

but look on the bright side,,
yesterday you didnt know viruses are parasites and today you do,,

WINNING!!

Face it, you've been proven wrong and still you keep getting up off the mat for another beatdown.
You're a true believer and there's nothing anyone is going to say to move you off of that belief.

So just be a man, take your meds and stop whining to everyone that your savior was right.

 

[progressive hunter]

Face it, you've been proven wrong and still you keep getting up off the mat for another beatdown.
You're a true believer and there's nothing anyone is going to say to move you off of that belief.

So just be a man, take your meds and stop whining to everyone that your savior was right.

you havent proven anything I said wrong,,

but as we both now know a virus is a parasite and as you said ivermectin is for parasites,,

so just be a man and stop playing childish word games,,

 

[Kilroy2]

Blood on whose hand

It is the doctors fault for prescribing it or suggesting it or the person fault for buying it over the counter prescription drug based on on the right wing drama about COVID vaccinations

Anti vaxxers rhetoric for putting fear into peoples mind and forces them to seek alternatives

FDA stated the warning but that was all they could do based on the laws.

It was never an approved method for COVID 19 in the US

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ivermectin dispensing by retail pharmacies has increased, as has use of veterinary formulations available over the counter but not intended for human use. FDA has cautioned about the potential risks of use for prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

Warnings were issued

Yet the government with deep pockets gets the blame


The FDA has never asserted that the off-label prescribing of ivermectin for COVID-19 was prohibited; the agency has reiterated this point in court and in public filings many times prior to August 2023.

Did FDA Recently 'Admit' That Doctors Can Prescribe Ivermectin For COVID-19?

The FDA does not, and has not, prohibited doctors from prescribing any drugs for off-label uses.

www.snopes.com

Yet it is the anti vaxxers who should be blame because they spread the doubt and lies concerning vaccinations.

If they do not get vaccinated then what are the other choices. They have to buy into the alternative remedies floating around the internet and spread by the anti vaxxers


Yeah it seems some entities like the below got caught up into it

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2207995

Given the wide availability and low cost of ivermectin and that the dosage used in the trial appeared to be safe, such treatment effects could be an important benefit for high-risk patients who do not have access to approved Covid-19 vaccines and costly therapies.

New England Journal of Medicine was even taunting it for those who do not have the money

Irony is COVID vaccination were free

Trump’s vaccine rhetoric sends chills through public health circles

Public health advocates are watching in growing alarm as former President Trump increasingly embraces the anti-vaccine movement. “I will not give one penny to any school that has …

thehill.com

Trump got the vaccination and was instrumental in getting it fast track

Trump’s vaccine rhetoric sends chills through public health circles

Public health advocates are watching in growing alarm as former President Trump increasingly embraces the anti-vaccine movement. “I will not give one penny to any school that has …

thehill.com

Now he is an anti vaxxer. Its not like it will get him more votes

 

[progressive hunter]

Blood on whose hand

It is the doctors fault for prescribing it or suggesting it or the person fault for buying it over the counter prescription drug based on on the right wing drama about COVID vaccinations

Anti vaxxers rhetoric for putting fear into peoples mind and forces them to seek alternatives

FDA stated the warning but that was all they could do based on the laws.

It was never an approved method for COVID 19 in the US

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ivermectin dispensing by retail pharmacies has increased, as has use of veterinary formulations available over the counter but not intended for human use. FDA has cautioned about the potential risks of use for prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

Warnings were issued

Yet the government with deep pockets gets the blame


The FDA has never asserted that the off-label prescribing of ivermectin for COVID-19 was prohibited; the agency has reiterated this point in court and in public filings many times prior to August 2023.

Did FDA Recently 'Admit' That Doctors Can Prescribe Ivermectin For COVID-19?

The FDA does not, and has not, prohibited doctors from prescribing any drugs for off-label uses.

www.snopes.com

Yet it is the anti vaxxers who should be blame because they spread the doubt and lies concerning vaccinations.

If they do not get vaccinated then what are the other choices. They have to buy into the alternative remedies floating around the internet and spread by the anti vaxxers


Yeah it seems some entities like the below got caught up into it

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2207995

Given the wide availability and low cost of ivermectin and that the dosage used in the trial appeared to be safe, such treatment effects could be an important benefit for high-risk patients who do not have access to approved Covid-19 vaccines and costly therapies.

New England Journal of Medicine was even taunting it for those who do not have the money

Irony is COVID vaccination were free

Trump’s vaccine rhetoric sends chills through public health circles

Public health advocates are watching in growing alarm as former President Trump increasingly embraces the anti-vaccine movement. “I will not give one penny to any school that has …

thehill.com

Trump got the vaccination and was instrumental in getting it fast track

Trump’s vaccine rhetoric sends chills through public health circles

Public health advocates are watching in growing alarm as former President Trump increasingly embraces the anti-vaccine movement. “I will not give one penny to any school that has …

thehill.com

Now he is an anti vaxxer. Its not like it will get him more votes

another mindless drone that doesnt realize the covid vaccine isnt a vaccine that doesnt stop you from contracting covid or spreading covid,,,

OH and you can still die with the covid non-vaccine,,

best you not tell other people what to think or do after this ignorant comment,,

 

[Kilroy2]

another mindless drone that doesnt realize the covid vaccine isnt a vaccine that doesnt stop you from contracting covid or spreading covid,,,

OH and you can still die with the covid non-vaccine,,

best you not tell other people what to think or do after this ignorant comment,,

drone , tell me where I said any of the above. Your the one who is saying it

talk about Invercectin if you can

Yet you ignorance is that you have another narrative that you want to tell people what to do

How can I tell people what to do , i can only state an opinion that you seem to fear

Is that an original idea that people can still die from COVID -19 despite seeking help. Did you think that up all by yourself.

Mindless drone such as yourself change the subject

Ivermectin Does Not Work Against COVID​

if you believe different then tell us why it works

 

[progressive hunter]

Ivermectin Does Not Work Against COVID

you make a statement of fact and then say its an opinion,,

what gives??

 

[Missourian]

to be clear : ivermectin is not tested or approved to treat covid or mudh else ourside of intestinal parasites.

some doofus winning a case for "free speech" does NOT make a drug effective.

my brother works for a sprawling state wide hospital system , in a red state, that has several wards for covid patients but NO COViD VACCINE WARDS.

a problem this great certainly calls for study. how much has congress appropriated for research into these deadly vaccine side effects?

Yep...and you won't need a mask...no, no wait, you DO need a mask and stay six feet apart...and Covid originated in a wet market...

If you still believe anything these people say, there's no hope for you.

 

[sparky]

if you believe different then tell us why it works

~S~

 

[Kilroy2]

you make a statement of fact and then say its an opinion,,

what gives??

what statement are are you referring to and the thread is not legally binding or am I making an affidavit that has been notarized .

 

[progressive hunter]

what statement are are you referring to and the thread is not legally binding or am I making an affidavit that has been notarized .

so its just your opinion ivermectin doesnt work against covid??

 

[sparky]

Alkaline vs. Acidic .....~S~

 

[Kilroy2]

so its just your opinion ivermectin doesnt work against covid??

In the context of the thread , its a statement that they made in regards to the lawsuit

“FDA has not changed its position that currently available clinical trial data do not demonstrate that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. The agency has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19.”

Its not an opinion as its a belief that the FDA who has the data has made logical arguments to support their position and no one has refuted it. It just they should not be the ones who make that opinion

NIH can make that decision

So it is a drug that can be used and shown to be useful in certain treatments

COVID 19 is not one of them

- The plaintiffs said their lawsuit wasn’t about whether ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19. It was about who determines the appropriate treatment for each unique patient and whether the FDA can interfere with that process.

So they really do not address the effectiveness of the treatment for COVID 19, they are just mad because the government is interfering with their doctor/ patient relationship

So the court rules that they cannot make recommendations

FDA Forced to Retract Statements Saying Does Not Work Against COVID​

The only reason that they retracting the statement is because it is one they should not make

The FDA webpage, still live, states repeatedly that the FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for treating COVID-19 and warns the drug can be “unsafe.”

The court’s finding that the FDA exceeded its regulatory authority, Marik said, “is a major win because it’s saying that the FDA can approve drugs, but they can’t interfere with the patient-physician relationship.”

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures.3 However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans.4,5

Recommendation from NIH​

• The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19

Trials have failed to find a clinical benefit of using ivermectin to treat COVID-19 in outpatients. I

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in COVID-19 with a low certainty of evidence.

Meaning it may or it may not but we don't know for certain thus confidence in the drug is not high

so it is a what if depending on what side your on

its nothing more than a placebo. Whether one survives or dies with COVID 19 depends on a lot of other factors.

​

NIH which can make that decisions says​

​

The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 (AIIa​

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Trials have failed to find a clinical benefit of using ivermectin to treat COVID-19 in outpatients. In TOGETHER, an adaptive platform trial conducted in Brazil, there was no apparent difference between the ivermectin and placebo arms for the primary outcome of risk of emergency department visits or hospitalization (14.7% vs. 16.4%).

 

[progressive hunter]

In the context of the thread , its a statement that they made in regards to the lawsuit

“FDA has not changed its position that currently available clinical trial data do not demonstrate that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. The agency has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19.”

Its not an opinion as its a belief that the FDA who has the data has made logical arguments to support their position and no one has refuted it. It just they should not be the ones who make that opinion

NIH can make that decision

So it is a drug that can be used and shown to be useful in certain treatments

COVID 19 is not one of them

- The plaintiffs said their lawsuit wasn’t about whether ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19. It was about who determines the appropriate treatment for each unique patient and whether the FDA can interfere with that process.

So they really do not address the effectiveness of the treatment for COVID 19, they are just mad because the government is interfering with their doctor/ patient relationship

So the court rules that they cannot make recommendations

FDA Forced to Retract Statements Saying Does Not Work Against COVID​

The only reason that they retracting the statement is because it is one they should not make

The FDA webpage, still live, states repeatedly that the FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for treating COVID-19 and warns the drug can be “unsafe.”

The court’s finding that the FDA exceeded its regulatory authority, Marik said, “is a major win because it’s saying that the FDA can approve drugs, but they can’t interfere with the patient-physician relationship.”

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures.3 However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans.4,5

Recommendation from NIH​

• The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19

Trials have failed to find a clinical benefit of using ivermectin to treat COVID-19 in outpatients. I

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in COVID-19 with a low certainty of evidence.

Meaning it may or it may not but we don't know for certain thus confidence in the drug is not high

so it is a what if depending on what side your on

its nothing more than a placebo. Whether one survives or dies with COVID 19 depends on a lot of other factors.

​

NIH which can make that decisions says​

​

The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 (AIIa​

Ivermectin | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

Review clinical data on the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

Trials have failed to find a clinical benefit of using ivermectin to treat COVID-19 in outpatients. In TOGETHER, an adaptive platform trial conducted in Brazil, there was no apparent difference between the ivermectin and placebo arms for the primary outcome of risk of emergency department visits or hospitalization (14.7% vs. 16.4%).

beings that ivermectin is for parasites and covid is a parasite it wouldnt be unreasonable to think there could be some crossover and helped for covid,,

many doctors have reported positive results,,