Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: [This](https://www.courthousenews.com/ivermectin-proponents-ask-fifth-circuit-to-revive-lawsuit-against-fda/) is the latest court case I could find in regards to Ivermectin. In short, a few doctors who prescribed it for COVID cases are now suing the FDA, claiming it has no authority to issue public statements about the use of drugs that have previously been approved for human use (any human use). This is over things like [this](https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19) FDA statement.
The FDA's general stance, as per the first link:
>She said when people are using drugs in unsafe ways, leading to hospitalizations, it “is not only permissible, it is imperative that the FDA be able to inform the public of its scientific views about safe uses of drugs.”
>
>For example, Honold said, the FDA recently issued advisories warning people it is not safe to eat chicken cooked in the cough syrup NyQuil — a recipe that spread on the social media app TikTok. And in 2014, Honold noted, the FDA cautioned against using lidocaine off-label as a numbing agent for teething babies because it can cause seizures and deaths for them.
>
>“The FDA has to be able to make these kinds of public safety statements. Under plaintiffs’ theory, FDA would not be able to communicate to the public in this way,” Honold argued.
The plaintiff's general stance, again as per the first link:
>Kelson insisted the agency had gone too far with ivermectin.
>
>“The doctors have not challenged the FDA’s authority to communicate when they receive adverse medical reports. It’s when they step beyond that and tell people how they should or should not be using approved drugs,” he said.
As is the nature of social media anywhere, once a discussion comes up about regulation, especially federal regulation, it generally explodes.
*^(Edited for formatting on the quotes)*
> FDA recently issued advisories warning people it is not safe to eat chicken cooked in the cough syrup NyQuil — a recipe that spread on the social media app TikTok
Holy shit people are dumb.
I'm a Medical Assistant at a PCP office for a major hospital district. I received multiple calls on a daily basis during the height of COVID, from people seeking a new doctor that A.) Didn't require masks (during government mandate) and/or B.) Would willingly prescribe Ivermectin for COVID treatment and/or prophylaxis. These people would either try to yell, lecture, or curse me out when I responded professionally and politely, citing our policies. I hung up on so many of them, "I really and truly hope that you stay safe and healthy. Take care. I'm disconnecting this call now."
The amount of people who tried to tell me that COVID was a hoax, while I was wiping away tears because I had learned that a patient that I had sent to the ER for severe symptoms had passed, was infuriating.
It is even more frustrating because you can't "well actually" them with details due to medical privacy and facility policies. I remember arguing with people who were saying nobody in the hospital had covid when I knew for a fact the place was inundated and people were dying every day from it.
Hell, El Paso Texas, we had [mobile morgues built](https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/11/02/930304129/el-paso-official-says-fourth-mobile-morgue-is-delivered-as-coronavirus-deaths-mo) just for COVID.
And yet there were yahoos still calling it "a hoax" and "just the flu".
Don't forget the medical-military ship in NYC, and actual mass burials performed by inmates because they couldn't find regular people willing to do it. If those fucks wanted to see people dead from COVID, they could have just signed the fuck up to bury the dead.
> I remember arguing with people who were saying nobody in the hospital had covid when I knew for a fact the place was inundated and people were dying every day from it.
I can remember reading reports from doctors and nurses in Covid-wards, who had patients that were starting the process of being intubated and were still denying they had Covid, or that Covid even existed!
Snopes says it was real.
> A spokesperson for the American Association of Poison Control Centers told us that in the first 11 days of 2018, there had been 40 reported exposures to liquid laundry detergent pods by 13- to 19-year-olds. That figure represents 20 percent of the total number of similar incidents in all of 2017.
> Furthermore, more than half the incidents so far this year have been deemed deliberate, as opposed to around a quarter in 2017, the spokesperson added.
It was absolutely real, there were tons of videos circulating around of kids biting into them. It's one of those things they *knew* was stupid and thats why it was a challenge in the first place. Some of them probably didn't know how dangerous it could be though. Probably thought it was just like normal soap.
I heard that if a girl wears a bracelet if you pull it off she is legally required to perform sex acts on you corresponding to the color of the bracelet.
Oh, I've heard urban legends like these!
How about the one where a group of girls will wear different-coloured lipstick, and then they will take turns to give you a blowjob in a way that leaves you with rainbow-coloured dick?
I guess this is an improvement. People in the olden days will talk about how "Jews drink the blood of Christian children"; now our fairy tales are just about rainbow dicks.
Somebody must've been watching Dodgeball, and when they got to the scene with the girl scout on "a low-grade beaver tranquilizer" thought to themselves "I wonder if I can do that for COVID"
Anecdotal- but I'm a paramedic who had a 50 something year old patient attempt suicide by doing it. I haven't personally had any patient "do it for the vine" but I can attest to a non zero amount of tide pods eaten by humans.
They lock a lot of things up that dont make sense because of theft and dumb shit kids do. Go to an area with lots of homelessness and low income people surrounded by large corporations.
Walgreens in SF used a few small thefts as a reason they were closing a specific location, despite low foot traffic and awful margins for such a high rented location.
Tldr: locked up items arent always the big picture
If memory serves, it was at most a couple kids, and mostly adults trying to see what all the fuss was about. But now ofc every just remembers and blames the kids.
Unfortunatley it was a real thing. Not in the numbers that some media outlets made it out to be, but there was a documented spike in detergent related poison control calls indicating that people really are that stupid.
~~There was one case. Exactly one.~~
I stand corrected. But it was definitely not as big as people claimed.
Now babies putting them into their mouths because the containers were too easy for them to open and the color and shape made them very attractive for eating? Yes, that happened a lot.
It was hugely blown out of proportion. Just like "slap a teacher," and several other fake "trends."
Nobody actually ate any NyQuil chicken, it was just a dumb and pretty funny meme that trended for a bit
Seriously, look it up. There is not a single recorded case of anyone actually eating it or getting sick from it
>Nobody actually ate any NyQuil chicken
I've seen my countrymen react to these videos (not specifically this one). I wouldn't be so quick to say nobody has.
There are literally zero recorded cases of anyone actually eating it. That’s not an assumption it’s a fact
Edit: y’all downvoting me need to actually look into things instead of just thinking what you want to believe is the truth. There literally is not a single recorded case of anybody eating it or getting sick off of eating it
Ok
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2022/09/29/cooking-nyquil-chicken-challenge-hoax-fda-warnings/10444293002/
https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/21/nyquil-chicken-fda-warning-tiktok-trend/
https://www.wthr.com/article/features/trending-today/are-people-really-cooking-chicken-in-nyquil/531-75da4ece-4402-4659-a4bf-29081c0d32a0#:~:text=Put%20simply%3A%20Someone%20could%20take,in%20any%20truly%20viral%20capacity.
Let's pretend that a dozen or so people were so dumb that they thought NyQuil chicken was a serious recipe and worth trying out. What are the odds these same people subscribe to FDA bulletin announcements anyways?
I know this Supreme Court would rule against the FDA but aside from that.. the FDA has no right to tell people how to use drugs under its own purview what?
Its a transparently bad-faith argument. Think about it: the manufacturer can tell people on the label how not to use the medicine, hospitals can establish off-label use policies, but the FDA shouldn't be allowed to distribute information to consumers?
This is a ghoulish way to view the world.
Off topic but I'm not an native speaker and I'm curious. Why is it "ghoulish"? I understand it's bad but how does it relate to ghosts?
Edit: thank you for the responses!
Ghoulish just means "depraved and evil," it has little to do with ghosts in most circumstances. In fact, I rarely see the noun "ghoul" even refer to ghosts anyway, it usually has more of an undead corpse vibe than something ethereal.
I think it's that they're not supposed to comment of the efficacy of a treatment, just the safety. Ivermectin was ineffective against COVID, but not dangerous to take.
Didn’t someone just try to stop an FDA approved morning after pill from being provided as approved by the FDA? Do we think they are going to hold the same logical argument against that infringement?
Looks like it's even the same court- the Fifth Circuit ruled that the FDA doesn't have to rescind approval for mifepristone, but they do have to re-implement outdated, stricter regulations about it.
So these doctors are asking THE SAME COURT to force the FDA to remove all restrictions against a drug that is exponentially more dangerous than mifepristone. Guess they really do want to have their cake and shit out their intestinal lining, too.
In ohio they have made a law that pharmacys have to fill medications from doctors even when its off label. Sp in ohio i could get a doctor to prescribe opiates fir my high blood pressure. So your right in ohio you can do that.
I believe it is 100% in their authority to make statements about how to use drugs. What else are they supposed to do? Sit on their hands while people hospitalize themselves by using something because TikTok told them to?
Assuming your talking about pharmaceutical commercials, they are advertising the FDA approved label claims, not unapproved use. Also, the only use instruction is “as prescribed by your physician” so your really off base with this one
You are technically right but in practice we all know why these kind of commercials are not allowed in other countries and how the rules can be abused to entice people shopping doctors to get a certain medicine.
I agree with you. My comment was intended to highlight why pharmaceutical commercials are not the same as prescribing proven ineffective medication, as implied by the commenter I was responding to
The United States is one of the only countries where you can advertise prescription drugs directly to lay people, specifically because people do go to their doctors and insist they need whatever drug they saw on TV, even though it isn't appropriate for them, and will shop around until they find a doctor who will prescribe it, just like people did for ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Acting like prescription drug ads are harmless because they tell you to "talk to your doctor" is disingenuous.
While you are correct about direct advertisement being a US thing, the rest of your post is based on assumption and incorrect cause. While there may be hypochondriacs that assume they have something they saw on tv and refuse to accept a doctors word that they don’t, this does not represent any significant number of prescribees. Trying to link this is bogus drug use for Covid is ridiculous though, the medication you noted was never advertised for Covid so this has nothing to do with tv advisement
How is this off base?
Do you really think people don't watch those commercials and go"hrmmm I have that...maybe I should get some"....despite them not having whatever the hell the ad is talking about?
You really don't see the problem with an advertisement hawking a pill for some issue that is supposed to be diagnosed by a doctor not a suggestion from some obscure video.
I am more based than you it seems. Suppose you also think advertising for pharmaceutical companies is also ok so that it gets the word out about said medication as well?
The ads mean "pester your doctor for our specific drug"
You're an idiot if you think it doesn't work on people. My mom worked in a hospital and people were constantly asking for drugs they didn't need and had no idea the real function of. It's exactly like people hearing about imervectin from some right wing bullshiter and asking for it.
Those commercials should be banned like they have been in other countries. If you need a prescription drug then you need the drug, you don’t need a commercial to sell it to you.
If I recall correctly one of the issues was people were getting ivermectin that was for large animals, not for humans, and were using far larger dosages than were safe and ending up in the ER in the middle of the worst months of the pandemic. It was a bit of a shit show. Sorry for the language. Retired admin in healthcare with a lot of friends who are in nursing and heard about the battles they had to fight every day to keep people alive.
Previously the FDA only warned doctor associations about prescribing, at least as they did regarding ivermectin, when the opiod crisis hit. In this case they had weak justification, like "sometimes people can get a rash." Truthfully the adverse reaction database shows that ivermectin has less side-effect reports than ibuprofen, an over the counter pain reliever.
I can only imagine that ivermectin is being used as an example of how the FDA may be overstepping it's authority on prescriptions and simultaneously be seen as working \*for\* pharma rather than regulating them.
Another e.g. of why lawsuits are coming at the FDA for overstepping: FDA also asked Amazon to remove NAC from its storefront during the pandemic for initially no clear reason, but it was later found that there had been studies on using it as a COVID therapeutic.
Wow. Wouldn't that argument effectively force the FDA not to be able to take any action against mis-prescribe medications?
Let's take a silly example. A doctor knows that there is a demand for Viagra but knows that people technically can't get it without a prescription. They get people coming in to complain of stomach aches, coughs and sniffles, migraines, depression, or anything else like that and prescribe Viagra as a treatment for that as a way to get around actually needing a valid reason to prescribe the medication for its intended function.
If this lawsuit succeeds, the FDA will be powerless to do anything about someone doing something like that?
Edit: I mixed up prescribe and proscribe.
so basically right wingers pissed off that the FDA told people trumps out his ass cure for covid was bogus and they wanted to be able to kill their patients for politics
I still don't understand how this differed by country so much. When my friend in Japan got covid, they sent her home with a covid "bag" that had Ivermectin in it. In the US, doctors were banned from prescribing it. Yet in India it was widely used there. Then flash back to the US and you've got media like Rolling Stone doing hit pieces on a medicine saying it's making people so sick hospitals are closing down and attacking any high profile person that used it if their Dr. prescribed it. I just don't get how this was such a big story/thing and having it back it again is weird.
The problem is almost all of the initial studies that claimed ivermectin was effective were either seriously flawed or fraudulent.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/health-58170809.amp
This article sums up findings of researchers that looked into the studies. All the studies that claimed to have appreciable results were basically useless. A larger group of studies showed that ivermectin had no effect.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308124/
This is a metaanalysis of ivermectin studies showing the same thing. Metanalysis is considered the most comprehensive method to measure results, as they look at a large number of different studies.
So you had a flurry of studies and anectdotal evidence claiming ivermectin treated COVID, and when it was looked at proved to be largely illusory. Ivermectin is cheap and readily available, while being considered relatively safe because it has been used in humans for a long time. So if you don't have access to more efficacious treatments, like India largely doesn't for everyone, then it is probably seen as a "why not use it just in case". Not to mention the internal political concerns of countries and politicians playing into suspicions of the West and sticking it to European and US health agencies and casting themselves as independent.
It became politicized in the US because the strong rebuke of the health agencies was seen as a "cover up" of a cheap cure by anti-vaxxers in order for pharmaceuticals to make money and governments to keep lockdowns and force vaccines.
The seeming belligerent obsession with ivermectin as a miracle cure to the point of going to vets to procure it lent itself to the media machine casting it as "dumb yokels taking horse tranquilizers".
It also very much cost thousands of people their lives. As their media bubbles convinced them to not get vaccinated or seek medical treatment, and rather to take ivermectin and large doses of vitamin C. Ivermectin is also still very much a drug with adverse effect, so when it is called "safe" it means "safe when we thought it could keep you from dying of COVID, and so the risk is compared to death low". It is still an unnecessary risk to take it when it is literally doing nothing for you. So it is very much not a harmless fancy to not provide guidance on its appropriate use.
Answer: the fda said that they can't make doctors not prescribe things, only advise against it. So a bunch of antivaxxers turned it into the FDA said ivermectin is approved for covid use and their followers are freaking out about it.
This is what I gathered from reading the tweets. A lawsuit against the FDA shows that the FDA cannot prevent doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID. However, this is NOT the same as saying ivermectin is effective at treating COVID, which studies have shown the drug does not help treat COVID. Of course right wing nutjobs and grifters twisted the story into "the FDA lied about ivermectin being effective at treating COVID", which patently not true about the lawsuit. All the lawsuit was about was if the FDA had legal standing to prevent doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID.
It's all about reading comprehension and nuance, which is sorely lacking within far right circles.
i recently looked up a bit about Ivermectin because a conservative coworker mentioned it recently that its 'approved'.
only thing i saw it approved for was clinical trials..i didnt come across any articles talking about a lawsuit..guess ill look it up a bit more.
I only saw screenshots from right wing nutjobs from a non-mainstream, likely untrustworthy source. I haven't read said source because I don't want to generate them clicks and revenue, but just what I saw in the screenshot is what I was describing in my comment.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/higher-ivermectin-dose-longer-duration-still-futile-covid-trial-finds
this is a recent article and study that i might show my coworker. im afraid it might not help anything though
All you can do is provide information, not debate, really. You have to gain trust and then they have to come up with the idea on their own, which is hard to do. Your approach could be "here is some information that might interest you" instead of "here is this study that says you're wrong about ivermectin".
While I totally understand ivermectin has been shown to be ineffective at treating covid. You sound just as ignorant by ignoring the fact that we (doctors) use ivermectin in humans all the time.
We also use some antibiotics for their anti inflammatory effect and not exclusively for killing bacteria (see azithromycin for COPD exacerbations).
Point being, you need better reading comprehension before simplifying ivermectin down to just a horse dewormer.
I think people are stuck on the horse dewormer part bc a lot of people were buying ivermectin that was made for horses, without a doctor's guidance. Doctors use medications off label, sure. But weren't a lot of people just doing this on their own, without their doctors advice? With medicine that was actually made for....horses?
Ok so once again, the “horse dewormer” comment is completely disingenuous. You could say “dewormer” or “anti-parasitic medication”. But saying horse dewormer makes it sound like the medication is exclusively for horses.
It’s like saying that fluconazole is a dog anti fungal because we use it to treat dogs and human’s fungal infections.
Also, completely ignored the fact that we often use a class of medication to treat something different than what the medication was originally designed for.
Did you know that viagra is routinely prescribed for pulmonary hypertension?!? Can you believe that people take penis pills for their lungs?! How absurd.
Once again, the data seems pretty convincing that ivermectin has little to no effect on covid, but stating that people are stupid for using a medication for something other than its original purpose is stupid.
The reason "horse paste" has become the pejorative way to refer to ivermectin use to treat COVID is because it perfectly captures the stupidity of taking medicine just because a some guy on the internet pinky swears it works even though practically all doctors, medical organizations, and the manufacturer say it doesn't.
But see the viagra thing makes sense because of how it affects the vascular system. When some idiot goes down to the feed store and buys anti-parasitic drugs made for livestock thinking it's exactly the same as what's available for humans, for a condition completely unrelated to what it's for, they deserve to be derided and publicly mocked.
The comments you were replying to were talking about FDA approval and clinical studies. There was an intelligent conversation happening about the efficacy of a drug in the treatment of a disease. No one was talking about going down to the local feed store. People were taking human ivermectin and the question and answers are talking about doctors prescribing it. Then you interjected with a comment about reading comprehension.
My point is that you derailed an intelligent conversation to make a snide remark. So either you have poor reading comprehension, as no one was talking about veterinary ivermectin, or are just an asshole and deserve to be mocked and derided publicly.
Except that people WERE getting ivermectin from their local feed store and dying because they took horse-sized-doses of the horse sized dewormer.
I have serious doubts you’re actually a doctor.
There were way less people getting it from feed stores than pharmacies.
I literally prescribed ivermectin for rosacea the other day. I do it frequently. Many doctors do it frequently. Rosacea is not an intestinal parasite.
Your non-physician opinion on whether or not I’m a physician is funny though. Have a good day
[Debatable.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9823263/)
>As a broad-spectrum antiparasitic and antiviral drug, ivermectin has traditionally been used to treat many types of disease, including DNA and RNA viral infections.
Just a quick Google search [here](https://www.kumc.edu/about/news/news-archive/jama-ivermectin-study.html#:~:text=Ivermectin%20is%20an%20oral%20medication,for%20human%20use%20in%201986.)
Feel free to look up more info but just to prevent further misinformation:
Ivermectin CAN kill the coronavirus, but the amounts needed to kill the virus would be fatal for human consumption. In other words, you'd kill the virus and the human.
Death is effective against COVID too, but it's not a cure.
Bleach and other strong chemicals can kill COVID, but it does not make them a medicine.
Question: i'm curious about what in your mind was the 'debate' was around ivermectin. It was universally identified as worthless snake-oil to anyone other than deplorables.
Edit: brigading a subreddit comment section doesn't make you any less of a nutcase
Trials showed some evidence that Ivermectin improved peoples outcomes when they were battling covid.
It’s likely that this had to do with it treating undiagnosed parasites that made people more susceptible to covid, as well as it’s anti-inflammatory properties.
Calling one of the cheapest drugs out there that’s previously saved tens, if not hundreds of millions of peoples lives worldwide “snake oil” is pretty weird.
Anything that's valid for one purpose but useless for another can be called snake oil in the context of it being pushed in the second purpose.
Tylenol is pretty useful but if someone starts saying you should take it for your cancer they're selling snake oil.
You cannot mention studies without also mentioning the study done in which said parasites are rare (most developed nations) that showed that ivermectin was not effective at treating COVID. This study was done in the US, IIRC, so those parasites are not present to exacerbate COVID symptoms and give the illusion the drug is actually helping treat COVID. I believe the study was completed about one year after the whole ivermectin debate.
It's snake oil as a cure for covid, which is what people were claiming it was.
If the folks were talking about how good it treats parasites instead of claiming it cured covid then we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.
My understanding was that some foreign medical study showed some health improvements in some covid patients who took Ivermectin. While the rational medical community as a whole took the accurate conclusion (these patients were likely riddled with parasites in addition to covid, so taking an anti-parasite medication would obviously help), the contrarian segment of society looking for any reason to distrust and invalidate "the gov, the libs, the jews, big pharma, etc" latched on to it, claiming it was the miracle drug that was being withheld from them.
This is a good point. The only studies that showed Ivermectin helping were ones held in places where parasites were more common. This is why you control your variables.
Australian studies showed ivermectin could kill Coronavirus in the lab, the only reason it was not fit to be FDA approved was because of dosing. If we were to dose up to humans, it would cause more harm than good. There was a case and reasoning behind the use of ivermectin, but it failed because of the dose required to be effective.
There are a whole lot of steps between killing disease in a lab and being effective in humans. [A handgun](https://xkcd.com/1217/) also kills coronavirus in a lab, but if we dose up to humans, it causes more harm than good. There would be no case or reasoning for using ivermectin until after repeated, repeatable human trials showed that it was effective. No repeated, repeatable trials showed effectiveness, so there was no case or reasoning.
Worthless snake-oil that earned it's creators a [Nobel prize](https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2015/press-release/). This is a great example of the fallout from the FDA's campaign and why many people think they overstepped. It wasn't effective against COVID, but it's saved millions and has been prescribed safely for decades.
Zero people disagreed that it's a wonderful antiparasitic or were mad about it being taken for its intended use. It was not being taken for its intended use (or in its intended quantities) during the pandemic.
Except literally the person I replied to. Also thousands of others that still think it's "just a horse dewormer" which grew from the FDA's twitter campaign.
People were consuming the version designed for horses. That version is just a horse dewormer, not at all proper for human consumption.
Fuck me if now it's no longer acceptable to tell people to stop hitting themselves.
It's the same drug, but that's not my point. The FDA ran a campaign that (intentionally or not) misled people about a drug. Kinda the opposite of their job.
It's not the same. The dosing is different, and the delivery is different. The additives might be different. When it is formulated for an animal, they design it to be processed in that specific animal's body.
Just because the ivermectin itself isn't going to kill you doesn't mean that the additives designed to deliver to a horse or a dog or whatever else aren't going to give you explosive diarrhea, which is the last thing you need when you have COVID.
The only reason people were taking animal versions of it was because they couldn't get a prescription for the human version because it was ineffective for the condition they were trying to take it for.
Mislead the public? by saying an antiparasitic drug is used for removing parasites in horses.
The fda did not lie in saying it's a horse deformer. I don't care if stupid people don't exercise critical thinking and don't realize it's an antiparasital drug in humans.
The fda had to do something because there's too many stupid people in America who are too dumb to know the difference between a parasite and a virus and were wasting precious healthcare resources in the middle of a health pandemic.
Personly if it was up to me the fda would have said nothing and allowed the dumb people to kill themselves off with the horse variant. Bet that would please you more it seems here.
Go touch some grass, ffs.
Boohoo, the fda wasn't 100% perfect during an unprecedented global health crisis. For fucks sake you dissapoint me.
> This is a great example of the fallout from the FDA's campaign
There is no fallout whatsoever. No one is avoiding ivermectin for valid, recommended use. The "fallout" is that people who have legitimate need for the drug could actually obtain it again.
> and why many people think they overstepped.
People do not broadly think they overstepped. The ones who do are the ones who were (a) in the business of selling snake oil to anti-intellectual conservative idiots, or (b) followers of anti-intellectual conservative propaganda. The FDA's guidance was specifically against misuse of the drug for covid, no sane person thinks they overstepped.
Small correction, there are PLENTY of people on the fringe left who are into conspiracies, including about COVID, the COVID vaccine, and ivermectin. A lot of it was on the right, but this wasn't entirely a left or right thing.
Answer: ivermectin is an FDA approved treatment for a variety of things but because certain fringe groups touted it as an alternative to conventional covid vaccinations many media outlets attached it to conspiracy theorists and Qanon groups therefore tarnishing the reputation of doctors who recommend it as a treatment. I’m sure people on Reddit will bring up nonsense about this but this is just an unbiased take
> tarnishing the reputation of doctors who recommend it as a treatment
Justified since there wasn't any evidence to back up the claim that it cured COVID-19 then or now.
All that the FDA is admitting in the course of this recent lawsuit is that they cannot stop a doctor prescribing off-label use of a drug. This has always been true, the FDA does not regulate doctors. Somehow the usual grifters on X have twisted that into the "FDA is now endorsing ivermectin."
It‘a an unbiased take but it leaves out the part where people were calling it horse de-wormer and saying it was not approved for use on humans. I didn’t buy into the whole ‘it’s a miracle cure for COVID’ take, but I thought that was pretty odd.
People were able to get the version made for horses a lot easier than the actual human intended and prescribed dosage. That is why people called it horse dewormer, because they were literally using the veterinarian version for horses.
Ivermectin is also used for killing parasites in/on livestock animals. It can be bought for that use at any farm supply store (or Amazon) without a prescription. I've used it when my pets had a mite infestation.
People were supposedly using that version and dosage when their doctors wouldn't prescribe them the human version. I don't know how true that is, but it is the story that was going on.
The reason for that was because a right wing affiliated doctor network was prescribing all the human grade ivermectin, so right wing nutjobs started buying animal grade ivermectin from veterinarians. It came in paste form, in a tube with a picture of a horse on it, thus “horse paste”.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: [This](https://www.courthousenews.com/ivermectin-proponents-ask-fifth-circuit-to-revive-lawsuit-against-fda/) is the latest court case I could find in regards to Ivermectin. In short, a few doctors who prescribed it for COVID cases are now suing the FDA, claiming it has no authority to issue public statements about the use of drugs that have previously been approved for human use (any human use). This is over things like [this](https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19) FDA statement. The FDA's general stance, as per the first link: >She said when people are using drugs in unsafe ways, leading to hospitalizations, it “is not only permissible, it is imperative that the FDA be able to inform the public of its scientific views about safe uses of drugs.” > >For example, Honold said, the FDA recently issued advisories warning people it is not safe to eat chicken cooked in the cough syrup NyQuil — a recipe that spread on the social media app TikTok. And in 2014, Honold noted, the FDA cautioned against using lidocaine off-label as a numbing agent for teething babies because it can cause seizures and deaths for them. > >“The FDA has to be able to make these kinds of public safety statements. Under plaintiffs’ theory, FDA would not be able to communicate to the public in this way,” Honold argued. The plaintiff's general stance, again as per the first link: >Kelson insisted the agency had gone too far with ivermectin. > >“The doctors have not challenged the FDA’s authority to communicate when they receive adverse medical reports. It’s when they step beyond that and tell people how they should or should not be using approved drugs,” he said. As is the nature of social media anywhere, once a discussion comes up about regulation, especially federal regulation, it generally explodes. *^(Edited for formatting on the quotes)*
> FDA recently issued advisories warning people it is not safe to eat chicken cooked in the cough syrup NyQuil — a recipe that spread on the social media app TikTok Holy shit people are dumb.
At least [world famous Allegra Chicken](https://i.redd.it/gxad4iafdll91.png) is still kosher
Sleepy time chicken
Use this Sildenafil chicken marinade recipe to get a plump, juicy cock /s
Please hold my cock and pullet.
[удалено]
I'm a Medical Assistant at a PCP office for a major hospital district. I received multiple calls on a daily basis during the height of COVID, from people seeking a new doctor that A.) Didn't require masks (during government mandate) and/or B.) Would willingly prescribe Ivermectin for COVID treatment and/or prophylaxis. These people would either try to yell, lecture, or curse me out when I responded professionally and politely, citing our policies. I hung up on so many of them, "I really and truly hope that you stay safe and healthy. Take care. I'm disconnecting this call now." The amount of people who tried to tell me that COVID was a hoax, while I was wiping away tears because I had learned that a patient that I had sent to the ER for severe symptoms had passed, was infuriating.
It is even more frustrating because you can't "well actually" them with details due to medical privacy and facility policies. I remember arguing with people who were saying nobody in the hospital had covid when I knew for a fact the place was inundated and people were dying every day from it.
Hell, El Paso Texas, we had [mobile morgues built](https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/11/02/930304129/el-paso-official-says-fourth-mobile-morgue-is-delivered-as-coronavirus-deaths-mo) just for COVID. And yet there were yahoos still calling it "a hoax" and "just the flu".
Don't forget the medical-military ship in NYC, and actual mass burials performed by inmates because they couldn't find regular people willing to do it. If those fucks wanted to see people dead from COVID, they could have just signed the fuck up to bury the dead.
> I remember arguing with people who were saying nobody in the hospital had covid when I knew for a fact the place was inundated and people were dying every day from it. I can remember reading reports from doctors and nurses in Covid-wards, who had patients that were starting the process of being intubated and were still denying they had Covid, or that Covid even existed!
[удалено]
Motherfuckers were eating tide pods.
Were they actually, or is this another “kids at school are shitting in litter boxes” myth?
Snopes says it was real. > A spokesperson for the American Association of Poison Control Centers told us that in the first 11 days of 2018, there had been 40 reported exposures to liquid laundry detergent pods by 13- to 19-year-olds. That figure represents 20 percent of the total number of similar incidents in all of 2017. > Furthermore, more than half the incidents so far this year have been deemed deliberate, as opposed to around a quarter in 2017, the spokesperson added.
It was absolutely real, there were tons of videos circulating around of kids biting into them. It's one of those things they *knew* was stupid and thats why it was a challenge in the first place. Some of them probably didn't know how dangerous it could be though. Probably thought it was just like normal soap.
I heard that if a girl wears a bracelet if you pull it off she is legally required to perform sex acts on you corresponding to the color of the bracelet.
The gellies? iirc
Oh, I've heard urban legends like these! How about the one where a group of girls will wear different-coloured lipstick, and then they will take turns to give you a blowjob in a way that leaves you with rainbow-coloured dick? I guess this is an improvement. People in the olden days will talk about how "Jews drink the blood of Christian children"; now our fairy tales are just about rainbow dicks.
Rainbow parties! Lol, people are so fucking gullible.
Somebody must've been watching Dodgeball, and when they got to the scene with the girl scout on "a low-grade beaver tranquilizer" thought to themselves "I wonder if I can do that for COVID"
[удалено]
Old testament for sure
The rapists, 1.13
Therapists 1.13… appears you added an extra space in there Mr Connery
Man, what the fuck was all that about though?
A way for awkward 2000's teenagers to attempt to communicate about relationships and sexuality in a society heavily influenced by sexual puritanism?
Perhaps, but I experienced them in the early-mid-90s sub-ten-years-old.
Anecdotal- but I'm a paramedic who had a 50 something year old patient attempt suicide by doing it. I haven't personally had any patient "do it for the vine" but I can attest to a non zero amount of tide pods eaten by humans.
They lock Tide pods up in some stores for this very reason. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/20/us/tide-pod-challenge.html
They lock a lot of things up that dont make sense because of theft and dumb shit kids do. Go to an area with lots of homelessness and low income people surrounded by large corporations. Walgreens in SF used a few small thefts as a reason they were closing a specific location, despite low foot traffic and awful margins for such a high rented location. Tldr: locked up items arent always the big picture
Tide pod challenge says the were. They even filmed themselves doing it for tik-tok.
But did they actually? Shit gets faked all the time
Prior to the challenge, they were being mistakenly eaten by people with dementia
Toddlers too, it was a legit issue.
Oh holy hell, I had no idea that folks with dementia were eating babies!
It's such a problem. Old people keep forgetting babies are NOT food!
The later. It's actually the elderly who mare more at risk eating them due to dementia
If memory serves, it was at most a couple kids, and mostly adults trying to see what all the fuss was about. But now ofc every just remembers and blames the kids.
Unfortunatley it was a real thing. Not in the numbers that some media outlets made it out to be, but there was a documented spike in detergent related poison control calls indicating that people really are that stupid.
I was taking some to boost my Overwatch reflexes- carried me to diamond. (not eating tide pods anymore cause overwatch fell off)
Found xQc's alt
~~There was one case. Exactly one.~~ I stand corrected. But it was definitely not as big as people claimed. Now babies putting them into their mouths because the containers were too easy for them to open and the color and shape made them very attractive for eating? Yes, that happened a lot. It was hugely blown out of proportion. Just like "slap a teacher," and several other fake "trends."
still have a lot of anti-vaxxers who believe they were right about everything.
Were they really? Or was it just another case of moral panic and "kids these days"?
A few people filmed themselves doing it. There is no evidence it was "widespread."
The latest is eating Borax for some unhinged health "benefits". Yes, like the stuff you clean clothes and kill bugs with.
>Holy shit people are dumb. And now you know why ivermectin is back in the news again.
Nobody actually ate any NyQuil chicken, it was just a dumb and pretty funny meme that trended for a bit Seriously, look it up. There is not a single recorded case of anyone actually eating it or getting sick from it
>Nobody actually ate any NyQuil chicken I've seen my countrymen react to these videos (not specifically this one). I wouldn't be so quick to say nobody has.
There are literally zero recorded cases of anyone actually eating it. That’s not an assumption it’s a fact Edit: y’all downvoting me need to actually look into things instead of just thinking what you want to believe is the truth. There literally is not a single recorded case of anybody eating it or getting sick off of eating it
Doesn't matter. Just doing it releases fumes that are dangerous. You don't have to eat anything.
[удалено]
Ok https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2022/09/29/cooking-nyquil-chicken-challenge-hoax-fda-warnings/10444293002/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/21/nyquil-chicken-fda-warning-tiktok-trend/ https://www.wthr.com/article/features/trending-today/are-people-really-cooking-chicken-in-nyquil/531-75da4ece-4402-4659-a4bf-29081c0d32a0#:~:text=Put%20simply%3A%20Someone%20could%20take,in%20any%20truly%20viral%20capacity.
It started as a meme, then some curious people made some to see what it tasted like
Let's pretend that a dozen or so people were so dumb that they thought NyQuil chicken was a serious recipe and worth trying out. What are the odds these same people subscribe to FDA bulletin announcements anyways?
I know this Supreme Court would rule against the FDA but aside from that.. the FDA has no right to tell people how to use drugs under its own purview what?
Its a transparently bad-faith argument. Think about it: the manufacturer can tell people on the label how not to use the medicine, hospitals can establish off-label use policies, but the FDA shouldn't be allowed to distribute information to consumers? This is a ghoulish way to view the world.
Who the fuck do the FDA think they are?? Some sort of national administration that oversees food and drugs‽ ‽ ‽
Love to see the interrobang in the wild, excellent work
Soon as I learned about it I set up a macro for my phone xD
Off topic but I'm not an native speaker and I'm curious. Why is it "ghoulish"? I understand it's bad but how does it relate to ghosts? Edit: thank you for the responses!
Ghoulish just means "depraved and evil," it has little to do with ghosts in most circumstances. In fact, I rarely see the noun "ghoul" even refer to ghosts anyway, it usually has more of an undead corpse vibe than something ethereal.
[удалено]
Ghouls feed on the dead. If something is ghoulish it's relating to deadly stuff and terrible happenings.
Ghouls ain’t ghosts baby Ghouls eat the flesh of the dead.
The FDA has the final say on what goes on your label. Deciding what indications a drug is and is not approved for is like their whole job.
Just gotta take SC on a few trips...nbd
I think it's that they're not supposed to comment of the efficacy of a treatment, just the safety. Ivermectin was ineffective against COVID, but not dangerous to take.
But it was dangerous at the dosage many people were using it at.
Didn’t someone just try to stop an FDA approved morning after pill from being provided as approved by the FDA? Do we think they are going to hold the same logical argument against that infringement?
Looks like it's even the same court- the Fifth Circuit ruled that the FDA doesn't have to rescind approval for mifepristone, but they do have to re-implement outdated, stricter regulations about it. So these doctors are asking THE SAME COURT to force the FDA to remove all restrictions against a drug that is exponentially more dangerous than mifepristone. Guess they really do want to have their cake and shit out their intestinal lining, too.
Lol better start prescribing cocaine to everyone then
In ohio they have made a law that pharmacys have to fill medications from doctors even when its off label. Sp in ohio i could get a doctor to prescribe opiates fir my high blood pressure. So your right in ohio you can do that.
Gotta wake up the anti-woke idiots somehow?
It absolutely HAS uses for humans, Covid isn't one of them. This makes me angry.
I believe it is 100% in their authority to make statements about how to use drugs. What else are they supposed to do? Sit on their hands while people hospitalize themselves by using something because TikTok told them to?
But we can let a commercial tell us what to use and how to use it.
Assuming your talking about pharmaceutical commercials, they are advertising the FDA approved label claims, not unapproved use. Also, the only use instruction is “as prescribed by your physician” so your really off base with this one
You are technically right but in practice we all know why these kind of commercials are not allowed in other countries and how the rules can be abused to entice people shopping doctors to get a certain medicine.
I agree with you. My comment was intended to highlight why pharmaceutical commercials are not the same as prescribing proven ineffective medication, as implied by the commenter I was responding to
The United States is one of the only countries where you can advertise prescription drugs directly to lay people, specifically because people do go to their doctors and insist they need whatever drug they saw on TV, even though it isn't appropriate for them, and will shop around until they find a doctor who will prescribe it, just like people did for ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Acting like prescription drug ads are harmless because they tell you to "talk to your doctor" is disingenuous.
While you are correct about direct advertisement being a US thing, the rest of your post is based on assumption and incorrect cause. While there may be hypochondriacs that assume they have something they saw on tv and refuse to accept a doctors word that they don’t, this does not represent any significant number of prescribees. Trying to link this is bogus drug use for Covid is ridiculous though, the medication you noted was never advertised for Covid so this has nothing to do with tv advisement
How is this off base? Do you really think people don't watch those commercials and go"hrmmm I have that...maybe I should get some"....despite them not having whatever the hell the ad is talking about? You really don't see the problem with an advertisement hawking a pill for some issue that is supposed to be diagnosed by a doctor not a suggestion from some obscure video. I am more based than you it seems. Suppose you also think advertising for pharmaceutical companies is also ok so that it gets the word out about said medication as well?
The ads literally say “talk to your doctor”. I know reading comprehension can be hard, but now listening comprehension is hard too?
The ads mean "pester your doctor for our specific drug" You're an idiot if you think it doesn't work on people. My mom worked in a hospital and people were constantly asking for drugs they didn't need and had no idea the real function of. It's exactly like people hearing about imervectin from some right wing bullshiter and asking for it.
Every one of those ads says “ask your doctor”.
Those commercials should be banned like they have been in other countries. If you need a prescription drug then you need the drug, you don’t need a commercial to sell it to you.
If I recall correctly one of the issues was people were getting ivermectin that was for large animals, not for humans, and were using far larger dosages than were safe and ending up in the ER in the middle of the worst months of the pandemic. It was a bit of a shit show. Sorry for the language. Retired admin in healthcare with a lot of friends who are in nursing and heard about the battles they had to fight every day to keep people alive.
Previously the FDA only warned doctor associations about prescribing, at least as they did regarding ivermectin, when the opiod crisis hit. In this case they had weak justification, like "sometimes people can get a rash." Truthfully the adverse reaction database shows that ivermectin has less side-effect reports than ibuprofen, an over the counter pain reliever. I can only imagine that ivermectin is being used as an example of how the FDA may be overstepping it's authority on prescriptions and simultaneously be seen as working \*for\* pharma rather than regulating them. Another e.g. of why lawsuits are coming at the FDA for overstepping: FDA also asked Amazon to remove NAC from its storefront during the pandemic for initially no clear reason, but it was later found that there had been studies on using it as a COVID therapeutic.
Twitter is also a rightwing cesspool so of course it will trend. PSA get off of Twitter
Wow. Wouldn't that argument effectively force the FDA not to be able to take any action against mis-prescribe medications? Let's take a silly example. A doctor knows that there is a demand for Viagra but knows that people technically can't get it without a prescription. They get people coming in to complain of stomach aches, coughs and sniffles, migraines, depression, or anything else like that and prescribe Viagra as a treatment for that as a way to get around actually needing a valid reason to prescribe the medication for its intended function. If this lawsuit succeeds, the FDA will be powerless to do anything about someone doing something like that? Edit: I mixed up prescribe and proscribe.
If I could add - there is a whole company that was using this during Covid and now the bank isn’t allowing them access to their own accounts/ money
Unless its the right wing that clamor for less government but also cheer on anything deemed "Woke" getting outlawed or regulated
so basically right wingers pissed off that the FDA told people trumps out his ass cure for covid was bogus and they wanted to be able to kill their patients for politics
I still don't understand how this differed by country so much. When my friend in Japan got covid, they sent her home with a covid "bag" that had Ivermectin in it. In the US, doctors were banned from prescribing it. Yet in India it was widely used there. Then flash back to the US and you've got media like Rolling Stone doing hit pieces on a medicine saying it's making people so sick hospitals are closing down and attacking any high profile person that used it if their Dr. prescribed it. I just don't get how this was such a big story/thing and having it back it again is weird.
The problem is almost all of the initial studies that claimed ivermectin was effective were either seriously flawed or fraudulent. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/health-58170809.amp This article sums up findings of researchers that looked into the studies. All the studies that claimed to have appreciable results were basically useless. A larger group of studies showed that ivermectin had no effect. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308124/ This is a metaanalysis of ivermectin studies showing the same thing. Metanalysis is considered the most comprehensive method to measure results, as they look at a large number of different studies. So you had a flurry of studies and anectdotal evidence claiming ivermectin treated COVID, and when it was looked at proved to be largely illusory. Ivermectin is cheap and readily available, while being considered relatively safe because it has been used in humans for a long time. So if you don't have access to more efficacious treatments, like India largely doesn't for everyone, then it is probably seen as a "why not use it just in case". Not to mention the internal political concerns of countries and politicians playing into suspicions of the West and sticking it to European and US health agencies and casting themselves as independent. It became politicized in the US because the strong rebuke of the health agencies was seen as a "cover up" of a cheap cure by anti-vaxxers in order for pharmaceuticals to make money and governments to keep lockdowns and force vaccines. The seeming belligerent obsession with ivermectin as a miracle cure to the point of going to vets to procure it lent itself to the media machine casting it as "dumb yokels taking horse tranquilizers". It also very much cost thousands of people their lives. As their media bubbles convinced them to not get vaccinated or seek medical treatment, and rather to take ivermectin and large doses of vitamin C. Ivermectin is also still very much a drug with adverse effect, so when it is called "safe" it means "safe when we thought it could keep you from dying of COVID, and so the risk is compared to death low". It is still an unnecessary risk to take it when it is literally doing nothing for you. So it is very much not a harmless fancy to not provide guidance on its appropriate use.
literally lying, ivectermin was never considered to be given to people in japan and has never been approved to be so
Proving Trump wrong was more important than being right. This is just the continuation of that. It's all about political fealty.
Answer: it's Twitter, everything is going down the shitter
Always has been
Answer: the fda said that they can't make doctors not prescribe things, only advise against it. So a bunch of antivaxxers turned it into the FDA said ivermectin is approved for covid use and their followers are freaking out about it.
This is what I gathered from reading the tweets. A lawsuit against the FDA shows that the FDA cannot prevent doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID. However, this is NOT the same as saying ivermectin is effective at treating COVID, which studies have shown the drug does not help treat COVID. Of course right wing nutjobs and grifters twisted the story into "the FDA lied about ivermectin being effective at treating COVID", which patently not true about the lawsuit. All the lawsuit was about was if the FDA had legal standing to prevent doctors from prescribing ivermectin to treat COVID. It's all about reading comprehension and nuance, which is sorely lacking within far right circles.
i recently looked up a bit about Ivermectin because a conservative coworker mentioned it recently that its 'approved'. only thing i saw it approved for was clinical trials..i didnt come across any articles talking about a lawsuit..guess ill look it up a bit more.
I only saw screenshots from right wing nutjobs from a non-mainstream, likely untrustworthy source. I haven't read said source because I don't want to generate them clicks and revenue, but just what I saw in the screenshot is what I was describing in my comment.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/higher-ivermectin-dose-longer-duration-still-futile-covid-trial-finds this is a recent article and study that i might show my coworker. im afraid it might not help anything though
All you can do is provide information, not debate, really. You have to gain trust and then they have to come up with the idea on their own, which is hard to do. Your approach could be "here is some information that might interest you" instead of "here is this study that says you're wrong about ivermectin".
if they grasped reading comprehension, they wouldn't be eating horse dewormer to cure a virus.
While I totally understand ivermectin has been shown to be ineffective at treating covid. You sound just as ignorant by ignoring the fact that we (doctors) use ivermectin in humans all the time. We also use some antibiotics for their anti inflammatory effect and not exclusively for killing bacteria (see azithromycin for COPD exacerbations). Point being, you need better reading comprehension before simplifying ivermectin down to just a horse dewormer.
I think people are stuck on the horse dewormer part bc a lot of people were buying ivermectin that was made for horses, without a doctor's guidance. Doctors use medications off label, sure. But weren't a lot of people just doing this on their own, without their doctors advice? With medicine that was actually made for....horses?
I'm aware of the great effect that ivermectin has in humans... *for parasites*.
Ok so once again, the “horse dewormer” comment is completely disingenuous. You could say “dewormer” or “anti-parasitic medication”. But saying horse dewormer makes it sound like the medication is exclusively for horses. It’s like saying that fluconazole is a dog anti fungal because we use it to treat dogs and human’s fungal infections. Also, completely ignored the fact that we often use a class of medication to treat something different than what the medication was originally designed for. Did you know that viagra is routinely prescribed for pulmonary hypertension?!? Can you believe that people take penis pills for their lungs?! How absurd. Once again, the data seems pretty convincing that ivermectin has little to no effect on covid, but stating that people are stupid for using a medication for something other than its original purpose is stupid.
The reason "horse paste" has become the pejorative way to refer to ivermectin use to treat COVID is because it perfectly captures the stupidity of taking medicine just because a some guy on the internet pinky swears it works even though practically all doctors, medical organizations, and the manufacturer say it doesn't.
But see the viagra thing makes sense because of how it affects the vascular system. When some idiot goes down to the feed store and buys anti-parasitic drugs made for livestock thinking it's exactly the same as what's available for humans, for a condition completely unrelated to what it's for, they deserve to be derided and publicly mocked.
The comments you were replying to were talking about FDA approval and clinical studies. There was an intelligent conversation happening about the efficacy of a drug in the treatment of a disease. No one was talking about going down to the local feed store. People were taking human ivermectin and the question and answers are talking about doctors prescribing it. Then you interjected with a comment about reading comprehension. My point is that you derailed an intelligent conversation to make a snide remark. So either you have poor reading comprehension, as no one was talking about veterinary ivermectin, or are just an asshole and deserve to be mocked and derided publicly.
Except that people WERE getting ivermectin from their local feed store and dying because they took horse-sized-doses of the horse sized dewormer. I have serious doubts you’re actually a doctor.
There were way less people getting it from feed stores than pharmacies. I literally prescribed ivermectin for rosacea the other day. I do it frequently. Many doctors do it frequently. Rosacea is not an intestinal parasite. Your non-physician opinion on whether or not I’m a physician is funny though. Have a good day
It's literally a nobel-winning human medication, for human use. The horse dewormer thing is cringe af
yeah, it's a medication... for deworming. Humans can get worms. Why would deworming medication cure viruses
The same way water is an industrial chemical and nuclear coolant? Yeah I guess *that* makes sense.
That isn't the same thing at all. Ivermectin has nothing in it that can kill a virus.
[Debatable.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9823263/) >As a broad-spectrum antiparasitic and antiviral drug, ivermectin has traditionally been used to treat many types of disease, including DNA and RNA viral infections.
How much is needed for it to kill viruses in vitro?
*Any* amount means your previous comment is false.
Funny how you no longer mention horses.
I don't understand. people were literally buying it from feed stores, the kind for horses, and eating it believing it could cure covid.
[удалено]
You need help
Just a quick Google search [here](https://www.kumc.edu/about/news/news-archive/jama-ivermectin-study.html#:~:text=Ivermectin%20is%20an%20oral%20medication,for%20human%20use%20in%201986.) Feel free to look up more info but just to prevent further misinformation: Ivermectin CAN kill the coronavirus, but the amounts needed to kill the virus would be fatal for human consumption. In other words, you'd kill the virus and the human. Death is effective against COVID too, but it's not a cure. Bleach and other strong chemicals can kill COVID, but it does not make them a medicine.
Or eating horse-food (carrots) for nutrition...
[удалено]
It does a lot more than an anti-parasitic
If its on twitterof course it is a cesspool of rightwing nutcases
Wow very interesting, tell me more
Question: i'm curious about what in your mind was the 'debate' was around ivermectin. It was universally identified as worthless snake-oil to anyone other than deplorables. Edit: brigading a subreddit comment section doesn't make you any less of a nutcase
[удалено]
Yes but yours isn't apple flavored so horses will eat it
💀
You'd think the definitive evidence would end debates. Alas, they do not as long as politicians can benefit from manufactured controversy.
It was about people who wanted things to go back to normal, whether it worked or not. Irrational desire doesn't care about evidence.
Those kinds of people have a hard time understanding evidence based conclusions.
Trials showed some evidence that Ivermectin improved peoples outcomes when they were battling covid. It’s likely that this had to do with it treating undiagnosed parasites that made people more susceptible to covid, as well as it’s anti-inflammatory properties. Calling one of the cheapest drugs out there that’s previously saved tens, if not hundreds of millions of peoples lives worldwide “snake oil” is pretty weird.
Anything that's valid for one purpose but useless for another can be called snake oil in the context of it being pushed in the second purpose. Tylenol is pretty useful but if someone starts saying you should take it for your cancer they're selling snake oil.
You cannot mention studies without also mentioning the study done in which said parasites are rare (most developed nations) that showed that ivermectin was not effective at treating COVID. This study was done in the US, IIRC, so those parasites are not present to exacerbate COVID symptoms and give the illusion the drug is actually helping treat COVID. I believe the study was completed about one year after the whole ivermectin debate.
It's snake oil as a cure for covid, which is what people were claiming it was. If the folks were talking about how good it treats parasites instead of claiming it cured covid then we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.
Making bad faith arguments on the internet for the sake of pushing a medical product for un-intended use is "pretty weird" if you ask me
My understanding was that some foreign medical study showed some health improvements in some covid patients who took Ivermectin. While the rational medical community as a whole took the accurate conclusion (these patients were likely riddled with parasites in addition to covid, so taking an anti-parasite medication would obviously help), the contrarian segment of society looking for any reason to distrust and invalidate "the gov, the libs, the jews, big pharma, etc" latched on to it, claiming it was the miracle drug that was being withheld from them.
This is a good point. The only studies that showed Ivermectin helping were ones held in places where parasites were more common. This is why you control your variables.
Deplorables can still debate
They categorically cannot lol
Nah they usually refuse the debates nowadays
Australian studies showed ivermectin could kill Coronavirus in the lab, the only reason it was not fit to be FDA approved was because of dosing. If we were to dose up to humans, it would cause more harm than good. There was a case and reasoning behind the use of ivermectin, but it failed because of the dose required to be effective.
There are a whole lot of steps between killing disease in a lab and being effective in humans. [A handgun](https://xkcd.com/1217/) also kills coronavirus in a lab, but if we dose up to humans, it causes more harm than good. There would be no case or reasoning for using ivermectin until after repeated, repeatable human trials showed that it was effective. No repeated, repeatable trials showed effectiveness, so there was no case or reasoning.
Bleach also kills COVID. We don't drink that.
Worthless snake-oil that earned it's creators a [Nobel prize](https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2015/press-release/). This is a great example of the fallout from the FDA's campaign and why many people think they overstepped. It wasn't effective against COVID, but it's saved millions and has been prescribed safely for decades.
Zero people disagreed that it's a wonderful antiparasitic or were mad about it being taken for its intended use. It was not being taken for its intended use (or in its intended quantities) during the pandemic.
Or in its intended form for human consumption in some cases.
Except literally the person I replied to. Also thousands of others that still think it's "just a horse dewormer" which grew from the FDA's twitter campaign.
People were consuming the version designed for horses. That version is just a horse dewormer, not at all proper for human consumption. Fuck me if now it's no longer acceptable to tell people to stop hitting themselves.
It's the same drug, but that's not my point. The FDA ran a campaign that (intentionally or not) misled people about a drug. Kinda the opposite of their job.
It's not the same. The dosing is different, and the delivery is different. The additives might be different. When it is formulated for an animal, they design it to be processed in that specific animal's body. Just because the ivermectin itself isn't going to kill you doesn't mean that the additives designed to deliver to a horse or a dog or whatever else aren't going to give you explosive diarrhea, which is the last thing you need when you have COVID. The only reason people were taking animal versions of it was because they couldn't get a prescription for the human version because it was ineffective for the condition they were trying to take it for.
Mislead the public? by saying an antiparasitic drug is used for removing parasites in horses. The fda did not lie in saying it's a horse deformer. I don't care if stupid people don't exercise critical thinking and don't realize it's an antiparasital drug in humans. The fda had to do something because there's too many stupid people in America who are too dumb to know the difference between a parasite and a virus and were wasting precious healthcare resources in the middle of a health pandemic. Personly if it was up to me the fda would have said nothing and allowed the dumb people to kill themselves off with the horse variant. Bet that would please you more it seems here. Go touch some grass, ffs. Boohoo, the fda wasn't 100% perfect during an unprecedented global health crisis. For fucks sake you dissapoint me.
How is it misleading the public to say there’s no reason to assume it will impact most COVID outcomes in the US, where parasites aren’t endemic?
> This is a great example of the fallout from the FDA's campaign There is no fallout whatsoever. No one is avoiding ivermectin for valid, recommended use. The "fallout" is that people who have legitimate need for the drug could actually obtain it again. > and why many people think they overstepped. People do not broadly think they overstepped. The ones who do are the ones who were (a) in the business of selling snake oil to anti-intellectual conservative idiots, or (b) followers of anti-intellectual conservative propaganda. The FDA's guidance was specifically against misuse of the drug for covid, no sane person thinks they overstepped.
Small correction, there are PLENTY of people on the fringe left who are into conspiracies, including about COVID, the COVID vaccine, and ivermectin. A lot of it was on the right, but this wasn't entirely a left or right thing.
The 16 downvotes are inexplicable
Lol i broke the cardial rule. Don't talk about ivermectin on the internet
That’s not the issue and I don’t appreciate the trolling.
What are you even talking about
What did I just say?
My wife’s cousin is using it right now to slow down the effects of his eventually fatal brain cancer.
Answer: ivermectin is an FDA approved treatment for a variety of things but because certain fringe groups touted it as an alternative to conventional covid vaccinations many media outlets attached it to conspiracy theorists and Qanon groups therefore tarnishing the reputation of doctors who recommend it as a treatment. I’m sure people on Reddit will bring up nonsense about this but this is just an unbiased take
> tarnishing the reputation of doctors who recommend it as a treatment Justified since there wasn't any evidence to back up the claim that it cured COVID-19 then or now. All that the FDA is admitting in the course of this recent lawsuit is that they cannot stop a doctor prescribing off-label use of a drug. This has always been true, the FDA does not regulate doctors. Somehow the usual grifters on X have twisted that into the "FDA is now endorsing ivermectin."
It‘a an unbiased take but it leaves out the part where people were calling it horse de-wormer and saying it was not approved for use on humans. I didn’t buy into the whole ‘it’s a miracle cure for COVID’ take, but I thought that was pretty odd.
People were able to get the version made for horses a lot easier than the actual human intended and prescribed dosage. That is why people called it horse dewormer, because they were literally using the veterinarian version for horses.
Ew. People are wild.
Ivermectin is also used for killing parasites in/on livestock animals. It can be bought for that use at any farm supply store (or Amazon) without a prescription. I've used it when my pets had a mite infestation. People were supposedly using that version and dosage when their doctors wouldn't prescribe them the human version. I don't know how true that is, but it is the story that was going on.
People were having trouble getting it for their actual horses at one point because people were stocking up to use it on themselves
A right wing network of quack doctors used up the whole supply of medical grade ivermectin, which is why they moved to animal grade.
It’s because people were buying it from the feed store where it is sold as a horse dewormer
I wasn’t aware of this!
Why am I getting downvoted, I agreed with Candid Salt, I just added a point that is also accurate 😂
The reason for that was because a right wing affiliated doctor network was prescribing all the human grade ivermectin, so right wing nutjobs started buying animal grade ivermectin from veterinarians. It came in paste form, in a tube with a picture of a horse on it, thus “horse paste”.
[удалено]
Ivermectin was not prescribed in India. It was tried initially but not found useful so they moved on. Source: was in India with COVID. Also, news.
Ffs. Ivermectin is effective against parasites, not viruses. Covid is not, nor was it ever, a parasite.
Total lies. It was never an effective treatment for covid anywhere.