Proponents of ivermectin for COVID-19 have long been talking about an expected review and meta-analysis led by Andrew Hill, PhD, of the University of Liverpool.
These results were finally published this week in Open Forum Infectious Diseases, and they’re positive — but they haven’t escaped criticism, and most researchers still want results from a randomized controlled trial.
The review and meta-analysis was conducted as part of the International Ivermectin Project Team from December 2020 to May 2021. Ivermectin proponents said Hill was conducting the analysis for the WHO, but MedPage Today was not able to confirm WHO involvement. Hill did not respond to an email request for comment.
Hill and colleagues assessed 24 randomized trials totaling 3,328 patients that involved some type of control, whether it was standard of care or another therapy. Sample sizes ranged from 24 to 400 participants. Eight of the studies had been published, nine were preprints, six were unpublished results shared for the analysis, and one was reported on a trial registry website.
In the 11 trials (totaling 2,127 patients) that focused on moderate or severe […]
“In the 11 trials (totaling 2,127 patients) that focused on moderate or severe infection, there was a 56% reduction in mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.77, P=0.004), …”
“Most” researchers still want results from a [yet another] randomized controlled trial, because one can never be too rich, or too thin, or have too many randomised controlled trials.
Calling for more, and more, and more trials is a deliberate delay facilitating irresponsible & deadly withdrawal of cheap/safe drugs and allowing (pushing) expensive untested (“emergency approval”) vaccines with unknown safety profile into the market instead.
To get emergency authorisation (skipping inconvenient testing and starting selling) for COVID19 vaccines (multi-billion dollar industry) BigPharma corporations cannot have any other effective treatment available – it is illegal to authorise therapeutics that way.
Suppression of treatments (like ivermectin and HCQ, there are several others, but the coordinated campaign is directed mostly at these two) is logical business strategy and is easy when you donate $$$$ to World Health Authority.
I agree with you, Eva. The only good science is one which can be duplicated and have the same results.