Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Politics Popular culture

In which Orac experiences schadenfreude over Ben Garrison’s COVID-19

Ben Garrison, whose fame comes from his QAnon-invoking and Trump-supporting cartoons, has COVID-19 and is treating it with ivermectin. Because of course he is. Orac’s schadenfreude is tempered by the knowledge that when Garrison recovers he’ll attribute his good fortune to the quackery he’s using.

It occurs to me that it’s odd that I’ve never blogged about Ben Garrison (or, as far as I can tell, even mentioned him on this blog before). The reason, of course, is that he is one of the crankiest of cranks when it comes to COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and the pandemic. (Indeed, a whole section of his website devoted to COVID-19 is called “Plannedemic,” obviously a play on the term “Plandemic,” a conspiracy theory that emerged early during the pandemic as a result of a video by conspiracy “documentarian” Mikki Willis featuring Judy Mikovits, a disgraced scientist turned antivax conspiracy theorist and COVID-19 grifter, claiming that the whole pandemic was a “plandemic” designed so that the elites can take total control. Of course, Garrison is about so much more than just COVID-19 conspiracy mongering and antivaccine nonsense. He is arguably the most famous pro-Trump cartoonist, and his cartoons buy into pretty much every piece of propaganda and conspiracy theory promoted by by Donald Trump over the years. Garrison’s style is also very notable in that he makes his cartoons so complicated that he feels a compulsion to label everything, as in these two examples:

I have no idea what this cartoon means either, but it does combine a whole lot of wingnuttery into just one cartoon: antivax, transphobia, anti-“woke,” and fear mongering about “socialism,” Black Lives Matter, and Antifa.
Ben Garrison...

Unsurprisingly, Garrison is very antivaccine, for example:

Let’s just say that Ben Garrison understands evolution as well as he understands COVID-19 and vaccines.
This is the “toxins gambit” updated for COVID-19.
Of course Ben Garrison thinks that jackbooted thugs are coming to force you to be vaccinated.

Given that background, you must know what’s coming next. Yes, Ben Garrison has caught COVID-19:

Ben Garrison, a right-wing cartoonist known for his opposition to vaccines and his extremely flattering drawings of former President Donald Trump, told Gizmodo late Sunday that he contracted covid-19 and has been sick for about two weeks. But allegedly getting covid hasn’t changed Garrison’s mind about modern medical science.

Garrison, who lives in Montana, believes that he got covid-19 while dining out at a restaurant a couple of weeks ago. Montana has seen a disturbing rise in coronavirus cases in recent weeks, with about 900 new cases each day.

“Yes, it’s definitely Covid and we’ve had all the symptoms. My wife and [I] went out with a couple to a restaurant and the next day all four of us were sick. One of us went to see a doctor and was told she had Covid, and that was the clincher,” Garrison told Gizmodo via email. (Garrison has been banned from Twitter for supporting the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.)

Of course, Garrison is also treating his COVID-19 with ivermectin and other quackery:

“We’re taking Ivermectin and various vitamins including a lot of Zinc,” Garrison continued, explaining what he’s doing to treat the disease. The cartoonist also notes he’s taking beet root juice. None of this has been proven to treat or prevent covid-19, with monoclonal antibodies and vaccines being the only real ways to fight this pandemic, which is still raging in many parts of the world.

Beet root juice? That one, believe it or not, I hadn’t heard of as a quack treatment for COVID-19, but apparently it’s a thing in the “wellness community” to “build your immunity” against the virus. My usual retort to such claims is this: You want to know what really builds your immunity against COVID-19? The vaccine!

But, of course, Garrison and his wife are unvaccinated:

Garrison told Gizmodo that he and his wife are not feeling well and that he’s completely lost his sense of taste and smell. Garrison seems to believe that he and his wife are struggling to overcome the disease because they’re in their mid-60s.

“Both Tina and I feel slightly better after two weeks, but it has been rough. I lost my taste and smell as well as desire to eat any kind of food. I lost 15 pounds as a result. Young people tend to bounce back more quickly, but we’re in our mid-60s,” Garrison wrote.

When Gizmodo asked Garrison whether he’d been vaccinated against covid-19, he repeated many of the same conspiracy theories that appear in his cartoons.

“We will never take their foul spike protein-producing jabs, which are neither safe nor effective. They’re not real vaccines. They’re gene therapy,” Garrison wrote in an email to Gizmodo.

As I’ve discussed many times before, ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. Like hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial and mild immunosuppressive drug used to treat some autoimmune disorders, ivermectin is a repurposed drug with no good evidence of efficacy at treating or preventing COVID-19 that’s being promoted by conspiracy theorists and grifters as a miracle cure for COVID-19 (that of course means that you don’t need the vaccine, or so infer the ivermectin-pushing quacks and cranks).

Unsurprisingly, Garrison is deep into COVID-19 conspiracy theories. He’s quoted as saying that the pandemic response is about “control,” not public health (where have we heard that before?); that the vaccine is not a “real vaccine” but “experimental gene therapy” (it’s not); and that the vaccine is killing tens of thousands (there’s no evidence that this is true, other than a misinterpretation of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database, or VAERS).

Garrison also refuses to go to the hospital for any reason:

Garrison says he’d never visit a hospital to treat his covid-19. (Last week, NBC News reported that anti-vaccine Facebook groups have been influencing members to not seek hospital treatment for covid-19 and even instructed them to pull their sick family members out of ICU.)

“I would never go to a hospital with Covid. Robert David Steele did it a few weeks ago and they killed him. The hospitals get extra money for Covid death reports, which is necessary to keep fear ramped up,” Garrison claimed in an email to Gizmodo.

The man Garrison is referring to, Robert David Steele, was a conspiracy theorist who frequently appeared on InfoWars with Alex Jones. The 69-year-old Steele believed some incredibly bizarre things, including that NASA had imprisoned children on Mars to work as slaves. Steele, who claimed to be a former CIA officer, reportedly died of covid-19 in August.

Of course, this particular conspiracy theory is not a new one. It’s existed in one form or another beginning very early in the pandemic. A variant of this conspiracy theory is the claim that hospitals are categorizing people who die of other things as having died of COVID-19 and that only 6% of people whose cause of death is listed as COVID-19 actually died of the virus. It’s a claim that depends upon an utter misunderstanding of how death certificates are filled out and dates back at least to summer 2020. Before even that conspiracy theory was one that claimed that doctors were intubating COVID-19 patients willy-nilly and thereby hastening their demise.

Still, the new conspiracy theory being pushed on Facebook groups that claims that doctors are keeping COVID-19 patients from using “miracle cures” like ivermectin or are even killing them on purpose, which means that people who contract COVID-19 should avoid emergency rooms and hospitals in favor of treating themselves is a horrific escalation in the distrust of the medical profession being stoked by COVID-19 conspiracy believers. It’s definitely a conspiracy theory that will lead to a lot of unnecessary deaths, as your odds of surviving severe COVID-19 at home in essence untreated are far worse than if go to a hospital and accept the best care, supportive and coronavirus-directed, that we currently have.

It’s also leading to this:

Those concerns echo various local reports about growing threats and violence directed toward medical professionals. In Branson, Missouri, a medical center recently introduced panic buttons on employee badges because of a spike in assaults. Violence and threats against medical professionals have recently been reported in MassachusettsTexasGeorgia and Idaho.

Conspiracy theories of the sort being promoted by Ben Garrison are leading to threats and violence against the very people trying to save the lives of those who contract COVID-19 and develop severe, life-threatening disease as a result.

You’ll excuse me if I admit to a bit of schadenfreude at Garrison’s misfortune. I don’t want him to die; I don’t even want him to end up on a ventilator (as unlikely as that would be given his refusal to go to the hospital). However, it’s hard not to see this as a bit of cosmic justice.

On the other hand, my schadenfreude is tempered by knowledge I’ve gained over the years from cancer patients who fall for quackery, indeed, patients who fall for any kind of quackery. Assuming that Garrison recovers from COVID-19, as he is likely to do, there is no doubt that he will attribute his recovery to ivermectin and all the other quackery that he’s been using, even though there’s no evidence that any of it has any therapeutic effect against the disease. Basically, if Garrison recovers, he will have done so without any effective treatment, but he will certainly tout ivermectin, zinc, beetroot juice, and whatever else he’s using as the things that “cured” him. He’ll also become more antivaccine than ever.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

172 replies on “In which Orac experiences schadenfreude over Ben Garrison’s COVID-19”

No, it’s really not.

Although people are poisoning themselves with it left and right…and a few folks have died of ingesting it in the American Southwest.

No, really; it really honestly IS. Here’s some information for you:

It’s amazing and also sad to me that so many of us are so quick to jump on the ‘YOU are a CONSPIRACY-THEORY nut” bandwagon; when in so many cases; I have seen it proven that those ‘conspiracy theorists’ actually turned out to be correct.
ALL of the time? No; of course not; but a lot more than most of us would be willing to admit to.
I learned recently to stop talking and start listening; and I’ve learned a lot of valuable information.
A few folks HAVE died from taking the wrong DOSAGE of Ivermectin or the wrong formulation of it; NOT because ‘It’s ivermectin” per se. And THOUSANDS have benefited from it. So I for one have shut my big fat mouth about ivermectin and instead focused on all of the facts I’ve found and shared with you.

Funny you should cite those studies. It turns out that a couple of the biggest ones, which tilted the meta-analyses and systematic reviews to be positive for finding a benefit for ivermectin against COVID-19, were almost certainly fraudulent:

Seriously, you’re not very good at this, particularly if you assume that your BS is anything I haven’t heard and responded to before.


Way to quote yourself on that. In case you missed it, here’s the possible fraud on the “almost certainly fraudulent” (to quote a classic) study which found negligible impact of the medicine:

How about we start pointing fingers in both directions for a change? You know, for objectivity’s sake.

There are lots of other clinical with same result:
Vallejos, J., Zoni, R., Bangher, M. et al. Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. BMC Infect Dis 21, 635 (2021).
If ivermectin is a miracle cure, why these does happen,
As yes, it is a Pharma plot, There is data from other out of patent drug, dexamethasone:
RECOVERY Collaborative Group, Horby P, Lim WS, Emberson JR, Mafham M, Bell JL, Linsell L, Staplin N, Brightling C, Ustianowski A, Elmahi E, Prudon B, Green C, Felton T, Chadwick D, Rege K, Fegan C, Chappell LC, Faust SN, Jaki T, Jeffery K, Montgomery A, Rowan K, Juszczak E, Baillie JK, Haynes R, Landray MJ. Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 25;384(8):693-704. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2021436. Epub 2020 Jul 17. PMID: 32678530; PMCID: PMC7383595.
Not a miracle drug, but hrlps in certain cases.
But Merck’s lopinavir does not work at all:
Di Castelnuovo A, Costanzo S, Antinori A, Berselli N, Blandi L, Bonaccio M, Bruno R, Cauda R, Gialluisi A, Guaraldi G, Menicanti L, Mennuni M, My I, Parruti A, Patti G, Perlini S, Santilli F, Signorelli C, Stefanini GG, Vergori A, Ageno W, Aiello L, Agostoni P, Al Moghazi S, Arboretti R, Aucella F, Barbieri G, Barchitta M, Bartoloni A, Bologna C, Bonfanti P, Caiano L, Carrozzi L, Cascio A, Castiglione G, Chiarito M, Ciccullo A, Cingolani A, Cipollone F, Colomba C, Colombo C, Crosta F, Dalena G, Dal Pra C, Danzi GB, D’Ardes D, de Gaetano Donati K, Di Gennaro F, Di Tano G, D’Offizi G, Filippini T, Maria Fusco F, Gaudiosi C, Gentile I, Gini G, Grandone E, Guarnieri G, Lamanna GLF, Larizza G, Leone A, Lio V, Losito AR, Maccagni G, Maitan S, Mancarella S, Manuele R, Mapelli M, Maragna R, Marra L, Maresca G, Marotta C, Mastroianni F, Mazzitelli M, Mengozzi A, Menichetti F, Milic J, Minutolo F, Molena B, Mussinelli R, Mussini C, Musso M, Odone A, Olivieri M, Pasi E, Perroni A, Petri F, Pinchera B, Pivato CA, Poletti V, Ravaglia C, Rossato M, Rossi M, Sabena A, Salinaro F, Sangiovanni V, Sanrocco C, Scorzolini L, Sgariglia R, Simeone PG, Spinicci M, Trecarichi EM, Veronesi G, Vettor R, Vianello A, Vinceti M, Visconti E, Vocciante L, De Caterina R, Iacoviello L; COVID-19 RISK and Treatments (CORIST) Collaboration. Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Darunavir/Cobicistat in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Findings From the Multicenter Italian CORIST Study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Jun 9;8:639970. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.639970. PMID: 34179035; PMCID: PMC8221239.
Perhaps a Pharma plot cannot explain results of clinical trials ?

The answer is in the study.

<< This study has several limitations. Firstly, the percentage of events in relation to the primary outcome was below the estimate, so this trial was under powered.

Secondly, the mean dose of ivermectin was 192.37 μg/kg/day (SD ± 24.56), which is below the doses proposed as probably effective [20, 33]. >>

That’s half the dosage, btw. The population included in the study wasn’t prone to hospitalization to begin with. (7% total hospitalized) In other words, they looked in the wrong place.

Miracle cure or not (and I repeat, I’m not one of the people who attributes this label), it at least shows that it works well enough to be considered as a cheaper alternative than what’s currently being administered.

In case you missed it, here’s the possible fraud on the “almost certainly fraudulent” (to quote a classic) study which found negligible impact of the medicine:

It’s totes kewl that the one endorser’s lone contribution is about “protective qi deficiency.”

Miracle cure or not (and I repeat, I’m not one of the people who attributes this label), it at least shows that it works well enough to be considered as a cheaper alternative than what’s currently being administered.

The Cochrane review? This one?

“Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use of ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID‐19 outside of well‐designed randomized trials.”

@Narad – It’s totes kewl that the one endorser’s lone contribution is about “protective qi deficiency.”

Hardly lone:’s-afraid-ivermectin-15529

Keep looking, you’ll find more. And still, it’s included in the Cochrane study, so you can imagine how much accuracy I’m attributing there. (+ @Aarno Syvänen)

Check all studies included in Cochrane study, ACSH is an astroturf organisation, read its posts.

Oh I know their stance on the matter. I know there’s bias on their side.

To clarify my earlier stance on studies, as long as methodology is accurate (not countered by other scientists, or just so blatantly wrong that even I would notice the problem), the results should be taken into account as far as the science of it goes.

So while do indeed have an issue with bias, I don’t just ignore data if it at least seems legitimate or isn’t subject to (too much) controversy.

That link is just an open letter addressing possible (probable?) flaws in the study’s design and execution. If that letter would’ve just simply translated to “it’s wrong, we’re right” I’d have brushed it off, but they do bring up actual issues.

Cindy, two of those articles are from the FLCCC. You know, the group with a vested interest in treating people with ivermectin?

There’s nothing here.

This is impressively incorrect. Neither have any effect. I’m getting more and more unvaccinated ivermectin patients by the day. The virus will find you and won’t give a sh*t that you’re taking Stromectol. Just ask the four people I have in the ICU who can attest to that after they counted on it to keep them safe.

The one who has been here for two weeks that I’m expecting to die any minute was also taking Plaquenil. I’ve watched this same saga play out time and time again over the last 18 months; first with Plaquenil then with Stromectol. They DO NOT WORK. It has nothing to do these patients “Taking it wrong.” It has nothing to do with “Comorbidities.” These drugs do not work against COVID. Not for anyone. Not now. Not ever.

They do, on the other hand, come with significant potential side effects.

this drug is having success all around the world along with hydroxi.

Then why didn’t you link to the sister site,

Merck, the big pharma company that produces Ivermectin, seems to be hell-bent on not profiting from it by publicly declaring that there is not evidence it helps against Covid-19. One wonders why.

Ask the doctors here who have access to market data on producers and you might understand just how much of the Ivermectin market Merk controls, and why they wouldn’t stand to gain much from it.

Though I’d ask other doctors as well if I were you, ones you don’t find on this blog.. for confirmation.

They wouldn’t lose from it though, would they, Catalin? As long as there’s evidence that it works they could ramp up production and make a mint. Especially since their own Covid vaccine effort stalled. Even if they made Covid vaccines they could sell both. Where’s the downside? Well, apart from the shortage of ivermectin for actual horses.

If the company that is actually licenced to make ivermectin for humans in the US doesn’t want it used that way, then you can pretty much guarantee that the evidence is poor. On the other hand, plenty of horses are going to be suffering from parasites uneccesarily. Well done anti-vaxxers. Human AND animal suffering.

Maybe they would lose from it. Keep in mind that Merk is currently in trials for Molnupiravir. Imagine coming up with a cheaper alternative over the funds you’ve already invested in other, more expensive drugs. I call that a loss.

Merck already make ivermectin. It’s been around since 1981 so, as long as there is demand, how can they fail to make money selling it? It IS the cheaper alternative. I doubt anything new would be cheaper since they’ll be recouping development costs and will be able to sell it at a much higher price due to copyright etc.

It’s pretty simple. When you have a lot invested in a more expensive treatment and you end up using the cheaper one, you profit less and you lose your investment. At the very least you make less profit, if the initial investment wasn’t large enough to warrant the loss. Oh yeah, they’d also need to start their own studies on IVM to get it licensed, since both the FDA and CDC stances (EMA’s as well) are against using it for Covid, at least until more is known. (to put it their way)

My apologies for being a bit dense. I thought we were talking about ivermectin vs the new anti-virals you mentioned. Didn’t realise you meant that other, unspecified treatments, made by the same company, might already be used and that they might be more profitable than ivermectin.

In which case, you should find that all drug companies say that ivermectin is ineffective and all other trials show great effectiveness. Don’t forget, there are a lot of organisations in this world that would greatly benefit from the emergence of a cheap, effective and readily available treatment. Every country with a national health service for a start.

@Catalin Ivermectin is almost pure profit to them at this point. Newer drugs start out with a negative profit. They can make a small change like time release and call it Covirsmacktin and roll in money.

You mention Molnupiravir. If Merck doesn’t sell Covirsmacktin, someone else will, and then Molnupiravir will be a loss anyhow. Merck’s competitors, who don’t have Molnupiravir, would be falling all over themselves to prove Covirsmacktin was the greatest thing ever.

Drug conspiracy theories never hold up. The first company to break silence and sell the herbal vitamin high vibration stickers would make a fortune. The reason grifters don’t test supplements is that they don’t have to.


I was really addressing both situations. If Merk knows it stands to gain more from selling the drug they’re currently working on, I’m inclined to believe they’ll follow that road out of greed.

Don’t forget, there are a lot of organisations in this world that would greatly benefit from the emergence of a cheap, effective and readily available treatment. Every country with a national health service for a start.

Quite so. This is partly why I usually attribute more trust to studies rolled out (or sponsored) by universities or national institutions as opposed to those by manufacturers, although I’m aware it won’t shred bias issues entirely.

@Christine Rose

Newer drugs start out with a negative profit.

They do, but depending on their cost, they can potentially overcome the profit made from the cheaper drug very fast.

You mention Molnupiravir. If Merck doesn’t sell Covirsmacktin, someone else will, and then Molnupiravir will be a loss anyhow.

This is precisely why I believe that most of what I’m reading about IVM being demonized fits these companies’ situations perfectly; why I’m seeing flawed or fraudulent studies on both sides – to instill enough doubt so that it doesn’t pass the goal post, leaving companies free to push out the expensive stuff.

The first company to break the silence has a very difficult part to play here because big players have big interests… and big wallets to protect these interests. Right now fingers are still being aptly pointed on both sides, and I’m afraid that will continue to happen for a while. I don’t for a second think these companies have the people’s health at heart. One could argue that they’d have to if they’re to sell anything, to which I’d respond that that might be the case when a deadlier virus emerges; this isn’t the scenario we’re in.

@Catalin Front line doctors actually sell ivermectin all the time, without any problems, It is just that FDA, or NHS for that matter does not believe that is does work:
Vallejos, J., Zoni, R., Bangher, M. et al. Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. BMC Infect Dis 21, 635 (2021).

I prefer candle wax on the nipples as my go to cure. Not for everything mind you, the germs though, especially. It works — my website says so. Too many are so behind on ritual technology! I have a reasonable consult fee. Really!

I’m even nearly certified for trephination in some countries.

“I would never go to a hospital with Covid. Robert David Steele did it a few weeks ago and they killed him.”

Typical conspiracy theory doubling down.

“My immune system is good enough to survive COVID!”

Winds up in hospital and dies.

“COVID is not that bad! The doctors must have murdered him!”

These damnfools will never, ever, EVER admit, even to themselves, that they were wrong. They will die still convinced it’s a conspiracy.

While not going to the hospital will certainly cause deaths, it may also save a few lives, since they won’t be tying up medical resources.

By foregoing vaccines, Garrison is avoiding dreadful Toxins like the ones mentioned in his cartoon – sugar, lipids and salt, oh my!

But by taking Big Pharma’s ivermectin tablets, he’s exposing himself to chemicals like colloidal silicon dioxide, magnesium stearate, butylated hydroxyanisole, anhydrous citric acid and croscarmellose sodium.* Eugggh!

He may have to update a cartoon or two to warn others about ivermectin ingredients.

It’s probably a good thing that Garrison and similar loons have vowed not to be hospitalized with Covid-19. It leaves additional beds open for non-cranks.

*unless he’s ingesting and/or smearing on horse ivermectin paste, in which case he’s also imbibing such things as polysorbate 80 and corn oil. And who knows what’s in that “apple flavor”?

You may be correct; I believe some (But I don’t think all???) formulations of Ivermectin contain one or possibly all of those ingredients. All modern medicine is fraught with potential dangers; ALL of them. The questions are, Do the benefits outweigh the risks? And in the case of Ivermectin; does a person have to take so MANY doses of it that the nasty ingredients WILL case not only short term; but long term side effects?
The answer to both question for ivermectin is no; especially when doing a side-by-side comparison to the nasty ingredients in ALL vaccines. Here is a link to the CDC’s website; with a list of all of the excipients in vaccines. I’m fairly certain that most people would rather have a handful of doses of Ivermectin with the nasty ingredients you listed; than to have repeated vaccines; of all kinds; with the DOZENS and DOZENS of VERY nasty ingredients in them. Take a gander:

A very good number of THOSE nasty ingredients are carcinogenic; as well as having the ability to cause a host of other health issues down the road.
There have been numerous studies proving that since the inception of wide-spread and routine vaccines; the OVERALL health of the world’s population has drastically decreased in DIRECT correlation to the use of vaccines to ARTIFICIALLY pump up our immune systems. Instead of BOLSTERING them; they sort of make them ‘sit it out’ and grow weaker and weaker. It’s why kids (And adults) who play/work with or in dirt are usually FAR more robust and healthy than kids or adults who sterilize everything around them.
I’ve read articles from some health leaders from other countries who are baffled by our resistance and even mockery of the use of Ivermectin; when those countries have used it for a very long time because of the great success they have with it.

You only need one, two, or three doses of vaccine to protect you from COVID. It’s unclear how much Ivermectin you would need because all the studies (except one VERY suspect one) show that no doses work as well as any doses.

If you are referring to all the other things we vaccinate against, like measles, you have to balance the shot vs. all the drugs you need to treat measles.

From what I can tell there are countries using it, but with no particular success.

Huh, my Ivermectin contains 1% Ivermectin, 40% glycerol formal & propylene glycol.

And that is all. No paste, no flavors, it is injectable to be drawn up at 1 ml per 110 lbs & taken ORALLY.

Injectables don’t contain all those extra ingredients & impurities.

I have two obese friends who recently were diagnosed with covid. The first one was hospitalized for a month & the day before discharge was vaccinated. She worsened & was unable to be discharged. Died 4 days ago.

The other treated with Ivermectin & is recovered.

Bullsnot. I don’t believe a single word. I do this in and out every single day. Stories like yours are always things people “Hear” but us experts in the trenches never, ever actually “See.” Go tell your bs stories to the uninformed. Some of us do this professionally, went to decades of school, and won’t just sit by and ignore baloney like this anymore.

Also, getting a vaccine a day before hospitalization would imply this fake person contracted covid something like five to seven days before this event. Vax won’t do squat at that point but good job tossing that steaming nugget in there. The obese thing is nice, too, I’ve got several patients here sick as sh*t with totally normal BMIs.

Ivermectin does not work. Period. End of story. Your fantasy has come to an end in a tsunami of new cases in areas that were dumb enough to believe the lies of people like “doctor demon semen” and her cronies, a disgraced professor who has zero physiology or clinical medicine training, and you. Nice company you keep.

I’m not sure of it, but I suspect it. The more India goes without another wave, the stronger the suspicion gets. And this suspicion comes from the date at which IVM has been approved in India (April 28th 2021). Government guidelines are here: – since then, their cases rose for a few days, steeply declined to insignificant numbers (in proportion with their population, and remained at that level. Their vaccine intake is 17%/29% (full/partial) currently. That’s where my suspicion comes from. Like it or not, at this point India is the most extensive observational study on IVM.

Catalin, you picked a bad week to tout India as an observational study on ivermectin:

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the National Task Force on Covid-19 have dropped the use of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) drugs from their revised guidelines for the treatment of the infection.

The decision was taken after experts found that these drugs have little to no effect on Covid-related mortality or clinical recovery of the patient.

Also, use of ivermectin as a treatment wouldn’t explain the drop in cases. It could explain a drop in hospitalizations and deaths, but most transmission occurs before treatment starts. Especially if they follow the guidelines.

@Aarno Syvänen

A number of factors could have had that effect.
– above 50% vaccination
– IVM demand skyrocketing
– doctors going rouge and teaching people how to clear throat/nasal viral loads with house products or common pharmaceuticals; people actually following this advice
– end of wave
– a combination of the above

The question is what’s really the best way to keep the cases down. I can’t agree that vaccination alone can do this as long as you still get infected. While you might tell me that the spread would be less, at this point in time the CDC does not agree with that; and quite frankly neither does the number of cases in countries with a high vaccine intake. This means it still spreads, and sooner or later will mutate to a degree that renders vaccines useless.

@W. Kevin Vicklund

The link I provided is from their official government site: – scroll down, section “Hospitals”, April 29th post. The link you provided doesn’t refer to these revised guidelines, and I can’t find this mention under the section I just mentioned, which would be a logical place to have such an update.

So I’m inclined to believe that either the article is fake news (not the first time this is announced on India Today, btw) or the measure is local and not country wide.

Also, use of ivermectin as a treatment wouldn’t explain the drop in cases. It could explain a drop in hospitalizations and deaths, but most transmission occurs before treatment starts. Especially if they follow the guidelines.

I have to disagree on the first account.

A few of the studies I looked at (one mentioned in a lower comment) indicated faster recovery, and others reported lower viral load; this would be consistent with a drop in cases. From this would logically derive the decrease in hospitalizations and deaths.

But this is still something I’m keeping under observation, and not only in India. I’ve been comparing figures over time of countries which use it fully, those which use it regionally and those which don’t use it at all. Add vaccine intake as a factor. It’s very difficult to get anything definitive, obviously… information clarity and language are huge barriers, but a rough image can be made out. This is really the next best thing I can look for when science is battling science.

My post comes from the official site of India’s Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
Kevin’s post comes from the Indian Council of Medical Research.

I’m pretty sure that ICMR is a subordinate of MoHFW.
The Ministry’s stance is unchanged since April.

The Ministry’s stance is unchanged since April.

You don’t know that, now do you? You want it, apparently so bad that you’re willing to ignore plain English, letterhead, that sort of stuff. Here is an identical flowchart (PDF), but with ivermectin and HCQ, dated May 19, and with your desired lingam domain.

So, is the idea that the ICMR decided to, what, pull a fast one? Just quit while you’re behind. “Fake news,” indeed. Pitiful.

Unless the Ministry failed to update their official site, let me know when you find a country whose Ministry acts under orders from their subordinates.

We’ll see if it’s the case. For now I’m seeing 2 institutions with different stances, out of which the higher one in the hierarchy has yet to update its previous stance.

For now I’m seeing 2 institutions with different stances, out of which the higher one in the hierarchy has yet to update its previous stance.

This “hierarchy,” so far, is something that you have simply pulled out of your ass.

The whole song and dance to “prove” that ivermectin still has the government seal of approval, or something, is asinine. The ICMR is funded by the Department of Health Research, which is within the MoHFW (this you can look up yourself). Do you understand what this is? Enough with your lazy petulance – go drop them an E-mail.

Catalin: Why does EVERYBODY think ivermectin ended the COVID wave in India??? It clearly did not, given there have been a million or so uncounted deaths. It’s much more likely due to a combination of lockdowns and uncontrolled virus spread.

Because both graphs (cases and deaths) went down 2-3 weeks after it got implemented as a measure. And it’s not a singular case.

Yup, if you just boost your immune system with the right supplements you never have to go to a hospital, never even see an MD, much less get a vaccine. Just ask David Stephan. /s

Personally, I prefer to boost my immune system with a well-targeted intramuscular injection so that it’s only boosted in response to specific threats, instead of maybe making it more aggressive about pollen or dust, which I’d rather it just ignore.

But you know, that’s apparently “scary” and “recommended by science” or something.

“Ben Garrison […] told Gizmodo late Sunday that he contracted covid-19 and has been sick for about two weeks”
“We’re taking Ivermectin and various vitamins including a lot of Zinc”

Has Garrison not read the literature? Ivermectin is for prophylaxis. What a rube!

This got by me on the first go-round, but Garrison’s story of contracting Covid-19 is pretty dubious.

He says he and three other people went out to a restaurant and were all sick the next day, with one of them later being told she had Covid.

Seeing that the typical incubation period for Covid-19 is 2-14 days, it’s hard to fathom how all 4 of them were noticeably sickened within 24 hours or less. With that time course, food poisoning is much more likely.

Of course, Garrison et al could have been exposed to Covid-19 at an earlier event. But the restaurant story smells.

My non-vax protection strategy is to engage in more anaerobic workouts so that I develop a lower dependency on oxygen. Then I make a set of workout videos on YT targeting the anti-vax crowd. It’ll bring in a tonne of lucre! At least until my audience dwindles from attrition.

Would it be too macabre for someone ( not me) to make a list of all the Covid deniers/ minimisers who caught the virus and/ or died? I’m sure someone who comments/ reads RI would be fit for the job.

I knew I recognised that ( so-called) ‘artistic’ ‘style’ from somewhere! He illustrated Heckenlively’s book / Bolen Report columns; maybe something on NN, too. Let me comment** on his ( supposed ) style.
Well, there’s not much style. He crowds his space without rhyme, reason or forethought, i.e. design. His drawing of buildings ( except the Capitol dome) and planes is much better than his depiction of people/ animals/ hybrids which is abysmal. I think I commented here that his portraits of anti-vaxxers as super heroes for Heckenlively needed name labels because they didn’t resemble the actual people he sought to represent. The two Disney cartoon characters fighting are the exception BUT I think that he just traced those.

** before trolls shriek, I have training/ experience in commercial art/ adverts.

Yes, there will always be vaccinated people who succumb to COVID, as no vaccine ever made was 100% effective. I suppose the smallpox vaccine is in first place.

Obviously the only fair way to judge this is to count systematically. We have a special name: controlled studies. Like the ones which were done on vaccines.

Stick to PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers, not obvious anti-science websites. Hitchens’s razor: “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.”

Can we mock antivaxer Brian Shilhavy for offering $1000 per hour “consultations”?

Wow! That’s Kelly Brogan-level grifting.

Gold-plated bullshit doesn’t come cheap.

The aptly named Brian Shilhavy?

Can I pay you for an autographed topless photo suitable for framing, hitchy? I’d like to work it into a triptych. I’m willing to negotiate the fee for smearing your torso with coconut oil.

Do any of you pro vaxxers wonder why no alternative views are allowed? Nobel laureates, PhD’s, former VP of pfizer. How about facebook posts of adverse reactions from 10s of thousands of people maimed from the Gates vaxx? You trust studies from Pfizer (fined 10s of billions of dollars for knowingly killing Americans) promoting their own product. If our Gvt is telling the truth about this “pandemic” it will be a first in my lifetime and forgive me for doubting the sociopaths ruling this world. If there was no tv news there would be no pandemic as I know of no-one dying from it though I do know people who have died from the clot shot. Imagine if you will…a disease so deadly you have to be tested to know you have it and a vaxx so safe you have to be threatened to take it…..TRULY the twilight zone. Good luck and get that booster cuz Dr gates and ass clown faustis says so! WOW!

@ hitch

Do any of you pro vaxxers wonder why no alternative views are allowed?

For people being silenced, you are quite loud. We have been hearing your whining about lockdown, masks and now vaccines for almost two years straight.

Ah, you don’t mean “allowed”, you mean “believed”.
You have a right to express yourself. You have no right to be trusted at face value.

If there was no tv news there would be no pandemic as I know of no-one dying from it though I do know people who have died from the clot shot.

Lucky you.
Maybe you should get out more. My colleagues and my parents know multiple people who got or died from Covid19. One colleague and his wife got it last year and had the joy to get a taste of long covid in the form of three months of brain fog.

a disease so deadly you have to be tested to know you have it

Tell that to the people in ICU.
Funny how unverified posts on Facebook by random people is to be taken as true, but news from TV, newspapers, scientific journals are to be rejected.


How about facebook posts of adverse reactions from 10s of thousands of people maimed from the Gates vaxx?

Assuming that you can even produce proof of these “facebook posts of adverse reactions from 10s of thousands”, still no. All you have are unverified self-reports (i.e. hearsay), and no hard evidence.

We’ve seen this tripe before. Vaccine comes out. All sorts of claims of harm are made. But when we ask for proof, nothing.

If you want us to take you seriously, you need to bring hard evidence. Unverified claims about facebook posts are not just hearsay, but hearsay of hearsay.

@hitch Gates Vax ? You should check who actually developed COVID vaccines. There are any number of follow up studies, not finaced by Pfizer.

Hitch’s level of “argument”

If there was no tv news there would be no nobody dying from automobile accidents as I know of no-one dying from one though I do know people who have died from other things.

It boggles me to see the science deniers here pushing disinformation and outright lying about how the horse medicine works when there is no supporting evidence. How do people get the fortitude to repeat such blatant lies?

” If there was no tv news there would be no pandemic”

Yeah, the Us government (and UK and other countries) tried that during WWI with the 1918 influenza. Guess what? People still died by the shedload. (How could that have happened? Most countries fighting in WWI had draconian laws against publishing anything “negative” or that might “damage morale”. That’s not true now.)


I didn’t know how to even look at a study when this all began. I got curious, asked around and eventually was able to crawl through them enough to understand them. I suggest you do the same; start reading them, understand them, look at both sides and then decide. Don’t take anyone’s word on it. Not mine, not Orac’s, not anyone’s. That’s the only way you’ll be certain $$$ doesn’t get in the way of the truth.

@Catalin Actually really do read both negative and positive reports. Then consider what causes the differences. One explanation: low powered trials
There is a strong political support for ivermectin, Problem is that viruses do not listen political propaganda

I don’t do politics. I get enough of it where I live and I hate it enough as it is. There’s no other human construct containing as many lies as politics.

I do read both. I do try to see which are more likely to be closer to the truth. The most difficult part is assessing the publisher’s conflicts of interest when they declare none. Sometimes you can follow the funding, other times you can’t and have to wait for whistleblowers and then confirm those leads.. headaches all around.

So my mind isn’t made up yet, but I confess the balance leans in favor of. (which was probably obvious :P)

Don’t take anyone’s word on it. Not mine, not Orac’s, not anyone’s. That’s the only way you’ll be certain $$$ doesn’t get in the way of the truth.

That Pharma shill gambit must be a hard itch to scratch, eh, Catalin?

“That Pharma shill gambit must be a hard itch to scratch, eh, Catalin?”

There is nobody home, Narad.

@Catalin You would assume that there is COI even if there is none declared. Do I guess right when I think this applies only to negative studies ? And that positive studies are automatically trustworthy. What kind of fundimg would make a study automatically wrong?

“I didn’t know how to even look at a study when this all began. I got curious, asked around and eventually was able to crawl through them enough to understand them.”

I’m a statistician — I read the articles I have access to. Nothing in them supports your views, so which is it:

your statement that you understand them is false but you don’t realize it?
you know that you don’t understand them but you prefer to lie about it anyway in order to appear to be one of the “brave” folks standing up against “government overreach” and big companies?
you understand them, realize they don’t support your world view, but still choose to lie for the reasons in my 2nd bullet?

The pure BS you, hitch, and the other anti-vacc people who post here are spreading is dangerous — you are not informing people, you are attempting to mislead people with the possible result that if they take your word for things they are putting themselves and others at risk. That’s vile. I’d say you should be ashamed, but your behavior so far shows you have no shame.


That Pharma shill gambit must be a hard itch to scratch, eh, Catalin?

I truly don’t trust them.

@ coriolis

There is nobody home, Narad.

Nobody knocked. 😛

@Aarno Syvänen

It applies to all studies.
The type of funding that comes from anyone standing to gain.


You’re a statistician? Alright.

pick any country which officially reported adoption of IVM state wide
note population, density, health care index (add vaccine intake for kicks)
find a country with similar factors which hasn’t adopted IVM
note active cases, 7d-avg new cases, 7d-avg deaths for both
turn them into % by total population
compare results
note trends

Pick another country and repeat.

After a few of these, come back and tell me again how I’m spreading pure BS. I can understand coincidence, but repeated coincidence at this level is something else.

To answer your question, none of the above.

Hitch: Why does it matter if you need to be tested for COVID? If anything, that makes it even more dangerous. You have no idea if you’ve just got a cold or something much worse.

“I can understand coincidence, but repeated coincidence at this level is something else.”

Check on things you intentionally cherry-picked? Pass. And, from this and other comments of yours it’s pretty clear you don’t understand coincidences at all.

“To answer your question, none of the above.”

That answers it — you’re lying.

Intentionally cherry-picked? Note that I didn’t name any countries or areas for that matter.

Like I was gonna tell you to verify the probability of a drug working comparing countries where it wasn’t used to countries where it wasn’t used.

So much for your statistician statement.

Take care.

Likewise, a list of those who advocated the vaccine and subsequently died of apparent complications after receiving it.

Simply divided the total number of celebrity anti-vaxxer deaths, by the total number of dead celebrity vaccine advocates, and voila! You have effectiveness of the vaccine – or something.

That division would be strongly in favor of the vaccines. They kill a lot less than the illness. Way more less.
Do you have reason to believe otherwise, or are you just contrarian?

Well yes. If the value was fractional, the vaccine proponents would be rightly falling on their swords (or syringes).

I have wondered about the Hippocratic oath in relation to statistical functions of health: The oath is not “First do more good than harm, on aggregate”

It always seems more egregious to be harmed or killed by a medical treatment recommended by a physician, that was meant to improve one’s health, than simply to succumb to a pathogen where one’s fate was “in the lap of the Gods”.

No-one sees views one’s own personal injury or death as a unusual statistical outlier in a dataset that has generally positive outcomes on the whole. You only care about your own personal outcome.

Humans will taint the assessment of risk by the perceived unpleasantness of the worst outcome. Hence why a person who was frightened of air travel, may zoom at high speed in their car, tinkering simultaneously with their mobile phone: Faulty assessment of risk.

Many perceive a risk of impending medical authoritarianism as a much worse outcome to complying with vaccine mandate, designed to reduce their risk from disease.

Are they wrong?
How do you measure such things?

@Cthulhu Why would death caused by infectious disease be better than any other death ?
Public health is about making rules to prevent deaths. Obviously, statistical analysis is required to assess their effectivity.

Well, there’s not much style. He crowds his space without rhyme, reason or forethought, i.e. design.

The vibe I got, after my optic nerve recovered, was of someone who was exposed to R. Crumb and really made the worst of it.

Denice said, “Would it be too macabre for someone ( not me) to make a list of all the Covid deniers/ minimisers who caught the virus and/ or died?”
Yesterday, from a posted link in a discussion, I ran across a YouTube channel that is doing this.
I don’t know anything about the channel nor the operators/hosts so they may be batshit insane or lowlifes for all I know.
Part 5 (so there are 4 earlier vids):

There’s a website for that


The purpose of this site is educational, everyone listed on this site was/is an anti-vaxxer activist who helped spread COVID-19 misinformation on social media. Share to stop others from making the same mistake. GET VACCINATED!

The schadenfreude I would experience would be when the smug, intellectual, progressive liberal types are the first to be machine-gunned in the atheistic, pro-trans, BLM friendly (trained Marxists), militantly-equitable Utopian society they thought they were building … but it just degenerated into every other attempt at communism, with starvation and mass-murder, with the most psychopathic crime-lord being in charge.

Remember – the real communists hate the progressive liberals EVEN MORE than they hate the imperialist reactionaries.

My prescription: KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov’s lectures on “ideological subversion”.

“I defected to the USA – where are you planning on defecting to?” – Yuri Bezmenov

It copied and pasted every bit of that, modulo some cud-chewing. I strongly doubt that it knows anything whatever about Marxism, and I wouldn’t wager anything much on C—s** herself.

**Brain teaser, C. Show Your Mettle!

in the atheistic […] society they thought they were building

Since we are not trying to build an atheistic society – just one where there is true freedom of religion, including freedom from religion – we are not much at risk of fulfilling your dark prophecy.
Yeah, yeah, I know, there are militant atheists outta here. They are giving lectures, and eat meat on Friday. Oh the horror.

In other news, last week, a bunch of Catholic monks set fire to a 5G tower in my country.
And the Talibans are back in power in Afghanistan.
Scuse me if I’m right now. more concerned by militant religious people.

Same thing with all your other bogeymen.

Remember what Mr. Hallorann said: It’s just like pictures in a book, Danny.
It isn’t real.

Like the BG cartoons.

Ooooh choices, choices, choices. Machine gunned by the intellectual progressive liberals or machine gunned by the Christian fundamentalist, gun nuts who think that the bible is the source of all information and not stopping to salute the flag is a capital offence . Who should we pick?

In reality, there are few consequences to publicly refusing to respect a national flag, in the progressive west.
But … just try publicly refusing to respect a rainbow coloured flag.

Anyway – it’s the communists machine gunning the liberal progressives.
You seem confused …

If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, you are to cut off her hand. You must show her no pity.

— Deuteronomy 25:11,12

Reddit tells me that it is because the surviving brother in these situations is a “spare dick” and that clenching it would threaten the lineage/bloodline. I concur.

The leadership of the BLM movement went on record as being self-described “trained Marxists”. Use your search engine.

The transgender movement seems to me to be the ultimate triumph of “feels over facts” – the antithesis of scientific reasoning. Then it is combined with the “repressive tolerance” of the Frankfurt School thinkers like Herbert Marcuse (which has, amazingly, captured the whole of Western academia), in order to browbeat the odd evolutionary biologist who dares to point out the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.

Of course – we have the highly scientifically eminent billionairesses, Jennifer Pritzker and Martine Rothblatt to push the whole trans-human agenda forward.

@Cthulhu I tried to do a Google search as you suggested, and got only Daily Fail type rants. I guess you believe them. It would explain something.

The beetroot is for nitric oxide production (I bet they forget the riboflavin).

His illustrations are

Their common knowledge base is common. And base. With the constant screeching noise that is the right wing media echo chamber, their memes reflect in a constant stream of gut-busting own-goal. It is like the artist just vomits out last week’s spin cycle and everything has to be labeled because the little children audience can’t tell the difference between beans and peas and they certainly don’t remember being fed those chunks of corn.

It’s like you are given the opportunity to have a one page cheat sheet in economics but fail anyways because 9/10 of it was on the national security implications of inflated art prices and Hunter Biden.

It is such good news that antivaxers are now being consistent enough not to tie up hospital beds unnecessarily as a result of their own irresponsible behaviour. If they are going to refuse medical intervention this is the only way to go and then perhaps they will do their own research and learn what life expectancy was like before empirical medicine.

Funny. “Empirical evidence” on Ivermectin is being cast aside because observation and experience isn’t as good as science. I guess that wouldn’t apply to vaccines though, right? How we love to twist terms so they work in our favor.. we truly do deserve a gruesome end.

. “Empirical evidence” on Ivermectin is being cast aside because observation and experience isn’t as good as science. I guess that wouldn’t apply to vaccines though, right?

What are you talking about?

“Empirical evidence” was so much cast aside, a few clinical studies have been sponsored and run to check this IVM stuff. Some are still running.

And clinical studies have been run and are still running with vaccines. We didn’t decide on approving vaccines on mere “observation and experience”.
And observation and experience of vaccines adverse events are so much cast aside, we have modified the recommendations for the Astra and are currently checking these stories of menstrual cycle perturbations.

Of course we didn’t. All we did was take the word of the seller on it. Pardon me for not spotting the difference.

@Catalin currently lists 79 studies about COVID 19 and ivermectin, 26 of them completed. Interesting thing is that 9 reports results. Could it be possible that negative results are not reported ?
Any case, lots of people are trying to acquire empirical evidence.

@Aarno Syvänen

Aye, I’ve went through a few of them now. What I’m noticing in the results are a couple of studies where Ivermectin (plus other drugs) usage performed at least as well as the placebo, and it’s important to note that the placebo isn’t a sugar pill, but actual treatment. Which can only logically mean that the combo does have an effect on the outcome of the illness.

Then you have a few studies where recovery occurred faster…

And then I have Orac explaining to me (us) that that’s most likely not the case because studies are being faked, even after I pointed out (with evidence) that studies on BOTH sides appear to be fraudulent.

Can you see how this back and forth wears out one’s patience and interest? Scientists being bought and paid for, experts speaking on behalf of their own interests. At this point I’d rather just waltz through it and if I die, so be it. At least it’ll be on my terms, not forced in a specific direction.

I think that you’d better re-read some information about what a placebo is, what it is used for and what the placebo effect is. Seems to me that you have completely misunderstood.

Empirical evidence” on Ivermectin is being cast aside because observation and experience isn’t as good as science.

No it is not. A standard treatment for all sorts of things until about the middle of the 19th C in Eurape & North America was bleeding. Docters knew it worked. It might have had a placebo effect.

@Catalin Can you not see that “as good as placebo” is not a miracle cure. It is even good enough to be accepted as a drug. Same thing applies if ivermectin plus standard care is as good as ivermectin plus placebo.


In the study I’m referring to (admittedly without having mentioned it; my bad), the treatments were clarified as follows: Ivermectin and Doxycycline (Ivermectin and Doxycycline: Ivermectin 6 mg stat and Doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 5 days) vs. Placebo (Standard treatment). I’m quite sure “standard treatment” doesn’t involve sugar pills. This study also reported a trend of earlier clinical improvements in the first branch.

@Aarno Syvänen

Hey I’m not the one calling it a miracle cure.. that’s on whoever likes to believe in miracles. I’m merely suggesting it has effects, and is therefor an alternative that can be considered over the more expensive treatments.

It’s normal to trial something against standard treatment but this isn’t placebo. As far as I understand it, a placebo is an inert substance or treatment which is is intended to simulate actual treatment. The idea being that people feel better after any treatment, so even a completely ineffective intervention will give a better result than doing nothing. One of the actual medical commenters could probably expand on whether the term ‘placebo’ is ever used to mean something else.

Being as good as current standard care could be useful. Especially if a combination of both gives a better result than either on their own. Being as good as placebo is a waste of time. Back to the drawing board.

@Catalin Now do give us a full citation. If you use PubMed, you find Cite box and and can copy result. There are lots of COVID studies around, so finding one without citation is difficult.

In the study I’m referring to (admittedly without having mentioned it; my bad)

Perhaps you could identify it, then.

Aye, here it is.

In this case, the placebo is an actual standard treatment (Paracetamol, Vitamin D, Oxygen if indicated, Low molecular weight heparin, dexamethasone if indicated)

You can most likely make out more from it than I can, but I do think I understand enough to see that there were some benefits in the IVM arm. It might not be the IVM itself (alone) but perhaps in combination with other drugs in the treatment.. still significant if you ask me.

What’s unclear to me in this one is the dosage they used. Most others I’ve read refer the dosage per kg, but not in this case..

You can most likely make out more from it than I can, but I do think I understand enough to see that there were some benefits in the IVM arm.

One 6 mg dose of dewormer?

still significant if you ask me.

By that standard, the experimental arm caused erosive esophagitis.

If you actually read the description, it says standard care plus placebo, not placebo
Recovery time was 4 – 10 days in the treatment group, 5 – 12 in “placebo” group. Not very evidence, either.


By that standard, the experimental arm caused erosive esophagitis.

So we’re counting 2 severe adverse events in one arm while dismissing the 3 deaths in the other arm. Got it.

@Aarno Syvänen

Well I did read the description.. the one mentioned in the study details tab; they don’t mention placebo plus treatment there, they define it as I quoted above. And now that you’ve pointed it out I notice the plus in the results tab. Regardless:

I don’t see those time frames mentioned. What I see is this:

IVM arm:

early recovery (around 7 days): 111 = 60.7%
late recovery (around or over 12 days): 42 = 23%
clinical deterioration: 16 = 8.7%
persistent positivity at 14 day mark: 14 = 7.7%
mortality: 0 = 0%
serious adverse events: 2 = 1.09%

Placebo arm:

early recovery (around 7 days): 80 = 44.4%
late recovery (around or over 12 days): 67 = 37.2%
clinical deterioration: 32 = 17.8%
persistent positivity at 14 day mark: 36 = 20%
mortality: 3 = 1.67%
serious adverse events: 0 = 0%

The comparison is pretty clear to me. Early recovery = less spread. Every bit helps.

Before you ask, the study is funded by a college. While COI could apply, I don’t see it as very likely.

You know, for the longest time I’ve been a pacifist at heart. The more I experienced, the more I found I wanted more and more people to drop dead. (this little note is directly related to people who live to profit – getting into these studies again and again reminds me of this ongoing fight to suppress what could actually turn out to be a good thing)

@Catalitn Nice that you read the study. But you missed the variance (error margins I mentioned) and still just two days. Second thing is that when the paper was written, standard of care was worse than now.

It’s possible. I did mention I didn’t see the time frames you referred to.

Any chance you could lay down how you calculated them in simple terms? I’d like to know for future situations of this sort.. live and learn, as they say :p

@Catalin I did not calculate error margins. The paper mentioned them, as is customary.

This is in response to Christine Rose’s comment to me. (Can’t there be a “Reply” button after everyone’s comment?)
I have been able to speak to a couple of people from another country; and have also read information from other countries; where the use of Ivermectin has helped save many people from the most toxic effects of Covid-19. Here are two examples:

I personally know one woman; a young woman; who was vaccinated and within a few weeks needed surgery because of ‘abnormal bleeding’; she had no previous problems.
A family member’s co-worker was vaccinated along with her husband and 21 year old Son. The Son died a week later; I believe but I’m not positive; that it was complications from a blood clotting issue; he had no pre-existing conditions. Are they both coincidences? It’s certainly possible of course. But in the last year I’ve heard so MANY of these real-life stories (Not from the dark web); that a person would have to be delusional to think that suddenly; all these people WITHOUT pre-existing conditions; are just dropping dead, all ‘coincidentally’…yeah; um; I don’t think so. Some, yes; but ALL?? No way.
Just as we say “Oh those CRAZY Anti-vaxxers don’t want to hear ANYTHING”; the VERY SAME THING can be said to all of us who are pro-vax; and in particular; these Covid-vaccines.
We really shouldn’t be so smug about it. I confess; I did a LOT of eye-rolling at first when hearing some of the things said by ‘Anti-vaxxers’; but I’m not rolling my eyes any more. I’ve seen FAR too much evidence that shows that they might be on to something. Only time will tell. NOT our opinions; but time. Maybe WE are right after all. And MAYBE; just MAYBE; we are the ones who will be proven wrong. I’m not anxious to find out.

On the other hand, I haven’t heard of any friends or acquaintances or workmates who died after or suffered any serious side effects from the vaccine. I know of one person (workmates mother-in-law) who spent a lot of time on a ventilator with covid and recently died, plus a couple of people who were really ill and recovered, plus several who just felt rubbish during their covid infection.

On that basis I’d be stupid to think that the vaccine is worse than the disease or even dangerous at all.

“All of these people?” The only people I see suddenly dropping dead are folks who refuse to get vaccinated for COVID, then get COVID & die.

Same here. I know of no bad reactions to the vaccine but of several people who died. The only one I knew well was a doctor who owned a restaurant and advised city government : he got sick caring for patients. My SO’s friend from Spain lost his brother living there who was elderly but healthy, living independently and working as an artisan; my SO also used a local mechanic, who shuttered by business for “a month” to care for his father who lived 50 miles away- both died a few weeks later.

There was a near shutdown here in Spring 2020 but recovery has been happening for well over a year with upticks that were controlled by vaccines and careful business planning. Looking at rates of serious illness/ death and rate of vaccination shows declines in the former as the latter increased**. The economy recovered too: restaurants and entertainment venues are functioning. High rates of vaccination will do that. For several months in 2020, there was virtually no traffic. There is now.

So the chaos predicted by anti-vaxxers- including trolls here- didn’t happen. Mike Adams says that millions of vaccine deaths and catastrophic economic meltdown were “all hidden* and that we can’t believe news and “history” anyway – it’s all staged, false flag and crisis actors. He also recommends horse paste.

** Mayo Clinic has maps

On my street of 10 houses, 3 of us have been hospitalized for COVID-19 and 2 of us have close relatives or friends who have died from this infection. Still I know people who haven’t taken the vaccine. I fight the urge to ask “how high a stack of bodies on the sidewalk would it take to change your mind?”

It’s not coincidental, but amazing that one person could have personal knowledge of so many cases involving serious/fatal complications of vaccination.

It’s almost like payback from a cosmic force for having done a LOT of eye-rolling at first over things those “Anti-vaxxers” said.

The road to awareness takes many, many strange twists and turns.

Exactly. And a large, outpatient clinical practice like I belong to has vaccinated over 150,000 patients and we have had ZERO bad reactions. Then stack the three hospitals atop that and the only death notes I write are for unvaccinated patients who bought into bs they read on FB or twitter. NEVER for a vaccine reaction. Closest I got was a lady we had sit in the ER for an hour or so after she got her second shot and got “Flushing.” She did a crossword, left happy, went back to work the next day.

Of course you are not crazy! Issues like you cite must be taken seriously. That’s why the VAERS database exists. If the database is showing lots of incidents like that something needs to be looked into.

What the database and your reports cannot do is tell coincidence from cause. And you yourself point this out, so clearly you are looking at this the right way. To tell cause from coincidence you need to look at a controlled population, say vaxxed vs. records from two years ago. This is how they detected the very small number of people who have had blood clotting or heart problems.

The article in the Deseret News was pretty snarky, and makes the same mistake. Cases in India are dropping. It must be the Ivermectin. It can’t possibly be that cases spiked after huge religious gatherings, or that people are distancing.

The second article you cite is on the fraud that Orac links to above. My favorite anecdote about this particular scam is that a hospital cited as one of the participants disavowed it and said they weren’t part of the study. The explanation was that they were smuggling pills in without telling the hospital. How could they possibly know the pills were working if they never talked to a doctor?

So what am I getting at? Either you learn some statistics and some virology, forget the news and read the original studies, or you decide who is most trustworthy. You have heard many stories. But stories aren’t enough to tell coincidence from cause. We’re talking about millions of vaccines. There will always be stories. Even people who drop dead in the doctor’s office.

We have a tendency to trust people we know over actual experts. But listen to the experts. Find a podcast where they break down the details. Orac is too snarky for many people’s tastes, but there are other options. Trust me, experts love to talk about this stuff.

Are you writing these posts under one name then replying to yourself in glowing adulation under another? I see a disturbing trend…

Christine Rose has been around a while, and this comment, while very gentle (especially for around here) is correcting Cindy, not agreeing with her.

The boss is a real stickler for no sock puppets (there was an … issue a few years ago).

(Can’t there be a “Reply” button after everyone’s comment?)

Eventually, the successive indents march replies farther and farther to the right, rendering them unreadable. One could put a button that doesn’t indent after every comment, but that’s pretty close to not threading (which is close to what’s already set up).

I assure you, citing newspaper articles wouldnot prove you right, India still have COVID cases,

Hitch- ‘if there were no TV news there would be no pandemic’ is a staggeringly ignorant comment ( among many others you own). There are none so sensory impaired as those who do not wish to perceive.

Washington Post has a paywalled article that apparently lists Mercola, JFKjr and others being banned.

It’s pretty much what the hed says: Y—be is purporting to ban all antivaccine content, a task to which they’ve devoted “at least hundreds” of moderators for medical misinformation writ large.

Frankly, I find his art to be gross and extreme, but in USA you can be gross – artful all you want. As I have read here, and other places, extremists don’t take kindly to any challenge to their world view. Extremists also come out to push violent resolution to such a challenge.

If you promote violence, you are the problem. If you lie, you are the problem. Lying means you have not been responsible presenting information that supports your position. This is easy. Show the world you are right, which requires ideas and comparisons judged at the very least.

Waxing on a bit too much here. If you can prove that there is something better that can be done — please step forward. The world will take you seriously as I understand it. Off soapbox.

If there are organizations (perhaps individuals) that produce obvious, damaging misinformation to the health of a nation, let them be recognized, known as well. New day, stop information pollution! Weird. Still sorry that an American Wood Pecker died permanently.

IMHO — thanks.

This dude is gross. Interesting that is produced big anti-vax response. Suppose they are being kicked off their easy platforms and have no place else to go. Perhaps a nerve been struck that produces weird anti-vaxx responses. Kind of interesting to observe.

Nice write. Thanks!

Question for the blog (only people who know what a lipid* is need reply, please):

I went to the store and they didn’t have what I went for (as is custom) but they did have this new stuff

THC – O?

I try to look it up when I get home but don’t know anything about it at all except that it is fat soluble and the army researched it for disabling dogs and people in the 1950’s. If it said absolutely anything on the box that hinted at acetate I would not have bought it.

Would it pose the same vaping disease pneumonia risk like a couple years ago with alpha-Tocopherol acetate (vitamin e)? It seems like it would but the stuff was pricey so I’m currently timidly trying it for now anyways.

Another thing is people say it takes up to 30 minutes to do it’s thing and that is not a good fit for me. No feedback. Too much lag. I’ve been very careful with increasingly long hits and waiting an hour but, so far, I’m not sure it does anything. What they say is in there may not be what is in there. More of a case should be made for some regulation that’s what is in there is what is in there.

I’ve had problems with strong THC in the past. If it is a threshold thing, I don’t want to go to far past that, for now. Does anybody here have any subjective/objective experience with this lab-made stuff? I’d rather not plod through bluelight and eroid because reasons.

It should be noted that the State is not a legal state and pot smokers imprisoning pot smokers is a religion around here so that we have always gotten the schwag aldulterated trash.

A lipid’s a lipid a lipid? Or like crayons and just don’t eat the orange ones?

“It’s pretty simple. When you have a lot invested in a more expensive treatment and you end up using the cheaper one…”

What “treatment” do they have a lot invested in? I’ll help you. Here are the treatments we use:
-Full-dose anticoagulation
-A bunch of vitamins and melatonin because what harm can they do?
Some, specific patients get:
When we have them. Which one, specifically, are they making all that $$ on?

Is molnupravir available right now? Is it in use now? Seems like its still experimental? If not then they aren’t making any money out of it. They could however be making a fortune out of ivermectin while waiting for molnupravir to come to market. This is what actually happens. Company produces a drug that works. Company sells drug. Company develops a drug that does the same job but maybe a bit better in some small way. Company sells that drug as well. Old drug usage eventually dies out. Or does it? There are many older drugs still circulating because they are still effective or cheaper or better in some patients.

You’ve locked this theory into your mind now and cannot see round it at all.

Why do you pretend to not understand how it works?

You’re sitting on a cheap and effective drug.
At the same time you’re invested and testing out a different, more expensive one.
Trials end and it turns out the new drug is leveled or a little better in terms of effectiveness.
People will pick the cheap treatment, ergo you lose your investment and fail to make expected profits.

The gap in effectiveness would have to be significant for people to actually chose it over the cheaper drug.

Nope. Can’t get it. Earliest we might get it is twelve months from now. Again-what “treatment” are they making all this $$ off of RIGHT NOW that’s robbing us of sacred, life-giving Stromectol??

Also-weren’t you mad at Pfizer? Molnuprivir is a Merck product

This has nothing to do with what’s being used now.

I’ve explained it before, it’s about blocking the use of a cheap drug so that when the expensive ones come out, the cheap one doesn’t get in the way of profits..

And no, I’m not only mad at Pfizer. I’m angry with any entity which holds profit above actual care.

Why would I limit this to what’s happening now? I’ve explained in the comment directly above how I see it..

I’ve explained it before, it’s about blocking the use of a cheap drug so that when the expensive ones come out, the cheap one doesn’t get in the way of profits..

A nice concept, in principle. But here you are still talking about Ivermectin. Aren’t you. My dissssapointement is immeasurable and my day is ruined.

beedebeedebeedebeede what the fuck Buck?

When I get fatally caught in a looky loop I usually go on ahead and pretend to agree to the EULA.

You would like some /BIGASS THOUGHTS.. Get some!

I understand perfectly what you are getting at. However, your theory is so full of holes that you’d starve to death if you had to rely on it to catch fish. You’re also modifying it on the fly to make it sound better to your own ears.

You’ve accused me of providing conflicting information/opinion before. I asked you then to point it out and you did not.

Trying to latch the picture of a failing theory only works when you rule out the depicted possibilities, which so far, at least in my mind, I’ve backed up enough. (previous comments from previous posts counted)

Remember, if companies were driven by healthcare instead of profit you wouldn’t see the before mentioned apartheid, or at the very least not as much of it. Granted, I’m expanding the feel by generalization to most companies. However I don’t think I’m wrong in doing so. If the number of people in charge driven by “good” outweighed their counters, we’d be looking at a different picture right now.

You see what you see, I see what I see. We should probably leave it at that.

As soon as I’ve hit the Post button it occurred to me that the accusation I mentioned might’ve came from Narad. Apologies if that is the case.

As soon as I’ve hit the Post button it occurred to me that the accusation I mentioned might’ve came from Narad.

I have seen no need to indulge such niceties.

Trying to latch the picture of a failing theory only works when you rule out the depicted possibilities, which so far, at least in my mind, I’ve backed up enough.

Well, you’re not really here for the hunting, are you?

We’ve had luck with Toci when we have it but you have to catch them before they need ventilatory support or the returns rapidly diminish

Just a general statement. One thing I’ve noticed in over twenty months of doing this is that patients who prone do better. That might make the difference between, say, a 7-8 day or a 10-11 day hospital stay – which seems to be the kind of “Outcomes” a lot of these studies measure. Did they account for this? This kind of thing is how we got remdesivir; which we now know doesn’t work.

If you prone, get out of bed and move around, hell-even sit up in a chair part of the day, your odds of ending up on a vent are much lower, as well.

Our former next-door neighbor’s grandson is on a ventilator with Covid-19. He’s 21.

But young people aren’t being sickened by the virus and don’t need to be vaccinated.

Catalin: One of those authors wrote a book about how the Mafia killed JFK, and the other is a dental surgeon. Why are they discussing things they know nothing about?

Comments are closed.


Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading