3 Comments

Unfortunately, now the authors want to disavow their own research:

Jose Gonzales Zamora

@JoseGonzalesZa1

Replying to @PierreKory

I am ONE of the authors of the study. This "retrospective" study looks for ASSOCIATION, not causality. Now that we have randomized clinical trials, we can say with certainty that IVERMECTIN DOES NOT WORK AT ALL FOR COVID. I recommend to read the conclusions of the abstract.

1:22 PM · Mar 3, 2022·Twitter Web App

460 Retweets 168 Quote Tweets 2,366 Likes

https://twitter.com/josegonzalesza1/status/1499450061025157120?s=12

It’s clear someone “got to them”.

Robert Clark

Expand full comment

Unfortunately it appears this study was a ruse to make ivermectin proponents look bad. The abstract was not peer-reviewed and has been redacted and denounced by it's own authors. Yet still remains in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, with no mention of it being redacted. Shady behavior by both the journal and the authors I'm afraid.

Expand full comment

I have little doubt that the authors could have received criticism from establishment anti-ivermectin interests; but I found the details of the study that found a very statistically significant result showing IVM better than remdesivir perfectly acceptable. Let us also remember that hospitals like to use the ultra expensive remdesivir for critically ill COVID patients. Thus, this research could be used by lawyers fighting on behalf of families to get IVM used and remdesivir rejected. As faculty in the medical school the authors could have been severely pressured to redact their article. If you look back into the history of remdesivir, pushed by Fauci, note that clinical trial did not find any benefit in terms of reducing mortality!

Expand full comment