{"id":800767,"date":"2022-09-15T20:57:10","date_gmt":"2022-09-15T20:57:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/?p=222313"},"modified":"2022-09-15T20:57:10","modified_gmt":"2022-09-15T20:57:10","slug":"clinical-trials-show-ivermectin-does-not-benefit-covid-19-patients-contrary-to-social-media-claims","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2022\/09\/15\/clinical-trials-show-ivermectin-does-not-benefit-covid-19-patients-contrary-to-social-media-claims\/","title":{"rendered":"Clinical Trials Show\u00a0Ivermectin Does Not Benefit COVID-19 Patients, Contrary to\u00a0Social Media Claims"},"content":{"rendered":"<img width=\"640\" height=\"273\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-featured.jpg\" class=\"attachment-medium_large size-medium_large wp-post-image\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" style=\"float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-featured.jpg 720w, https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-featured-340x145.jpg 340w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px\" \/><h2><span>SciCheck Digest<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span>Randomized clinical trials have repeatedly found that ivermectin does not benefit COVID-19 patients. The National Institutes of Health recommends against its use for COVID-19. Ivermectin enthusiasts continue to falsely claim the contrary.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n    \n      <!-- Button trigger modal -->\n      <button type=\"button\" class=\"btn btn--rwjf-qanda-modal btn-block\" data-toggle=\"modal\" data->\n        <div class=\"container\">\n          <div class=\"row\">\n                          <div class=\"col-2\">\n                  <img class=\"d-none d-sm-flex rwjf-svg\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/rwjf-icon-treatment-01-.png\" alt=\"\" \/>\n              <\/div>\n                        <div class=\"col\">\n              What treatments are available for COVID-19?            <\/div>\n          <\/div>\n        <\/div>\n      <\/button>\n\n      <!-- Modal -->\n    <div class=\"modal fade\" id=\"modal--rwjf-qanda-200677\" tabindex=\"-1\" aria-labelledby=\"modal-label--rwjf-qanda-200677\" aria-hidden=\"true\" style='background: linear-gradient(125deg, #ffffffcc 25%, #f255ffcc, #ee3c83cc);'>\n        <div class=\"modal-dialog modal-dialog-centered\">\n          <div class=\"modal-content\">\n            <div class=\"modal-header\">\n              <a class=\"modal-title\" id=\"modal-label--rwjf-qanda-200677\" href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/scicheck_digest\/what-treatments-are-available-for-covid-19\/\">What treatments are available for COVID-19?<\/a>\n              <button type=\"button\" class=\"close\" data-dismiss=\"modal\" aria-label=\"Close\">\n                <span aria-hidden=\"true\">\n                  <svg class=\"\">\n                    <use href=\"#modal-close\">\n                  <\/svg>\n                <\/span>\n              <\/button>\n              <\/div>\n            <div class=\"modal-body\">\n              There are no cures for COVID-19, <span>but an increasing number of<\/span><span> evidence-based treatments have been identified. Most of these have emergency use authorization, rather than full approval, from the Food and Drug Administration.<\/span>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>At the end of December\u00a0<\/span><span>2021, the FDA authorized for em<\/span><span>ergency use the first oral antivirals for COVID-19, Pfizer\u2019s\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-first-oral-antiviral-treatment-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"1\"><span>Paxlovid<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0and Merck\u2019s\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-additional-oral-antiviral-treatment-covid-19-certain\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"2\"><span>molnupiravir<\/span><\/a><span>. Both drugs are authorized for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who are at high risk of severe disease. The pills should be given as early as possible and no later than five days after symptoms begin.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>Paxlovid consists of nirmatrelvir, a\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2021\/10\/scicheck-merck-pfizer-covid-19-antivirals-different-from-ivermectin\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"3\"><span>protease inhibitor<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0that prevents replication of the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2; and ritonavir, a drug that slows breakdown of nirmatrelvir. Paxlovid was found in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to reduce COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause by 88% compared with a placebo after 28 days of follow-up.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>Molnupiravir also prevents viral replication of SARS-CoV-2, but works in a different way, by introducing errors into the virus\u2019s genetic code. It was shown in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2116044\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"4\"><span>clinical trial<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0to reduce hospitalization or death from any cause\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.merck.com\/news\/merck-and-ridgeback-announce-publication-of-phase-3-study-of-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-covid-19-treatment-in-the-new-england-journal-of-medicine\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"5\"><span>by 30%<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0compared with a placebo after 29 days.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>While potentially revolutionary for COVID-19 treatment, the pills are not a substitute for vaccination and come with some risks. <\/span><span>Paxlovid, for example, may not be suitable in people with kidney disease or those taking certain other drugs, while molnupiravir is not recommended for pregnant people. Also, initial availability is expected to be very limited.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>The only FDA-approved treatment for COVID-19 is\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/antiviral-therapy\/remdesivir\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"6\"><span>remdesivir<\/span><\/a><span>, an intravenous antiviral drug. It was approved in October 2020 for hospitalized patients based on<\/span> randomized, controlled clinical trials that found faster recovery times and statistically significant odds of improving conditions among hospitalized patients with mild to severe COVID-19 who received the drug, compared with those who got a placebo plus standard care.<\/p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><span>On Jan. 21, as part of the agency\u2019s response to the omicron variant, the FDA <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/fda-takes-actions-expand-use-treatment-outpatients-mild-moderate-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener\">expanded<\/a> the approved use of remdesivir to high-risk patients who are not hospitalized. That decision was based on a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2116846\"  rel=\"noopener\">clinical trial<\/a> that demonstrated that nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 can benefit from early treatment with the drug. High-risk patients who received three days of IV remdesivir within a week of symptom onset were <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/files.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/guidelines\/archive\/statement-on-anti-sars-cov-2--12-23-2021.pdf\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"7\"><span>87% less likely<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0to be hospitalized or die compared with those receiving placebo.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<span>Other important therapies include <a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/anti-sars-cov-2-antibody-products\/anti-sars-cov-2-monoclonal-antibodies\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">several monoclonal antibodies<\/a><\/span>\u00a0that target SARS-CoV-2<span>, which the FDA has authorized<\/span> for patients with mild to moderate disease who are at high risk for developing severe COVID-19. These drugs are\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2020\/10\/trump-overstates-status-of-covid-19-antibody-drugs\/\">synthetic antibodies<\/a>\u00a0that are designed to\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/statement-on-anti-sars-cov-2-monoclonal-antibodies-eua\/\">prevent the virus from entering cells<\/a>, although some <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-limits-use-certain-monoclonal-antibodies-treat-covid-19-due-omicron\"  rel=\"noopener\">may<\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/drugs\/drug-safety-and-availability\/fda-updates-sotrovimab-emergency-use-authorization\"  rel=\"noopener\">not<\/a> be effective against all variants of the coronavirus. Only two antibodies, Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline\u2019s\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2107934\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"6\">sotrovimab<\/a>\u00a0and Eli Lilly\u2019s\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-new-monoclonal-antibody-treatment-covid-19-retains\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"7\">bebtelovimab<\/a>, are\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/files.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/guidelines\/archive\/statement-on-anti-sars-cov-2--12-23-2021.pdf\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"8\">thought to\u00a0have\u00a0activity<\/a> against the omicron variant,\u00a0and only bebtelovimab is thought to\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/drugs\/drug-safety-and-availability\/fda-updates-sotrovimab-emergency-use-authorization\">work against<\/a>\u00a0the omicron subvariant BA.2.\r\n\r\n<span>Another key drug in the arsenal is the steroid dexamethasone, which was found in a large <\/span><span>randomized controlled trial in the U.K. to provide a mortality benefit in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were ventilated or receiving supplemental oxygen. The finding was <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.recoverytrial.net\/news\/low-cost-dexamethasone-reduces-death-by-up-to-one-third-in-hospitalised-patients-with-severe-respiratory-complications-of-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><span>announced<\/span><\/a><span> in June 2020. Dexamethasone, however,<\/span><span>\u00a0did\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.recoverytrial.net\/news\/low-cost-dexamethasone-reduces-death-by-up-to-one-third-in-hospitalised-patients-with-severe-respiratory-complications-of-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><span>not help<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0patients who weren&#8217;t receiving respiratory support, and\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2021436\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><span>may have harmed<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0them.<\/span>\r\n\r\nA large randomized controlled trial conducted in Brazil and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/langlo\/article\/PIIS2214-109X(21)00448-4\/fulltext\"  rel=\"noopener\">published<\/a> in the<i> Lancet Global Health<\/i> in late October also found fluvoxamine, a cheap antidepressant and obsessive-compulsive disorder drug, reduced the risk of hospitalization and prolonged ER visits by 32% when given early to high-risk outpatients. When the analysis was limited to the people who actually took fluvoxamine regularly, the results were even more impressive, showing a 66% drop in hospitalization or a prolonged ER stay and a 91% reduction in death.\r\n\r\n<span>Another very small clinical trial\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/immunomodulators\/fluvoxamine\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"11\"><span>found<\/span><\/a><span>\u00a0a benefit of taking fluvoxamine for COVID-19, but a larger subsequent trial was stopped prematurely because few people in the trial became very ill and it did not appear that the drug was having an effect. For now, the NIH\u2019s treatment guidelines neither endorse nor recommend against use of the drug.<\/span>\r\n\r\nThe FDA has also issued EUAs for\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/drugs\/emergency-preparedness-drugs\/coronavirus-covid-19-drugs\">two immune modulating drugs<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/media\/150319\/download\"  rel=\"noopener\">tocilizumab<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/media\/143822\/download\"  rel=\"noopener\">baricitinib<\/a>,\u00a0for use in certain patients who are hospitalized, in combination with other drugs. Both drugs are used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and are thought to help by\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/management\/therapeutic-management\/\">tamping down<\/a>\u00a0an overactive immune system later in the disease progression.\r\n\r\nBaricitinib was authorized in combination with remdesivir for hospitalized patients who require ventilation or supplemental oxygen; that decision was based on a randomized, controlled clinical trial that found faster recovery times and better odds of improvement with the drug combination. Tocilizumab was authorized for patients taking systemic corticosteroids, such as dexamethasone, who need supplemental oxygen or ventilation.\r\n\r\nConvalescent plasma, or the part of the blood that contains antibodies from people who have recovered from COVID-19, has also been studied as a potential treatment. In February 2021, the FDA\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/fda-brief\/fda-brief-fda-updates-emergency-use-authorization-covid-19-convalescent-plasma-reflect-new-data\">modified<\/a>\u00a0its EUA to include only plasma with a high concentration of antibodies \u201cfor the treatment of hospitalized patients early in the disease course,\u201d following studies that found no benefit with lower antibody amounts. In a March 9 letter, the FDA\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/media\/141477\/download\">noted<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cthe clinical evidence supporting this EUA remains limited\u201d and encouraged health care providers to enroll patients in ongoing clinical trials. The NIH\u2019s COVID-19\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/anti-sars-cov-2-antibody-products\/convalescent-plasma\/\">treatment guidelines<\/a> do not currently recommend convalescent plasma for any patient group and\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/anti-sars-cov-2-antibody-products\/convalescent-plasma\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"12\">recommend against<\/a>\u00a0its use in hospitalized patients without impaired humoral immunity.              <p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/scicheck_digest\/what-treatments-are-available-for-covid-19\/\" class=\"small\">Link to this<\/a><\/p>\n            <\/div>\n          <\/div>\n        <\/div>\n      <\/div>\n\n    \n<hr \/>\n<h2><span>Full Story<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span>The latest results of several <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2115869\"  rel=\"noopener\">large<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.medrxiv.org\/content\/10.1101\/2022.06.10.22276252v1\"  rel=\"noopener\">randomized<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2201662\"  rel=\"noopener\">controlled<\/a> trials show no benefit in using the antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2. The results are consistent with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/tables\/ivermectin-data\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">existing evidence<\/a> that shows the cheap and accessible drug does not work to treat COVID-19.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/SciCHECKsquare_4-e1430162915812.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-107984 size-medium alignleft\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/SciCHECKsquare_4-e1430162915812-161x145.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"161\" height=\"145\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/SciCHECKsquare_4-e1430162915812-161x145.png 161w, https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/SciCHECKsquare_4-e1430162915812.png 243w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 161px) 100vw, 161px\" \/><\/a>But a recently published <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&amp;expedited_modal=true#article-information-publication-history\"><span>study<\/span><\/a> from Brazil that claims ivermectin decreased COVID-19 hospitalization by 100% and COVID-19 mortality by 92% is giving new wings to those touting ivermectin as a miracle drug. The observational study contains methodological flaws, and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&amp;expedited_modal=true#article-information-publication-history\"  rel=\"noopener\">is<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/covid19criticalcare.com\/about\/the-flccc-physicians\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">authored by<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/covid19criticalcare.com\/ivermectin-in-covid-19\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">ivermectin<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.hsgac.senate.gov\/imo\/media\/doc\/Testimony-Kory-2020-12-08.pdf\"  rel=\"noopener\">activists<\/a>. And its results are completely inconsistent with stronger studies that did not identify any benefit of using the drug for COVID-19.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cFrom multiple, large well-conducted, double-blind randomized clinical trials of now thousands of participants, ivermectin has not been shown to have any meaningful clinical benefit for the early, outpatient treatment of COVID-19,\u201d Dr. <a href=\"https:\/\/med.umn.edu\/bio\/dom-a-z\/david-boulware\">David Boulware<\/a>, a professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical School and an adviser for two large trials in the U.S., told us in an email.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSpecifically, two large, multi-site randomized clinical trials (Covid-Out; ACTIV-6) have been completed in the United States. These two trials both failed to detect any statistically significant benefit of ivermectin,\u201d Boulware added.<\/p>\n<p><span>In addition, the flawed study got intertwined with a false rumor that the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>website<\/span><\/a><span> had \u201cnow\u201d added ivermectin as a recommended treatment. But that\u2019s not accurate. The drug <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/antiviral-therapy\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>has been listed<\/span><\/a><span> on the NIH&#8217;s page for antiviral treatments for a while (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20210612061731\/https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/antiviral-therapy\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>here\u2019s an archived capture<\/span><\/a><span> from June 12, 2021) as a medication \u201cthat is being evaluated to treat COVID-19.\u201d But the NIH <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/perma.cc\/2FXZ-NFST\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>recommends against the use of ivermectin<\/span><\/a><span> for the treatment of COVID-19 outside of clinical trials.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cYesterday the National institute of health added Ivermectin to the list of covid treatment<strong>,\u201d <\/strong>former martial arts fighter Jake Shields<a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20220903161837\/https:\/twitter.com\/jakeshieldsajj\/status\/1565395166931914753\"> wrote on Twitter<\/a>. <strong>\u201c<\/strong>Looks like the conspiracy theorist were right and the &#8216;experts&#8217; wrong once again,\u201d he said, later referencing the problematic study. <\/span><span>His tweet got over 42,000 likes and 13,000 retweets in three days.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>On Sept. 3, the conservative website The Blaze published a <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/perma.cc\/Q3BR-QNN4\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>story titled<\/span><\/a><span> \u201cIvermectin reduces COVID death risk by 92%, peer-reviewed study finds,\u201d which got over <a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/the-blaze.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\">1,000 shares<\/a>. The same day, Robby Starbuck, a <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/ballotpedia.org\/Robby_Starbuck\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>former Republican congressional candidate<\/span><\/a><span> in Tennessee, referenced both the study and the supposed addition of ivermectin to the NIH\u2019s website in posts <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131653.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>across<\/span><\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131738.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>his<\/span><\/a><span><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131904.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\"> social<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131837.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\">media<\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cNow\u2019s a good time to think about the mass censorship campaign carried out against those who used it or advocated for the freedom to use it, pharmacists who refused to fill doctors prescriptions and the unending hate people got for treating COVID with it. The attacks on it were all about lining Big Pharma and politicians pockets,\u201d he wrote in a <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131904.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Facebook post<\/span><\/a><span>. A capture of the post on <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/Screenshot-2022-09-09-131653.jpg\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>his Instagram<\/span><\/a><span> got over 26,000 likes in four days.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<div>\n<div>\n<div>\n<div>\n<div><figure id=\"attachment_222463\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-222463\" style=\"width: 400px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-222463\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-insert.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"400\" height=\"267\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-insert.jpg 400w, https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-insert-217x145.jpg 217w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 400px) 100vw, 400px\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-222463\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Ivermectin pills. The antiparasitic drug has not been approved or authorized by the FDA to treat COVID-19. Photo by Callista Images via Getty Images.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p><span>As we said, there has been no recent change to the NIH website to recommend ivermectin as a treatment. The page on ivermectin, which clearly states that the agency&#8217;s guidelines recommend against the use of the drug to treat COVID-19, was <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/perma.cc\/2FXZ-NFST\"  rel=\"noopener\">last updated<\/a> on April 29.<\/p>\n<p><span>The antiparasitic drug <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/consumers\/consumer-updates\/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>has not been approved or authorized <\/span><\/a><span>by the Food and Drug Administration to prevent or treat COVID-19. Ivermectin is approved for human use only to treat some conditions caused by parasites, such as intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis, head lice, and skin conditions. The FDA has warned that the use of large doses of the drug or of ivermectin for animals is dangerous.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span>Most Recent Results of Large Clinical Trials Show No Benefit<\/span><\/h2>\n<p><span>More than <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.clinicaltrials.gov\/ct2\/results?term=ivermectin&amp;cond=COVID-19&amp;Search=Clear&amp;age_v=&amp;gndr=&amp;type=&amp;rslt=\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>80 studies<\/span><\/a><span> around the world have examined the use of ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19. But as <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2021\/09\/scicheck-ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>we\u2019ve<\/span><\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/03\/scicheck-evidence-still-lacking-to-support-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19\/?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=social-pug\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>reported<\/span><\/a><span>, <\/span><span>over and over<\/span><span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/tables\/ivermectin-data\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">randomized controlled trials<\/a> have shown no evidence of a clinical benefit for ivermectin.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Here are some of the latest results of large clinical trials we\u2019ve been following.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>In May, researchers of the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.togethertrial.com\/publications\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Together trial<\/span><\/a><span> in Brazil <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2115869\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>concluded that<\/span><\/a><span> treatment with a moderate daily ivermectin dose for three days \u201cdid not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19.\u201d This study had a total of 3,515 patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection, where 679 received ivermectin, 679 got a placebo, and 2,157 received another intervention.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>In June, the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/activ6study.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/ACTIV-6_Results_Summary-Ivermectin400_07JUNE20221_508.pdf\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>ACTIV-6 trial<\/span><\/a><span>, funded by the NIH, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.medrxiv.org\/content\/10.1101\/2022.06.10.22276252v1\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>reported that<\/span><\/a><span> a moderate daily ivermectin dose\u00a0for three days \u201cresulted in less than one day of shortening of symptoms and did not lower incidence of hospitalization or death among outpatients with COVID-19 in the United States during the delta and omicron variant time periods.\u201d The ivermectin arm of the study had 1,591 participants with a SARS-CoV-2 infection, with 817 assigned to the ivermectin group and 774 to the placebo.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Finally, in August, researchers of the University of Minnesota <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/covidout.umn.edu\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Covid-Out trial<\/span><\/a><span>, which studied the use of ivermectin, metformin and fluvoxamine for COVID-19 in 1,323 patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2201662\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>reported that<\/span><\/a><span> none of the three medications \u201cprevented the occurrence of hypoxemia, an emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death associated with Covid-19.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cAt the dose we used, which was a median of 430 micrograms per kilo, per day, for three days, there was no effect on reducing severe COVID-19 in this population \u2014 and our population was adults over age 30 with a BMI greater than 25,\u201d said <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/med.umn.edu\/bio\/pediatric-obesity-medicine\/carolyn-bramante\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Dr. Carolyn T. Bramante<\/span><\/a><span>, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, in a <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=2-h_j7t88aI&amp;t=12s&amp;ab_channel=UniversityofMinnesotaMedicalSchool\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>video<\/span><\/a><span> responding to the question of whether ivermectin was effective in reducing the severity of COVID-19.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<p>Boulware, who provided advice for the trial, told us that investigators found there was no difference in the duration of symptoms between the participants who took ivermectin and those who took the placebo, and that numerically the ivermectin group patients had more ER visits and hospitalizations than the placebo group.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span>Problematic Study<\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The study that revived claims about ivermectin for COVID-19 used data from a citywide program in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.britannica.com\/place\/Itajai\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Itaja\u00ed<\/span><\/a>, a city in southeastern Brazil, in which residents were offered ivermectin to prevent COVID-19 between July and December 2020.<\/p>\n<p><span>In March, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/03\/scicheck-evidence-still-lacking-to-support-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19\/?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=social-pug\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>we explained<\/span><\/a><span> that a previous observational study by the same team, using the same dataset, had multiple methodological flaws. Both papers were published in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">Cureus<\/a>, an open-access online medical journal that allows researchers to publish studies faster than the traditional peer-reviewed journals. <\/span>The peer-review process for the most recent paper took <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects\"  rel=\"noopener\">five days<\/a>. In other journals, the peer-review process typically <a href=\"https:\/\/www.medpagetoday.com\/opinion\/revolutionandrevelation\/86465#:~:text=Authors%20may%20be%20given%20a,process%20takes%204-6%20weeks.\"  rel=\"noopener\">takes more<\/a> than a month.<\/p>\n<p>The team reported multiple conflicts of interest: Two of the authors have financial ties with an ivermectin manufacturer, and four of them work for organizations that promote ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.<\/p>\n<p><span>Neither of the studies, the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching#article-information-publication-history\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>first<\/span><\/a><span> published in January and the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&amp;expedited_modal=true#article-information-publication-history\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>second<\/span><\/a><span> published in August, were randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. <\/span><span>Instead, the researchers looked back at data collected by clinics and health centers where ivermectin was offered. According to the study\u2019s methodology, people without COVID-19 symptoms could opt to get a prescription to take a low dose (about half of the dose given in the previously mentioned clinical trials) of ivermectin for two consecutive days every 15 days over the course of 150 days. Those who then got COVID-19 were medically followed, and data on hospitalizations and deaths were registered. The study grouped the participants by non-users (residents who didn\u2019t use ivermectin), irregular users (those who took up to 10 tablets), and regular users (took more than 30 tablets), and compared their outcomes.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201cThe regular use of ivermectin decreased hospitalization for COVID-19 by 100%, mortality by 92%, and the risk of dying from COVID-19 by 86% when compared to non-users,\u201d the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&amp;expedited_modal=true#materials_and_methods\"  rel=\"noopener\">paper concluded<\/a>.<\/span> <span>\u201cProtection from COVID-19-related outcomes was observed across all levels of ivermectin use, with a notable reduction in risk of death in the over 50-year-old population and those with comorbidities.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p>But experts have identified numerous problems with the study, which as an observational study can at most only claim to have found an association between regular ivermectin use and better outcomes &#8212; not that the drug reduced hospitalizations or mortality.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe main flaw is that it\u2019s an uncontrolled epidemiological trial using a small quantity of routinely collected clinical data in a somewhat useless way,\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/www.acsh.org\/profile\/gideon-meyerowitz-katz\"  rel=\"noopener\">Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz<\/a>, an epidemiologist from the University of Wollongong in Australia, told us in an email. \u201cIn this sort of study, you have to spend a great deal of time looking for alternate explanations for why you might be seeing a relationship, like residual confounding, immortal time bias, or survivorship bias as others have mentioned, but instead the authors simply decided to run a biased analysis and call it a day.\u201d (Click on the links for more information about <a href=\"https:\/\/sphweb.bumc.bu.edu\/otlt\/mph-modules\/bs\/bs704-ep713_confounding-em\/BS704-EP713_Confounding-EM4.html#:~:text=Residual%20confounding%20is%20the%20distortion,or%20analysis%20of%20a%20study.\"  rel=\"noopener\">residual confounding<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/content\/340\/bmj.b5087\"  rel=\"noopener\">immortal time bias<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.masterclass.com\/articles\/survivorship-bias\"  rel=\"noopener\">survivorship bias<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<p>The study, for example, attempted to control for some factors that might explain the outcomes of the different groups, such as sex, age and some underlying health conditions &#8212; but not for other factors related to infection risk, including income. Those could have skewed the results.<\/p>\n<p>The inability to control for differences in groups is always a problem for observational studies &#8212; and that&#8217;s why randomized controlled trials, which randomly assign individuals to the treatment and control groups from the start, are considered more <a href=\"https:\/\/himmelfarb.gwu.edu\/tutorials\/studydesign101\/rcts.cfm\"  rel=\"noopener\">reliable and a higher level of evidence<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps most critically, as <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dbs.nus.edu.sg\/staffs\/greg-tucker-kellogg\/\">Greg Tucker-Kellogg<\/a>, a biology professor in practice at the National University of Singapore, and<a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/K_Sheldrick\"> Kyle Sheldrick<\/a>, a medical researcher in Australia, have <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=41QD-2DMWC8&amp;t=1179s\"  rel=\"noopener\">noted<\/a>, the study suffers from survivorship bias because once a participant contracted COVID-19 they were advised not to use ivermectin.<\/p>\n<p>This is important because the study&#8217;s purported finding is about &#8220;regular&#8221; ivermectin users who took at least 30 tablets of the drug. This means that most of the people who took ivermectin in the study who got sick were not included in the analysis because they couldn&#8217;t have taken enough pills to be considered a &#8220;regular&#8221; user, Tucker-Kellogg explains <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=41QD-2DMWC8&amp;t=1179s&amp;ab_channel=BiotechandBioinformaticswithProfGreg\">in a video<\/a>. In contrast, no one in the non-ivermectin group was removed from that group if they got sick earlier in the study<strong>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u201cBy definition, \u2018regular users\u2019 would almost always be people who didn\u2019t get infected,\u201d Meyerowitz-Katz told us, \u201cthat\u2019s simply how the study has been designed.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Or, as Tucker-Kellogg <a href=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/41QD-2DMWC8?t=1467\"  rel=\"noopener\">put it<\/a>, &#8220;This is a way to game the system. This is basically gaming the outcome so that the strictly regular ivermectin users have an extremely low rate of sickness and death, because basically most of the people who got sick are not counted in that group.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><span>In the study\u2019s <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>comments<\/span><\/a><span>, Cadegiani, one of the authors, dismissed these issues.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>But Meyerowitz-Katz said that even if the paper didn\u2019t have methodology problems, it still wouldn\u2019t be useful at this point, when there is higher-quality evidence that ivermectin doesn\u2019t work.<\/p>\n<p><span>\u201c<\/span><span>I could go on with issues and errors, but there&#8217;s not that much point. <\/span><span>When it comes to ivermectin, a poorly-conducted study with errors *in the title* is not going to move the dial on what the evidence says at all,\u201d he <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/GidMK\/status\/1566574986865016832\">said on Twitter<\/a>. \u201cCurrent best evidence shows that ivermectin is unlikely to have a clinically meaningful benefit in the treatment of COVID-19, and there&#8217;s not much evidence for its use as a prophylactic.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><em><span>Editor\u2019s note:\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/covid-misconceptions\/\"  rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" data-auth=\"NotApplicable\" data-linkindex=\"0\">SciCheck\u2019s COVID-19\/Vaccination Project<\/a>\u00a0is made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The foundation has\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2021\/04\/scicheck-and-our-committment-to-transparency\/\"  rel=\"noopener\">no control<\/a>\u00a0over FactCheck.org\u2019s editorial decisions, and the views expressed in our articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the foundation. The goal of the project is to increase exposure to accurate information about COVID-19 and vaccines, while decreasing the impact of misinformation.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<h2><strong>Sources<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/therapies\/antiviral-therapy\/ivermectin\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Ivermectin<\/span><\/a><span>. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Guidelines. National Institutes of Health. Updated 29 Apr 2022.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/med.umn.edu\/bio\/dom-a-z\/david-boulware\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Boulware, David<\/span><\/a><span>. Professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical School. Email sent to FactCheck.org. 12 Sep 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>\u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/consumers\/consumer-updates\/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d Food and Drug Administration. Update 12 Oct 2021.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.clinicaltrials.gov\/ct2\/results?cond=COVID-19&amp;term=ivermectin&amp;cntry=&amp;state=&amp;city=&amp;dist=&amp;Search=Search\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Clinical Trials.gov<\/span><\/a><span>. National Institutes of Health. Accessed 14 Sep 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Jaramillo, Catalina. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/03\/scicheck-evidence-still-lacking-to-support-ivermectin-as-treatment-for-covid-19\/?utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=social-pug\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Evidence Still Lacking to Support Ivermectin as Treatment for COVID-19<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d FactCheck.org. Updated 6 Jun 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Jaramillo, Catalina. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2021\/09\/scicheck-ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Ongoing Clinical Trials Will Decide Whether (or Not) Ivermectin Is Safe, Effective for COVID-19<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d FactCheck.org. Updated 29 Oct 2021.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov\/tables\/ivermectin-data\/\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Table 4c. Ivermectin: Selected Clinical Data<\/span><\/a><span>. NIH. Updated 29 Apr 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reis, Gilmar, et al. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2115869\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d The New England Journal of Medicine. 5 May 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV)-6 Study Group, Susanna Naggie. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.medrxiv.org\/content\/10.1101\/2022.06.10.22276252v1\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Ivermectin for Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 in the Outpatient Setting: A Decentralized, Placebo-controlled, Randomized, Platform Clinical Trial<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d medRxiv. 12 Jun 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>University of Minnesota Medical School. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=2-h_j7t88aI&amp;t=39s\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>7. Did your study&#8217;s findings prove Ivermectin is not effective in reducing the severity of COVID?<\/span><\/a><span>\u201d. YouTube. 15 Aug 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Bramante, Carolyn T., et al. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMoa2201662\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Randomized Trial of Metformin, Ivermectin, and Fluvoxamine for Covid-19<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d The New England Journal of Medicine. 18 Aug 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Packer, Milton. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.medpagetoday.com\/opinion\/revolutionandrevelation\/86465#:~:text=Authors%20may%20be%20given%20a,process%20takes%204-6%20weeks.\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Does Peer Review Still Matter in the Era of COVID-19?<\/span><\/a><span>\u201d MedPage Today. 13 May 2020.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Kerr, Lucy, et al. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching#article-information-publication-history\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d Cureus. 15 Jan 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Kerr, Lucy, et al. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cureus.com\/articles\/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&amp;expedited_modal=true#article-information-publication-history\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Regular Use of Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner: Results of a Prospective Observational Study of a Strictly Controlled Population of 88,012 Subjects<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d Cureus. 15 Jan 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.acsh.org\/profile\/gideon-meyerowitz-katz\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon<\/span><\/a><span>. Epidemiologist from the University of Wollongong in Australia. Email sent to FactCheck.com. 12 Sep 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon. \u201c1<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/GidMK\/status\/1566574988609875968\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>5\/n I could go on with issues and errors, but there\u2019s not that much point. When it comes to ivermectin, a poorly-conducted study with errors *in the title* is not going to move the dial on what the evidence says at all.<\/span><\/a><span>\u201d Twitter thread. 15 Dec 2021.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Tucker-Kellogg, Greg. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=41QD-2DMWC8&amp;t=1179s&amp;ab_channel=BiotechandBioinformaticswithProfGreg\"  rel=\"noopener\"><span>The Cureus case of Ivermectin for Covid in Brazil, Part 2<\/span><\/a><span>.\u201d YouTube. 4 Apr 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img alt=\"\"\/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img alt=\"\"\/><\/figure>\n<p>The post <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/09\/scicheck-clinical-trials-show-ivermectin-does-not-benefit-covid-19-patients-contrary-to-social-media-claims\/\">Clinical Trials Show\u00a0Ivermectin Does Not Benefit COVID-19 Patients, Contrary to\u00a0Social Media Claims<\/a> appeared first on <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/\">FactCheck.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"syndicated-attribution\">This post was originally published on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/09\/scicheck-clinical-trials-show-ivermectin-does-not-benefit-covid-19-patients-contrary-to-social-media-claims\/\">FactCheck.org<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"640\" height=\"273\" src=\"https:\/\/cdn.factcheck.org\/UploadedFiles\/ivermectin-getty-featured.jpg\" class=\"attachment-medium_large size-medium_large wp-post-image\" alt=\"\">Randomized clinical trials have repeatedly found that ivermectin does not benefit COVID-19 patients. The National Institutes of Health recommends against its use for COVID-19. Ivermectin enthusiasts continue to falsely claim the contrary.<\/p>\n<p>The post <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/2022\/09\/scicheck-clinical-trials-show-ivermectin-does-not-benefit-covid-19-patients-contrary-to-social-media-claims\/\">Clinical Trials Show\u00a0Ivermectin Does Not Benefit COVID-19 Patients, Contrary to\u00a0Social Media Claims<\/a> appeared first on <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.factcheck.org\/\">FactCheck.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2637,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3505,259,3506],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/800767"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2637"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=800767"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/800767\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":804173,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/800767\/revisions\/804173"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=800767"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=800767"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=800767"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}