Talk:Ivermectin
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ivermectin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the prodedures and edit carefully. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you've come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Treatments for COVID-19: Current consensus
A note on WP:MEDRS: Per this Wikipedia policy, we must rely on the highest quality secondary sources and the recommendations of professional organizations and government bodies when determining the scientific consensus about medical treatments.
- Ivermectin: The highest quality sources (1 2 3 4) suggest Ivermectin is not an effective treatment for COVID-19. In all likelihood, ivermectin does not reduce all-cause mortality (moderate certainty) or improve quality of life (high certainty) when used to treat COVID-19 in the outpatient setting (4). Recommendations from relevant organizations can be summarized as:
Evidence of efficacy for ivermectin is inconclusive. It should not be used outside of clinical trials.
(May 2021, June 2021, June 2021, July 2021, July 2021) (WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, CDC, NIH) - Chloroquine & hydroxychloroquine: The highest quality sources (1 2 3 4) demonstrate that neither is effective for treating COVID-19. These analyses accounted for use both alone and in combination with azithromycin. Some data suggest their usage may worsen outcomes. Recommendations from relevant organizations can be summarized:
Neither hydroxychloroquine nor chloroquine should be used, either alone or in combination with azithromycin, in inpatient or outpatient settings.
(July 2020, Aug 2020, Sep 2020, May 2021) (WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, NIH) - Ivmmeta.com, c19ivermectin.com, c19hcq.com, hcqmeta.com, trialsitenews.com, etc: These sites are not reliable. The authors are pseudonymous. The findings have not been subject to peer review. We must rely on expert opinion, which describes these sites as unreliable. From published criticisms (1 2 3 4 5), it is clear that these analyses violate basic methodological norms which are known to cause spurious or false conclusions. These analyses include studies which have very small sample sizes, widely different dosages of treatment, open-label designs, different incompatible outcome measures, poor-quality control groups, and ad-hoc un-published trials which themselves did not undergo peer-review. (Dec 2020, Jan 2021, Feb 2021)
SAIVE Trial
Shall we mention the results of this trial? https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230105005896/en/MedinCell-Announces-Positive-Results-for-the-SAIVE-Clinical-Study-in-Prevention-of-Covid-19-Infection-in-a-Contact-Based-Population Pakbelang (talk) 08:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's just PR. WP:MEDRS needed. Bon courage (talk) 08:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- You've linked to a press release for French pharma company MedinCell. Despite these impressive claims made in the press release, no publication, or even preprint has resulted (that I have been able to find).
- At the company's website
- https://www.medincell.com/en/portfolio/
- potential ivermectin products (mdc-STM for malaria and mdc-TTG for COVID-19) are still shown as PRECLINICAL candidates - which in itself is suspect given the company's press release claims of at least one completed Phase-2 trial.
- So no - All you have cited is a press release. 156.96.151.132 (talk) 18:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Too preliminary, as even single phase 2 studies contradict WP:MEDRS.
- The study design is strange, I doubt that strong conclusions can be drawn. --Julius Senegal (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Should mention Ivermectin Anti-viral properties
Despite the prevailing narrative that has tried to cover up Ivermectin's antiviral properties, if Wikipedia is to show itself as a reliable, unbiased information source, these valuable and important characteristics must be mentioned clearly in the current information.
Some examples:
Ivermectin is an FDA-approved broad-spectrum antiparasitic agent with demonstrated antiviral activity against a number of DNA and RNA viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite this promise, the antiviral activity of ivermectin has not been consistently proven in vivo. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/
There were lower viral loads and less viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which shows its anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. It could reduce transmission in these patients and encourage further studies with this drug. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9262706/
Ivermectin proposes many potential effects to treat a range of diseases with its antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-cancer properties as a wonder drug. It is highly effective against many microorganisms, including some viruses. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z
Ivermectin is an FDA-approved broad spectrum anti-parasitic agent (Gonzalez Canga et al., 2008) that in recent years ,we, along with other groups, have shown to have anti-viral activity against a broad range of viruses (Gotz et al., 2016; Lundberg et al., 2013; Tay et al., 2013; Wagstaff et al., 2012) in vitro. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011
Stop destroying Wikipedia's already tarnished reputation. Hvalborg (talk) 22:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- This was discussed ad nauseum here at the height of the ivermectin craze. In vitro is meaningless.Please read the archives for the full discussion, and stop promoting fringe medicine. Acroterion (talk) 22:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed, and this is covered in more detail at Ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bon courage (talk) 04:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Ivermectin, COVID, and Peru
In case anyone tries to add that again: the referenced study was co-authored by a member of the discredited FLCCC and Peru completely removed Ivermectin from their recommended COVID treatments in 2021.[1] –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ Robins-Early, Nick (September 24, 2021). "Desperation, misinformation: how the ivermectin craze spread across the world". The Guardian. Coronavirus. Retrieved August 22, 2023.
Ivermectin, COVID and Fifth Circuit
Should(n't) the decision concerning the drug's use be mentioned? Here's an article about it: Fifth Circuit sides with ivermectin-prescribing doctors in their quarrel with the FDA | Courthouse News Service = https://www.courthousenews.com/fifth-circuit-sides-with-ivermectin-prescribing-doctors-in-their-quarrel-with-the-fda . Kdammers (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- I thin we can mention a court said they over stepped their authority. Slatersteven (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- Crazy old America ah? It only means a court decided doctors can do quackery there, but it's not the FDA's role to push back. Would need some decent secondary sources to make sense of this: it doesn't convey any knowledge about ivermectin. This has already been discussed at Ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bon courage (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note I have adding something on this to Ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic, where is's probably WP:DUE (unlike here). Bon courage (talk) 04:06, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Can we have a list of countries selling oral Ivermectin over the counter for humans or animals?
Can we have a list of countries selling oral Ivermectin over the counter for humans or animals?
En .wiki article of Ivermectin now says:
Legal status CA: ℞-only US: ℞-only/ EU: Rx-only (UK not mentioned at en . wikipedia, but Rx-only also there)
Each EU country decides independently, which drugs are Rx-only, which are over the counter medicines. Are we sure Ivermectin (oral or topical) isn't over the counter in some EU country or in other European country?
I heard one can buy ivermectin tablets in some countries (in global south only?) at airports from vending machines, one doesn't even need to visit a pharmacy to buy it? And one doesn't even need to leave the airport, if one visits such airport and such country only to buy the medicine.
Because of growing Scabies problem in Europe, and side-effects of topical lotions, there is growing interest for better availability of scabies drugs. Topical scabies lotions: difficult to apply everywhere on body, bad smell, skin irritation and dying and smell of clothes.
91.159.188.106 (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- WP:NOTDIR. Presumably Europeans with scabies get it from doctors, rather than airports, as it's an established treatment. Bon courage (talk) 17:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia pages about contentious topics
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Biology and health sciences
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Biology and health sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Biology and health sciences
- C-Class pharmacology articles
- Mid-importance pharmacology articles
- WikiProject Pharmacology articles
- C-Class Veterinary medicine articles
- Mid-importance Veterinary medicine articles
- WikiProject Veterinary medicine articles
- C-Class medicine articles
- Mid-importance medicine articles
- All WikiProject Medicine articles
- C-Class COVID-19 articles
- Low-importance COVID-19 articles
- WikiProject COVID-19 articles