you mean the one that was retracted?
this is a better summary of what went on:
you mean the one that was retracted?Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines (nih.gov)
Data sources:
We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
Oh heres another:
Effectiveness of ivermectin-based multidrug therapy in severely hypoxic, ambulatory COVID-19 patients (nih.gov)
IVM used alone has been tested in more than 20 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) for COVID-19 treatment, with statistically highly significant clinical benefits in almost all of these and an average of 62% reduction in risk of death
Ivermectin has been identified as an inexpensive, readily available drug with the potential to be repurposed as a treatment for COVID-19, especially in countries with limited access to vaccines. Although multiple studies have been published in an attempt to evaluate its usefulness in COVID-19, many are small and not constructed appropriately to detect differences in important clinical outcomes (ie, death). For this reason, researchers have turned to meta-analyses to combine study results and draw summary conclusions regarding ivermectin's effectiveness. Two such meta-analyses recently published in the American Journal of Therapeutics concluded that ivermectin decreased mortality and improved other surrogate end points in COVID-19.1–4 A recently withdrawn article caused both authors to rework their meta-analyses without altering their main conclusions.1–5 We feel that shortcomings within both sets of meta-analyses and limitations in the component studies are significant enough to invalidate their main finding that ivermectin reduces mortality. A review of other meta-analyses on the same subject, containing many of the same individual studies, were similarly limited by poor design.
Full study:
Ivermectin does not work better than placebo.
I wonder how much more money will have to be wasted because people who do NOT trust science still continue to deny reality...
Can we do proper trials on promising things instead of rehashing this shit? Ever? No? 'muricans will never let it go? Ok then..
"Did they add zinc?"It was one of the first things that came up when this was posted in another fora. "Did they add zinc?" It's... There is no point to this, it doesn't matter how many studies are made, these people have decided it works and there is NOTHING anyone can do to convince them otherwise.
That abject broscientists like Rogan supports it just confirms how this is all a conspiracy and people are worried about "censorship" for spreading lies about a virus that is STILL the most common cause of death in the world next to starvation.
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines (nih.gov)
Data sources:
We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
Oh heres another:
Effectiveness of ivermectin-based multidrug therapy in severely hypoxic, ambulatory COVID-19 patients (nih.gov)
IVM used alone has been tested in more than 20 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) for COVID-19 treatment, with statistically highly significant clinical benefits in almost all of these and an average of 62% reduction in risk of death
Why would anybody expect data that indicate something might be medically effective based on indications by derived from improperly or inaccurately derived data, small sampling, or have other defects be surprised that better and more careful studies showing it to be in error create any other expectation than that the latter represents better information?Guys....it's just another typically dishonest and disingenuous false gotchya claim from one of our resident clowns.
Of course the data is NOT going to read as he claimed...did you expect different?
It doesn't help when people who know better lead credence to the illusion that it is rage against "anything challenging their political sacred cows" instead of what it actually is: rage against willful ignorance.Why would anybody expect data that indicate something might be medically effective based on indications by derived from improperly or inaccurately derived data, small sampling, or have other defects be surprised that better and more careful studies showing it to be in error create any other expectation than that the latter represents better information?
When you subtract the rage that people seem to have against anything challenging their political sacred cows in batters that have taken on identities defining the current political divide, maybe then one only then will we see any clear thinking.
Righteous indignation seems to walk hand in hand with self importance. We just need anybody wrong about anything killed.
It doesn't help when people who know better lead credence to the illusion that it is rage against "anything challenging their political sacred cows" instead of what it actually is: rage against willful ignorance.
You speak about death of ego, and all I hear from you is constant patronizing of others. I have no doubt that the truth you speak of is undoubtedly the truth for you .I am telling you that your truth is the truth of a fool and is unwelcome as a result. You are attached to the unconscious assumptions you hold and I am asking you to examine them.
I have always wondered how he reconciled the death of his ego with the idea that people must be forced to live in houses he approves of.You speak about death of ego, and all I hear from you is constant patronizing of others. I have no doubt that the truth you speak of is undoubtedly the truth for you .
Yet, you seem set on declaring that this is the same truth for everyone.
'Everyone was put down as children.' 'Everyone was taught self-hate and built a psychological shell in order to survive the mental anguish.' 'This causes all problems.' 'Everything is projection.'
You don't sound wise and philosophical. You're a damn broken record, and you offer no better (or different) explanations than you did five years ago. Most of your posts calling out others for hostility, rage, etc are simply another opportunity to condescend based on some higher road of enlightenment.
You are not enlightened, you can stop pretending anytime.
Guys....it's just another typically dishonest and disingenuous false gotchya claim from one of our resident clowns.
Of course the data is NOT going to read as he claimed...did you expect different?
Wrong right out of the gate. Fix it. Or don't.As I have said, we do not share a common language here. You view is that willful ignorance justifies righteous indignation. ...
You speak about death of ego, and all I hear from you is constant patronizing of others. I have no doubt that the truth you speak of is undoubtedly the truth for you .
Yet, you seem set on declaring that this is the same truth for everyone.
'Everyone was put down as children.' 'Everyone was taught self-hate and built a psychological shell in order to survive the mental anguish.' 'This causes all problems.' 'Everything is projection.'
You don't sound wise and philosophical. You're a damn broken record, and you offer no better (or different) explanations than you did five years ago. Most of your posts calling out others for hostility, rage, etc are simply another opportunity to condescend based on some higher road of enlightenment.
You are not enlightened, you can stop pretending anytime.
Probably his self-hate showing.I have always wondered how he reconciled the death of his ego with the idea that people must be forced to live in houses he approves of.
I have mentioned that what I refer to as the ego, the identification of the self with some external ism that purports to confer value to believers is a false self that is we adopted to survive as children and as such creates a false sense of moral value for the self, the only real value being real self respect that can only appear when one is sufficiently devoid of those sacred cows we cling to. Those that prevented me from connecting to something deeper within myself, what I call simply being, I destroyed by failing to prove they were of the nature of absolute good. I died to enough of what I was holding onto to be forced to let go and fall. There was no ego virtue in anything I did. It happened in spite of me not because of me which is why I use the term grace. As a person who may be unaware of how the ego works and what its purpose is, you may be unable to hear the idea that someone died to their ego as an ego boast. I have enough ego left to be tickled by that.I have always wondered how he reconciled the death of his ego with the idea that people must be forced to live in houses he approves of.
I'm not sure if you misunderstood me, if you just don't care, or if you're just completely stuck in your own mentality...but your last post (repeats) is a prime example of what I was saying. I wasn't trying to goad you to respond. I was making a statement, take it or leave it.Yes, of course I am well aware. If you tell people who hate themselves as a result of what happened to them as children because of being put down, and explain the hopelessness of their condition because they won't allow themselves to remember and understand the truth of it by opening up and feeling that old pain, which is what the fear of death is really all about, why would you wonder why you would not take an expression of truth like that as a sure sign of condensation rather than helpful knowledge. You have been put down all of your life and even made to feel you deserve it. Why would you expect to have any real moral courage. You are just going to put down anybody who knows the facts better than you as a mortal threat that needs to be put down worse than you were. Do you really think that knowing what I do about both you and me that I would be intimidated by your rejection of what I say. I am here to speak the truth whose value was life affirming for me in the off chance that someone with deep curiosity or suffering consciously may find a way to be free.
In this forum and in the subject of politics I see great parallels between the need to believe in political orthodoxy as I do in the need to deny our inner psychology, how we work as sleeping machines. For you enlightenment is somebody who claims things you don't understand and for very good reason. You had the will to know kicked out of you. You may feel rage at what I say about your condition but to me it is just what has to be and factual. You have a universal disease. I get no benefit that you have it and no joy from some stupid notion that I am superior because I see what you have not. Just sharing. There is nothing mandatory about it, but the fact that it bothers you could tell you something if you know how to listen.
That could be so help me see it. I am not sure to what you refer as that first out of the gate. My first point was that I have said before we do not use the term willful ignorance in the same way. But I know that I have told you that I see things differently than you do because of my own personal experience with a transformative experience that shatters the concept of duality.Wrong right out of the gate. Fix it. Or don't.
My last post consciously repeated everything I always say because I always say what I always say for those who may hear it. I am concerned only to provide what I believe to be the truth and of benefit to real seekers. I am perfectly aware there are many who will be offended and I also stated the reasons. I mentioned too that despite your stated total disinterest in what I repeat you insist even now again to inform me of that fact, a point I suggested you might want to look into and you seem not to even have noticed. The long and the short of it is that if what I say is of no importance to you ignore it, if you disagree argue your case, but otherwise your seeming upset at what I post is of no importance to me. It is what machines do with real information. I have heard your point of view thousands of times. Par for the course. This will all now turn into who can be the most indifferent because ego is a form of competition. Let's get it over with. You are infinitely better than me. I lose.I'm not sure if you misunderstood me, if you just don't care, or if you're just completely stuck in your own mentality...but your last post (repeats) is a prime example of what I was saying. I wasn't trying to goad you to respond. I was making a statement, take it or leave it.
I mentioned too that despite your stated total disinterest in what I repeat you insist even now again to inform me of that fact, a point I suggested you might want to look into and you seem not to even have noticed. The long and the short of it is that if what I say is of no importance to you ignore it, if you disagree argue your case, but otherwise your seeming upset at what I post is of no importance to me. It is what machines do with real information. I have heard your point of view thousands of times. Par for the course. This will all now turn into who can be the most indifferent because ego is a form of competition. Let's get it over with. You are infinitely better than me. I lose.
I do not, like people who belong to a religious faith, or who practice various kinds of specialized traditions believe is any ridged or singular path. I believe that humanity is asleep, that we suffer a schism at the core of our being caused by our capacity to divide and name via our ability to think using language. Thinking creates time, and is of the past and the future. We do not live in the present, the only place that is real. Thought is fear.
You make the mistake of assuming that because people don't necessarily agree with everything you state as your truth, then they must still be stuck in their childhood shell of self-hate which they can only project on others until they awaken to the reality of the cosmos and consciousness and other such things we've heard countless times now. That still sounds like ego to me, and it isn't just my own I smell.
I don't claim to not be an angry curr, but you also know nothing of my background or where I've been. Am I an enlightened Yogi? Of course not. But you know nothing about me, about my childhood or how I was "put down". I'm just tired of reading it over and over and over again.
I have just one question for you, and then I'll shut my egotistical and angry piehole. When did you have your mental/spiritual/conscious epiphany? Just approximate year, maybe.
edit: I don't see your statements (repeated for years) as much different than someone telling others that they need to accept Jesus to find peace. When it's most of what we get from you, it starts to come off as preaching. If you want to help others, great. People can find salvation and/or inner peace in their own manner and path. I do not believe the road to it is rigid and singular.
Sorry for the thread hijack/sidetrack.
Yes, I take issue with using rage and righteous indignation interchangeably, but that is splitting hairs. My main objection is the use of justifies. I don't claim it justifies anything. I just want to highlight that what looks like sacred cows to you is not. What "willful ignorance" justifies is not my concern. What "willful ignorance" is and what it is not is why I chimed in.It doesn't help when people who know better lead credence to the illusion that it is rage against "anything challenging their political sacred cows" instead of what it actually is: rage against willful ignorance. You view is that willful ignorance justifies righteous indignation.
That could be so help me see it. I am not sure to what you refer as that first out of the gate. My first point was that I have said before we do not use the term willful ignorance in the same way. But I know that I have told you that I see things differently than you do because of my own personal experience with a transformative experience that shatters the concept of duality.
The second thing out of the box was, "You view is that willful ignorance justifies righteous indignation.", and that was based on your statement, "It doesn't help when people who know better lead credence to the illusion that it is rage against "anything challenging their political sacred cows" instead of what it actually is: rage against willful ignorance. Here is just used righteous indignation as an alternative to rage. So where was I wrong out of the box. Can't defend against charges I don't understand.
You view is that willful ignorance justifies righteous indignation. In my view this Is willful ignorance itself. All indignation finds that very rationalization.
No, you have been very clear about your desire to force people to live in the way you find appropriate. A person without ego would not find it necessary to force anyone to do anything.I have mentioned that what I refer to as the ego, the identification of the self with some external ism that purports to confer value to believers is a false self that is we adopted to survive as children and as such creates a false sense of moral value for the self, the only real value being real self respect that can only appear when one is sufficiently devoid of those sacred cows we cling to. Those that prevented me from connecting to something deeper within myself, what I call simply being, I destroyed by failing to prove they were of the nature of absolute good. I died to enough of what I was holding onto to be forced to let go and fall. There was no ego virtue in anything I did. It happened in spite of me not because of me which is why I use the term grace. As a person who may be unaware of how the ego works and what its purpose is, you may be unable to hear the idea that someone died to their ego as an ego boast. I have enough ego left to be tickled by that.
Secondly, since the death of ego or the presence of the knowledge that one in fact knows nothing, would conflict with the idea that people should be forced to live in ego approved housing, perhaps the problem isn't that I fit that description but that you only imagine I do because the moral concerns that are of paramount value to you are not things you have died to as beliefs not fit those moral concerns of mine that survived a shipwreck. Can I mention again, also, that I voted against prop 13 and can't recall having a voice to express election-wise since.
Somewhere back when I was young I thought to myself what the world would look like now in Egyptian civilization never fell. What kind of fabulous cities we would have created in 5000 years, the art and beauty we could be surrounded by. But there is that ancient disease of envy, the feeling that others have something that we were for some terribly unjust reason were denied and we would rather destroy than allow others to have. Looks like we are going to have a big new housing crisis in Ukraïna too.