Ivermectin found to have "antiviral effect" with Covid virus

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah I was going to say. Are we living in an alternate universe where moderators are going against qualified medical advice and propping up crackpot theories indirectly encouraging people play russian roulette with their lives?

I think you misunderstood me. Trump (or anyone else who's not a medical professional( had no business to encourage people to drink bleach, horse urine or whatever else they might think up, and indeed should be held accountable for many a death. I was suggesting that these pop-up politicians and other would-be experts stick to what they're good at, if anything...

Graphical abstract

Ivermectin has powerful antitumor effects, including the inhibition of proliferation, metastasis, and angiogenic activity, in a variety of cancer cells. This may be related to the regulation of multiple signaling pathways by ivermectin through PAK1 kinase. On the other hand, ivermectin promotes programmed cancer cell death, including apoptosis, autophagy and pyroptosis. Ivermectin induces apoptosis and autophagy is mutually regulated. Interestingly, ivermectin can also inhibit tumor stem cells and reverse multidrug resistance and exerts the optimal effect when used in combination with other chemotherapy drugs.

[...]

Summary and outlooks

[...]

As mentioned above, the broad-spectrum antiparasitic drug IVM, which is widely used in the field of parasitic control, has many advantages that suggest that it is worth developing as a potential new anticancer drug. IVM selectively inhibits the proliferation of tumors at a dose that is not toxic to normal cells and can reverse the MDR of tumors. Importantly, IVM is an established drug used for the treatment of parasitic diseases such as river blindness and elephantiasis. It has been widely used in humans for many years, and its various pharmacological properties, including long- and short-term toxicological effects and drug metabolism characteristics are very clear. In healthy volunteers, the dose was increased to 2 mg/Kg, and no serious adverse reactions were found, while tests in animals such as mice, rats, and rabbits found that the median lethal dose (LD50) of IVM was 10-50 mg/Kg [112] In addition, IVM has also been proven to show good permeability in tumor tissues [50]. Unfortunately, there have been no reports of clinical trials of IVM as an anticancer drug. There are still some problems that need to be studied and resolved before IVM is used in the clinic.

[...]

Most of the anticancer research performed on the avermectin family has been focused on avermectin and IVM until now. Avermectin family drugs such as selamectin [36,41,113], and doramectin [114] also have anticancer effects, as previously reported. With the development of derivatives of the avermectin family that are more efficient and less toxic, relevant research on the anticancer mechanism of the derivatives still has great value. Existing research is sufficient to demonstrate the great potential of IVM and its prospects as a novel promising anticancer drug after additional research. We believe that IVM can be further developed and introduced clinically as part of new cancer treatments in the near future.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated that ivermectin may regulate the expression of crucial molecules Caspase-3, Bax, Bcl-2, PARP, and Cleaved-PARP in the apoptosis pathway by increasing ROS production and inhibiting the cell cycle in the S phase to inhibit colorectal cancer cells (Figure 11). Therefore, current results indicate that ivermectin might be a new potential anticancer drug for treating human colorectal cancer and other cancers.

Background:
Previously, we demonstrated that ivermectin use as prophylaxis for
COVID-19 was associated with reductions in COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and
mortality rates, and in the risk of dying from COVID-19, irrespective of regularity and
accumulated use of ivermectin, in an observational, prospectively obtained data from a
strictly controlled city-wide program in a city in Southern Brazil (Itajaí, SC, Brazil) of of
medically-based, optional use of ivermectin as prophylaxis for COVID-19. In this study,
our objective was to explore the data obtained from the program to evaluate whether the
level of regularity of ivermectin use impacted in the reductions in these outcomes, aiming
to determine if ivermectin showed a progressive dose-, regularity-response in terms of
protection from COVID-19 and COVID-19 related outcomes.

[...]

Conclusion:

Non-use of ivermectin was associated with a 10-times increase in mortality
risk and 7-times increased risk of dying from COVID-19, compared to strictly regular use
of ivermectin in a prospectively collected, strictly controlled population. A progressive
dose-response pattern was observed between level of ivermectin use and level of
protection from COVID-19 related outcomes and consistent across different levels of
ivermectin use

Bolsanaro is being held responsible for the 600,000 COVID deaths in Brasil and may be tried in the Hague for crimes against humanity.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/ ... -questions
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... oronavirus
https://theconversation.com/bolsonaro-f ... ads-170332

He's also tweeted support for Joe Rogan

I was just wondering if he might have had input in that study claiming horse dewormer cures more people with Covid than the actual vaccine.

Given the study from Brazil which I posted said nothing about the "vaccine", instead comparing the outcomes of people taking regular doses of Ivermectin, compared to those who did not - In fact "vaccine" isn't mentioned anywhere in the study - I'm not sure which study you are referring to: do you have a link to the study you are disparaging, as I'm curious as to what was tested, and how this occurred in it?

Of course, this also makes me wonder - You do realise that it is entirely possible for people who have taken the "vaccine" to need hospitalisation for (and can still dies from) this virus, and that some of these people may want this medication to try and ease their symptoms, don't you?

It's not a binary situation of either "vaccine" or Ivermectin, but not both (or neither).

Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-japan-kowa/japans-kowa-says-ivermectin-effective-against-omicron-in-phase-iii-trial-idUSL1N2UB0AV
Press release and English "Auto-translated" version:


It will be interesting to see the results of the above study, as well as those of this trial which is nearing completion:

Source: https://www.startribune.com/university-of-minnesota-ivermectin-trial-nearing-completion/600139471/

The implication is that it's supposed to be better than the vaccine.

Roll out Ivermectin using standard doses used in the past and realistically the worst case scenario is a few people get dewormed and it does nothing against the virus. The so-called "vaccines" are a completely different beast.

While the vaccine didn't help in a small minority of cases, it's also true to say that some of the strange concoctions Trump endorsed or recommended also caused some deaths in the case of folk who preferred to listen to him than their doctor.

several reliable medical science sources indicating that the vaccine isn't needed if you already had the virus, as you don't get Covid-19 twice.

From what I understand, it does show an effect in vitro, but not in vivo. That's not unusual -- many things that show promise in vitro turn out to be useless in vivo.