Overall, the discussions reflect a strong consensus that recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses show ivermectin has no significant benefit for COVID-19, with many posters citing specific high-quality studies and expressing confidence in evidence-based medicine. The tone varies from factual to dismissive, but the emphasis on peer-reviewed research and meta-analyses underscores a high level of engagement and a belief in the importance of scientific rigor in shaping public health policy.
AgreementStrong disagreement
Most discussions strongly align with the findings that ivermectin is ineffective for COVID-19 treatment, showing widespread consensus that current high-quality studies do not support its use.
InterestModerate interest
While the main topic is highly relevant to current debates, many comments express frustration or dismissiveness, indicating moderate to high interest but also fatigue or skepticism.
EngagementHigh engagement
Many posts delve into scientific methodology, cite systematic reviews, and critique studies, demonstrating a deep level of engagement with the evidence and research processes.
ImpactHigh impact
The collective tone emphasizes that the evidence strongly refutes ivermectin's efficacy, potentially influencing public perception and clinical guidelines, so the overall impact is significant.
Abstract in brief
The systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment by analyzing data from 19 studies, finding no significant impact on disease progression, recovery time, hospitalization duration, or viral load, with only low-uncertainty evidence suggesting a possible reduction in mortality.
The study emphasizes that many of the positive effects reported in some studies might be due to bias, as higher-risk studies tended to show more favorable outcomes for ivermectin.
Based on current evidence, the World Health Organization recommends limiting ivermectin use to clinical trials, as it does not demonstrate clear benefits for COVID-19 patients outside of research settings.
Woher kommt die Wissenschaftsskepsis in Österreich? Eine Studie ging dieser Frage nach. Was dabei gefunden wurde in voller Länge: https://t.co/ZhCJjyadbB https://t.co/KYOLdX6ENF
Nov 26, 2023 · 150 likes · 36 shares · 49,761 followersView post →
MM
Martin Moder
@Martin_Moder · X
Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 148 likes · 43 shares · 49,761 followersView post →
AM
Auntie Pho, MD
@AuntiePho88 · X
@Sethmr1989 @jonathanstea Conclusion: Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials. https://t.co/iT9eefKpVp
The systematic review analyzed 19 studies on ivermectin for COVID-19, showing no significant impact on disease progression, recovery, or viral load. Evidence suggests potential mortality reduction, but positive effects…
This video reviews a systematic analysis of 19 studies on ivermectin for COVID-19, showing no significant benefits in disease progression or recovery, and highlights the importance of evidence-based medicine as…
RT @AlastairMcA30: @jakeshieldsajj Jake, just read the actual site.
Similarly, this is my area of expertise, and multiple, large scale RCT…
Aug 12, 2025 · 9 shares · 1,094 followersView post →
SB
Stevan Bolton
@StevanBolton · X
@BKsupre @FrMatthewLC Here are 6 meta reviews you can start with. If you need hundreds more, raid their bibliographies. Come back when you can invalidate their findings: https://t.co/Gk5X5iBUjh
https://t.co/LusuCZXNPI
https://t.co/kcMajO7hwX
https://t.co/DHPoGSBeuz
https://t.co/9itIN3x8BR
RT @IntegralAnswers: @DCjusticeseeker Ref: IVM Meta Analyses
https://t.co/WIkdmvxsKe?
https://t.co/GhPkgZuhnl?
https://t.co/ruXqH841ma?
Jan 1, 2025 · 1 share · 1,474 followersView post →
I
IntegralAnswers
@IntegralAnswers · X
@DCjusticeseeker Ref: IVM Meta Analyses
https://t.co/WIkdmvxsKe?
https://t.co/GhPkgZuhnl?
https://t.co/ruXqH841ma?
Dec 31, 2024 · 1 like · 1 share · 8,599 followersView post →
PH
Presumably Humor
@OXHarryH1 · X
@donkerwater @DrNeilStone They weeded out the bogus and retracted papers. Dummy.
https://t.co/dQ4WXmoXvr
https://t.co/omeXonINOy
https://t.co/HwsbV1j7gs
https://t.co/J9bODdgo9e
Kory the fraud.
https://t.co/vxboyLxxqW
Dec 19, 2024 · 2 shares · 630 followersView post →
I
IntegralAnswers
@IntegralAnswers · X
References: https://t.co/mKOoXfakQB
Dec 19, 2024 · 22 likes · 2 shares · 8,599 followersView post →
M
MPC
@mpc_xetts · X
@h53824546 @DrNadolsky This study reviewed all RCTs on IVM up to Feb 22
"19 and 17 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. There was no significant difference in progression to severe disease"
https://t.co/tHVCo925R0
@h53824546 @DrNadolsky "We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin for COVID-19 patients based on current peer-reviewed RCTs and to address disputes over the existing evidence."
https://t.co/tHVCo925R0
@h53824546 @DrNadolsky "Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trial"
https://t.co/tHVCo925R0
@Waitwha77782293 @RealPizzaPepe It has antiviral properties but further study didn't show efficacy against covid:
Apr 13, 2022: https://t.co/YjEbo9NMXq
Sept 14, 2021: https://t.co/itVLOFOwRU
June 13, 2022:
https://t.co/NLg4hovFIq
Can you link to a study showing effectiveness that was censored in social media?
@gnomegnosis @JaneGaudaur @dr_jon_l Ah, the shitty Bangladesh study.
https://t.co/w3QC7HW3uR
Oct 27, 2024 · 1 like · 7,988 followersView post →
DM
D. Ben Moshe
@DBenMoshe2 · X
@KatLeTel @realMKOrts @DiedSuddenly_ Please read these 3 authoritative papers and get back to me.
N Engl J Med 2022;387:599-610
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2201662
VOL. 387 NO
N Engl J Med 2022;387:654-655
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMe2209017
VOL. 387 NO.
Virol J 19, 102 (2022). https://t.co/zDV0uQNfKr
Unser Wohlstand basiert auf wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen und dem Gründungs- und Unternehmergeist des 20. Jhdts
Es ist hoch an der Zeit diese Ideale wieder in den Fokus zu rücken!
#aufklärung2.0
https://t.co/3qnUMokEAA
Oct 19, 2024 · 7 likes · 1 share · 1,659 followersView post →
W
WahnSager
@WahnSager · X
Shwurbler-Land #Österreich?
Oct 17, 2024 · 2 likes · 6,218 followersView post →
AF
Andreas Felsch
@Raketenschnegge · X
Fundstück.
Ich hab nicht im Ansatz geahnt, dass es außerhalb von D noch schlimmer sein kann.
Und welche Tragödien @Demoguardian durchleben muss
@Shakingmyhead01 @sco0psmcgoo Some people are eager to take an OTC drug but afraid of vaccines. Doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, my opinion isn't expert, so here are links to research on Ivermectin for Covid:
https://t.co/tu8muHT0nJ
https://t.co/7FvS3ycUJ0
https://t.co/D3sCtHx1Fr
https://t.co/tu8muHT0nJ
@JimmyC1366 Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients
https://t.co/8dELnEZ8fW https://t.co/cDWaIWjXc2
@KarlaODell11 @Kenneth19567057 @Debunk_the_Funk https://t.co/vsBXkvBohe
https://t.co/vr1pXcliFM
https://t.co/xjsF9TDQBE
There's more, but as they say, you can do your own research.
@jackburton109 @erichhartmann @jordanbpeterson That work was superseded and the low quality evidence they found was later found to be from studies that were more likely to be biased. Later systematic reviews - including placebo controlled trials are below. Sorry.
https://t.co/TgRJYh2AFi
https://t.co/WdMC0WMnbC
Cochrane (which is top of the heap ask any Clinician!) Systematic Review & Meta Analysis, alas, says no. https://t.co/DTh4VF1CRB
Virology Journal Sys Rev & Meta analysis says no https://t.co/F2Qnu9QCNE
BMC Infect. Dis Sys Rev & Meta Analysis says no https://t.co/RqSZZaEMBM https://t.co/1q97b76zBa
@dr_jon_l Mentions a meta review yet do not cite the journal and issue publication…here’s two I found
https://t.co/RqSZZaEeMe
and
https://t.co/F2Qnu9Q4Y6 https://t.co/gXvQhHmtGX
@apadua1975 @SimoneL97600977 @CNNBrasil Amigo, análises in vitru em 2020, reprovada em análises clínicas publicadas posteriormente.
Da uma atualizada aí, nesse estudo COMPLETO de 2022 que usa como base essas 18 análises tão defendidas por vc. Negacionista burro
Mar 12, 2024 · 13 likes · 3,357 followersView post →
PD
Peter Kramer, Ph. D.
@KalmiaLatifolia · X
@WotsOnInfo @ActivismUr @GetSchwifyinere @nofreepunch Here’s a study they excludes low confidence studies that QUACKS cherry pick to confirm their bias.
https://t.co/cgrW2ok1kY
@Krassnig @barbaratoth @falter_at uiuiui ja genai, deretwegen es Lockdowns gab, weil sie lieber auf die Blase als auf die Wissenschaft hören
https://t.co/YGudQALyC3
@DouglasFalcon @GuntherEagleman Just for the cherry on top @DouglasFalcon
Here is a real meta-analysis with methodology in data choice explained as real researchers do, along with PEER RVIEWS.
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies
@goddeketal Sounds too good to be true. What is the quality of ivermectin studies?
Why do other authors report conflicting results? https://t.co/4rrdZKqDtu
https://t.co/kO5S33m1P1
@ginevra1348 @IFashioned @FanCooler2 È un articolo del 2021, ma ce ne sono moltissimi, più recenti, che senza clamore (ma con rigore) riportano semplicemente che l’ivermectina non è efficace contro il covid. Ma continua a esserlo contro la scabbia
https://t.co/cFzaDTKa4v
Dec 17, 2023 · 1 like · 3,357 followersView post →
AS
Albert Stöbich
@AlbertStobich · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Dec 17, 2023 · 43 shares · 64 followersView post →
AS
Atomsk's Sanakan
@AtomsksSanakan · X
@mentju4 @yoshkapundrick @MarionKoopmans And ivermectin doesn't work.
So you were wrong.
Your behavior shows that you're very bad at admitting when you're wrong, which would likely extend to you being confronted with any evidence that shows you're wrong on other topics (ex: on pandemic origins)
https://t.co/bQjXVirVUm https://t.co/fA0mxFaFIO
RT @Martin_Moder: Woher kommt die Wissenschaftsskepsis in Österreich? Eine Studie ging dieser Frage nach. Was dabei gefunden wurde in volle…
Dec 14, 2023 · 36 shares · 1,238 followersView post →
WH
Wöhrer Helmut
@wirdschovergeh · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Wissenschaft ist NICHT von Bedeutung
Dec 12, 2023 · 64 shares · 527 followersView post →
PR
Petra Röbl
@petra_roebl · X
@HombergEv @fluglehrer_neu @suesselimone @wienerlinien @Stadt_Wien https://t.co/xJiZaslS9v
schau da mal rein, wenn du magst : 10 % sind mit normaler wissenschaftskommunikation nicht mehr erreichbar
@Me_xNL @ritsie01 @JokeBruis38 @Schoterbos @mkeulemans @rivm https://t.co/334UrTLFXk
Conclusion
Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials.
@Lupus_Ridens2 @ErikGeenen @Spaulus60 Mooie screenshot. Hier is een klinische studie en een systematic review. Probeer later eens opnieuw wanneer je zelf ook studies hebt gelezen en deze kan delen
https://t.co/cMHpMLkj4F
Oh en nog een klinische studie
https://t.co/5X5tKEgY0v
Ajb dit is hoe je bronnen deelt
Nov 26, 2023 · 43 shares · 5,984 followersView post →
WS
Waldlaeuferin.bsky.social
@ichbinschoener · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Woher kommt die Wissenschaftsskepsis in Österreich? Eine Studie ging dieser Frage nach. Was dabei gefunden wurde in volle…
Nov 26, 2023 · 36 shares · 5,984 followersView post →
WS
Waldlaeuferin.bsky.social
@ichbinschoener · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Woher kommt diese Wissenschaftsskepsis?
Nov 26, 2023 · 28 shares · 5,984 followersView post →
MM
Martin Moder
@Martin_Moder · X
Woher kommt die Wissenschaftsskepsis in Österreich? Eine Studie ging dieser Frage nach. Was dabei gefunden wurde in voller Länge: https://t.co/ZhCJjyadbB https://t.co/KYOLdX6ENF
Nov 26, 2023 · 150 likes · 36 shares · 49,761 followersView post →
GH
Gerhard Hauer
@Hauerg · X
@volkspartei Fleißige Menschen und, wie man an den Wahlergebnissen und EU Umfragen zum Thema Wissenschaft sieht, selten dummes Volk.
Keine Beleidigung, Fakt.
https://t.co/JmvFA3yD0V
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,064 followersView post →
CF
Conrad Fiedorowicz
@MrFiedo · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 197 followersView post →
GF
Gerhard Fuchs
@fuchs_gerhard · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 172 followersView post →
B
Beate
@mehrtempo · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 124 followersView post →
AB
Alexander Burtscher
@AlexBurtscher · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 119 followersView post →
GM
Geier Michaela
@MichaGeier · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 19, 2023 · 43 shares · 244 followersView post →
PB
Peter Bern
@Pbern12 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 6,628 followersView post →
M
Madrigal
@Madigral0815 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,088 followersView post →
MS
Micha S.
@MichaS72423279 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 130 followersView post →
K
KBuchberger
@buchberger_k · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 296 followersView post →
SI
Spark of Insanity ⚠
@Gulpenschnulf · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,196 followersView post →
MA
Marion Schulz-Algie
@AlgieMarion · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 98 followersView post →
F
FakeDoctorRealData
@FakeDoctorReal1 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,538 followersView post →
HN
Hartmut Nowotny
@HartmutNowotny · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 479 followersView post →
AL
Albin Lupinc
@ALupinc · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,108 followersView post →
M
Marianne
@MarianneSallab1 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 69 followersView post →
US
UnionWatch / @watch_union@mastodon.social
@watch_union · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 77,439 followersView post →
YB
yve biskupska
@YveBiskupska · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 2,686 followersView post →
H
hb
@usance · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 437 followersView post →
M
Moalin
@interessierte00 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 16 followersView post →
EB
Eva Baumgartner
@ebaumgartner63 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 375 followersView post →
AS
Andrea Seidl
@vienna1011 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 2,689 followersView post →
M
Manuela
@Phuxxx · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 156 followersView post →
NK
Nanea Taylor #KHive
@Nanea_T · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 319 followersView post →
A
alpenSteff
@AlpineStvo · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,270 followersView post →
S
Skepticbrain
@Skepticbrain · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,680 followersView post →
FW
Flame Wolf
@TheFlamewolf · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 72 followersView post →
MK
Manuel Krist
@manuel_krist · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 22 followersView post →
MS
Martha Schweiger
@MaSchweigt · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Wissenschaft ist das eine, Fakten sind das andere
Nov 18, 2023 · 44 shares · 32 followersView post →
S
Suzy
@Suzyistdaheim · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 4,308 followersView post →
KS
Kamil Szlachta
@kamilszlachta · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 320 followersView post →
A
Archtitectoby
@Architectobyy · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 115 followersView post →
P
Pixelfee83
@Jessi46852952 · X
RT @Martin_Moder: Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 43 shares · 1,158 followersView post →
MM
Martin Moder
@Martin_Moder · X
Österreich vs. Wissenschaft
Nov 18, 2023 · 148 likes · 43 shares · 49,761 followersView post →
JH
Jan Kirsch, M.D., M.P.H.
@DrJanKirsch · X
@lewieatlarge @lea81338_mc Also not a scientific journal article but a bucket of meta-analyses that I think you obtained from an anti-vaccination site.
Here's an actual journal article - a meta-analysis which demonstrates the inefficacy of ivermectin in covid-19.
https://t.co/q78Yp1065x
@68degr @_itsme107_ @TriotPa @CeesCees72 https://t.co/yV5WIFi5w7
https://t.co/pD9jmLBgD3
https://t.co/2SuxNUbFxn
Hier wat grote studies die bewijzen dat het middel niet effectief is tegen Covid.
@dementia_doctor @CeesCees72 https://t.co/yV5WIFi5w7
https://t.co/pD9jmLBgD3
https://t.co/2SuxNUbFxn
Waarbij de eerste een conclusie is van 19 onderzoeken dus verdiep je eens zou ik zeggen.
youtu.be/AVvbEXskuGY?... Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit und bornierte Ignoranz (Link) haben in Österreich beschämende Tradition sowie zZ mE Proponenten an den Schalthebeln der Republik: BK, BM , GM sowie Unterstützer:innen in Medien und Volk, die Hände falten und die Goschen halten.
https://youtu.be/AVvbEXskuGY?si=Yb33KK2hr6N6DZDd
Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit und bornierte Ignoranz (Link) haben in Österreich beschämende Tradition sowie zZ mE Proponenten an den Schalthebeln der Republik: BK, BM , GM sowie Unterstützer:innen in Medien und Volk, die Hände falten...
Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit in DACH Ländern wissenschaftlich betrachtet. Die ersten zwei Slides lassen erahnen, wo in der Statistik die Schweiz zu suchen wäre, wenn sie in der EU wäre…
youtu.be/AVvbEXskuGY?...
@lawrie_dr [19] Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients | Virology Journal https://t.co/ck7Hszjcuk
[20] My Letter to Dr Andrew Hill Video - Dr. Tess Lawrie's Substack https://t.co/PwSjWjYbHB
[21]
Oct 28, 2023 · 3 likes · 1 share · 1,224 followersView post →
RS
roterfrosch.bsky.social
@roterfrosch.bsky.social · Bluesky
Video von Martin Moder.
Ist der eigentlich hier?
youtu.be/AVvbEXskuGY?...
@HelenTeaPot @gerrydavis1234 @Toothless71 @SeanPlunket Me, I'll take real science over anti vaxxers ignoring peer reviewed large scale studies, which show ivermevtin has no affect on covid. Like this peer reviewed roll up of 17 studies https://t.co/7ZTGkCg1Yz https://t.co/oaoDDBXqJF
Oct 18, 2023 · 1 like · 1,103 followersView post →
MB
Mark Bernay
@PhoneTrips · X
@ACMEAtomicAce @MdBreathe @ACLU All of these say the opposite:
https://t.co/qoKDRSqmJZ
https://t.co/9WVVL5QVzg
https://t.co/kiTKcxJPQV
https://t.co/OJFWV2F4lb
https://t.co/gMnbkVxDPa
https://t.co/pykUq239B4
https://t.co/w4rdsO4IFb
@timij01 @butthole32145 @gorskon Multiple sources of high-quality data:
https://t.co/HJtjtPUMM7
https://t.co/YqJWuy3YiE
https://t.co/GfSiqnGFL1
Now are you going to provide evidence proving these studies wrong, including the one I posted earlier?
Good read here:
https://t.co/JKsq0f8MFC
@MemeMeMoments @saras76 @ThomasSzymon I gave you a rebuttal of a large number of studies. I can't recall if I had reviewed Caly, but others have. It does nothing.
https://t.co/tKy2UWnTw4
@TnAlistair @ArtRemsik @JanJekielek @willn4c @joevaron I also found this.
"19 and 17 studies were included...
Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients"
https://t.co/VPNqBdqqtM
@TnAlistair @ArtRemsik @JanJekielek @willn4c @joevaron Share that data with me. Because everything I've found from reputable sources says the opposite.
This paper reviewed 36 studies.
"Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients..."
https://t.co/VPNqBdqqtM
@MdBreathe @DebbieCanWeTalk Or... We defer to the scientific method and good quality studies, as opposed to anecdotal evidence. One, that I'll note, does not even imply causation. Stanford med school?!?! Really? Boy, how our cognitive biases can skew our thinking. Or financial motive
https://t.co/9jJvY0XURo
@2ndSmartest 15/n The best evidence comes from quality meta-analyses, which show no effect of ivermectin on COVID-19.
https://t.co/CEQ3gQPaNm
https://t.co/GtDykpxFwL
https://t.co/yYuvUNql2V
5/8 This systemically dismantles most of your BS "studies," along with why.
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients | Virology Journal | Full Text https://t.co/jQ8dJY3Hl0
4/8 Here let me help you. I'll supply more. Including the largest "controlled" study in the world. The final one in Brazil is the largest double blind.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 https://t.co/jQ8dJY3Hl0
@Michael50199969 @PresidntTicTac @catturd2 1/5 All MAGA/Alt-Right fringe subgroups fall apart when evidence is involved. Not only is the above from only 5 days ago, but we have all this peer reviewed evidence below as well. WOMP WOMP
(https://t.co/4ffw2E4Njx) https://t.co/jQ8dJY3Hl0
@kouters24 Welke deskundige precies?
En waar kan ik de wetenschappelijke onderbouwing lezen?
Maar hier is een goed wetenschappelijk onderzoek
https://t.co/pYFddON3uS
@patricksavalle @EchoesOfSmiles @jeanerus @Mariba2puntnul Ik heb ook een lijstje onderzoeken die geen werking aantonen van HCQ en IVM….
Bronnen:
https://t.co/JHa7Y8CYLl…
https://t.co/JBQLajN6TD…
https://t.co/ul30HTmoh1…
https://t.co/kBaqgOy80A
https://t.co/iwrRVGJ0MI…
https://t.co/lwthR3QJ1x
https://t.co/Uq3siM98hi…
@plunk69 @Wanttoknownl @dancalegria @IGJnl Weet ik niet. Ik hou het gewoon bij feiten.
Conclusion: Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials.
https://t.co/IqB6vDHZv9.
@pimb1986 @_CrypTony_ @patricksavalle @MarionKoopmans Maar goed;
Hier een lijstje met peer reviewed onderzoeken die geen werking aantonen van HCQ en IVM….
Bronnen:
https://t.co/AsISBtpfWU
https://t.co/mPhbLjcg2X
https://t.co/CQkIDuC7Hs
https://t.co/KCyJtQUf14
https://t.co/AXVknktn5P
https://t.co/4ewhKxqUEt
https://t.co/WhmH1FdC4Q
Aug 10, 2023 · 3 likes · 1,182 followersView post →
AH
Andrew Hales
@AndrewH81483877 · X
@MdBreathe Ivermectin did not have any significant effect - https://t.co/FwDrgB1K2G
@TheChiefNerd @RobertKennedyJr No, but the medical literature is and (just one example) https://t.co/geNvq4D92d .... "do your own research" springs to mind...
@MichelJeanDomi1 @argilleux @Hunting_CIO @MTransfertRad https://t.co/7O8TIyaRy2
https://t.co/1Bmm5ra7Qv
https://t.co/Nd0mNeeO05
https://t.co/8j6yVKx0jl
Ils vous donnent tous tort, vous allez ressortir le faux argument de la corruption sans aucune preuve de ça et vos gogos ne verront pas que vous leur mentez…
@Sethmr1989 @jonathanstea Conclusion: Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials. https://t.co/iT9eefKpVp
@youngscarface44 @LaurquiW @PeterHotez This aint a real scientific n peer reviewed article, hope you know that.
Now this is https://t.co/6fWVOBNpWG
In short :: There was no significant difference in progression to severe disease
@USBornNRaised @arsthegod @mcuban DARPA know shit all about treatments for Covid.
Here are two meta analyses showing NO BENEFITS
https://t.co/xrRzjNZv8t
https://t.co/K8TAuPwElm.
Knock it off. It doesn’t bloody work.
Jun 15, 2023 · 1 like · 8,927 followersView post →
H
Hypoautonomic
@hypoautonomic · X
@han_francis @SolNataMD @CrowNationPR @TheCrowTribe One can catch up quick with this little video on his dirty business practice (with references) https://t.co/b2vNNzLnQj
@IBAConservative But i already done that. Thats why i know it does not work.
Conclusion:
Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials.
https://t.co/334UrTLFXk
@psykozis11 @xrpdr598 @hillbe12 @wokesocieties @alx @elonmusk @davidmweissman @JoeBiden 1/4 U are extremely desperate & pathetic at this point. When will u stop pretending reality supports an iota of your false claims? It must truly suck when nothing shows the silly/false things you say are true.
Ivermectin Doesn't Make Difference With C19 https://t.co/jQ8dJY3Hl0
@Woodynist @montastrucf @EMA_News Regardons une meta analyse sur l’ivermectine
https://t.co/Nd0mNeeO05
Ah ben non… regardons en une autre
https://t.co/8j6yVKx0jl
Toujours pas…
Décidément… quand ça veut pas… https://t.co/ErKtjMjwi7
RT @Rhazelovitch: @insins31544458 Tes 100% d'études ont beaucoup de mal à se faire un chemin dans la littérature apparemment (que s'apelori…
May 16, 2023 · 1 share · 2,615 followersView post →
R
Rhazelovitch
@Rhazelovitch · X
@insins31544458 Tes 100% d'études ont beaucoup de mal à se faire un chemin dans la littérature apparemment (que s'apelorio "cherry picking"):
https://t.co/bTCPkVJoIx
https://t.co/ausqmOWFr3
Et ton étude miracle Medincell n'est ni publiée ni reviewée,on a hâte, mais hâaate de la lire en entier.
May 16, 2023 · 2 likes · 1 share · 6,606 followersView post →
B
bob
@bob68095936 · X
@Szymon49366484 @WolnoscTV @GrzegorzBraun_ @KoronyPolskiej @KONFEDERACJA_ To podaj tych innych, bo ja ich tam nie widziałem. Proszę, tutaj jest uaktualniona meta-analiza, tylko z recenzowanego czasopisma, w odróżnieniu od tego co sam dawałeś. Wyklucza ono złej jakości badania z tamtego. Czyli to kończy dyskusje rozumiem?
https://t.co/plbj8ZCeQj
Lah, yg itungannya butuh kuliah 4 tahun cuma supaya ngerti dibilang ga ilmiah. Yg jelas2 ga ilmiah dipaksa boleh.
FYI, hasil review after-the-factsnya ivermectin ud keluar. "did not have any significant effect". Persis yg ditakutkan sama yg nolak dulu.
https://t.co/Fnua8hTEq2 https://t.co/oZII6oDMQb
@Nick_C247 @S1lv1us @georgiegirl1216 @spencerconway11 @EdKrassen Anti parasitic, I dont watch CNN but its clear you get your medical needs watching joe rogan lmao. Peer reviewed show it does nothing for covid moron. Your commanders must have thought you were a retard. https://t.co/GlZ8OMh6Kg
@DianeMountz @RobSchneider British Medical Journal, Virology
"Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials."
https://t.co/WMilaG2stb
@David34210856 @VigilantFox Yawn... Not effective against COVID. Not just one study, but a meta review of all, published peer reviewed studies.
https://t.co/WMilaG1UDD
Apr 20, 2023 · 1 like · 6,426 followersView post →
PH
Presumably Humor
@OXHarryH1 · X
@lorraine_logie @CKellyUAP Don't you understand, there's literally no contradictory evidence anymore. None. Prior to the trials, there was hope. It was all dashed.
https://t.co/HwsbV1j7gs
https://t.co/omeXonINOy
@wilsonrob8823 @TiceRichard As the science says in this thorough meta-analysis, worm medicine has no significant effect on COVID
https://t.co/0zihSRz8Hp
@MarqFrancois @Chamchamat C'est pas comme ça que ça marche, mais allons-y quand même :
https://t.co/mtErM22faC
https://t.co/LyP0bIP6U6
https://t.co/9VoVxYG33n
https://t.co/wUENo7bq6O
https://t.co/sqIkvlSjPi
https://t.co/3MGju1BnD9
C'est une petite sélection.
À toi.
@blounttruthnow @HelenTeaPot @VigilantFox @drpaulmarik1 100% failure. What cognitive issues do you have that prevent you from understanding evidence based medicine? Summary of studies from around the globe. Failed all of them.
It started here:
https://t.co/2NZXH48nTV
and now millions of dollars wasted.
https://t.co/omeXonINOy
@HelenTeaPot @blounttruthnow @VigilantFox @drpaulmarik1 It failed EVERY trial. At this point only the most gullible fall for the scam.
Literally every trial. Not some, not most. ALL. Completely failure.
https://t.co/qj1LM9qj37… https://t.co/IxzvCx5bB7… https://t.co/8jVxh4pRF5… https://t.co/omeXonINOy… https://t.co/HwsbV1j7gs
Mar 28, 2023 · 1 like · 1,525 followersView post →
AA
Anomic Aphasia
@AphasiaAnomic · X
@t_endian @laura69923509 @DrAseemMalhotra Also: not effective https://t.co/tUCvYiAtN9. Not effective: https://t.co/x9qzXWLYCJ. Claimed efficacy in small trials subject to bias and now published with a warning about research misconduct: https://t.co/umWg0ESyes
@Albert36979477 @JimDoubleYou1 @guill2001 @raoult_didier Et non… toujours pas
https://t.co/8j6yVKx0jl
https://t.co/S3J6heM6Zn
https://t.co/X9BUGlkjQh
https://t.co/h7Z1hXtuxZ
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients https://t.co/2RKdjtlSK0 https://t.co/vEdmxqWANj
RT @hypoautonomic: @mtaibbi @RichardDaleFitz Kory is a now well-documented quack selling snake oil and I don't see you identifying him as a…
Feb 7, 2023 · 3 shares · 10,467 followersView post →
GS
Greedwashing StuffyCat
@greedwashing · X
RT @hypoautonomic: @mtaibbi @RichardDaleFitz Kory is a now well-documented quack selling snake oil and I don't see you identifying him as a…
Feb 7, 2023 · 3 shares · 1,476 followersView post →
AS
Atomsk's Sanakan
@AtomsksSanakan · X
RT @hypoautonomic: @mtaibbi @RichardDaleFitz Kory is a now well-documented quack selling snake oil and I don't see you identifying him as a…
Feb 7, 2023 · 3 shares · 3,357 followersView post →
H
Hypoautonomic
@hypoautonomic · X
@mtaibbi @RichardDaleFitz Kory is a now well-documented quack selling snake oil and I don't see you identifying him as a charlatan in your articles. Looks like you missed the warning signs
https://t.co/b2vNNzLnQj
Feb 7, 2023 · 8 likes · 3 shares · 775 followersView post →
HP
Homert, The Singing Bumblebee MD PhD
@Singing_BumbleB · X
@Ladyjustice1312 @MarKes1900 @HaHaGentherapie @ToKnowOrNot @Charlot2409 @cwitteveen1 @vpknerd @Missionmars21 @HansLandman @ing_thegame @PaulGanck @Torch_1968 @Miraloml @JanssenJh @JasperRTuijnman @LaceyX1989 @Luketheduke1960 @Bartje46198812 @rudybouma Kijk, nog een. Het staat nu 2 1 voor mij.
https://t.co/IOiK6Zc3Lr
RT @hypoautonomic: @Alexa2B74 @SabinehazanMD @US_FDA @FBI @elonmusk Ya she does. She sells magic just like pierre kory.
Kory is exposed he…
Dec 15, 2022 · 1 share · 2,440 followersView post →
H
Hypoautonomic
@hypoautonomic · X
@Alexa2B74 @SabinehazanMD @US_FDA @FBI @elonmusk Ya she does. She sells magic just like pierre kory.
Kory is exposed here:
https://t.co/b2vNNzteCb https://t.co/ILNs54eyI6
Dec 15, 2022 · 1 like · 1 share · 775 followersView post →
T
Tim
@SledKnight · X
@Waggishness @SnowHimbo @rnd868 @jimmy_dore lol, you changed “excluded those with high risk of bias” to somehow mean “only included studies to skew results.” Like always, you guys will completely ignore quality if it means getting numbers you like. Here’s another that focuses on peer reviewed RCTs: https://t.co/1jtcratx1S
@d_e_mol @mirwijn @PvanHouwelingen @hapelensrob Als we papers gaan gooien, dat kan ik beter. En kijk vooral naar het Nature verhaal. Daarin wordt uitgelegd waarom niet alle meta's betrouwbaar zijn.
https://t.co/woYLSolLaG
https://t.co/X7H4sB6Ug4
https://t.co/UjRCRtGsXg
Nov 19, 2022 · 3 likes · 1,572 followersView post →
ST
Steven T.
@sdt993 · X
@samanthamarika1 Ivermectin does not work. End of story. https://t.co/KyMdJiyk6C
Oct 3, 2022 · 3 likes · 1,066 followersView post →
RG
Rolando Garcia
@RatioScientiae · X
@iambackagain21 @StevenWMosher @RealPNavarro You can't consider all studies valid and lump them together. No wonder this has not been published in a reputable journal. Ivermectin is still under investigation, but so far it doesn't look good. https://t.co/PCvQEaev8a, https://t.co/H8VbElH0dJ
A meta-analysis from June 2022 found no benefit: https://t.co/gUez4gNCcq
During the same time period, I found one study, from Lagos, that showed benefit: https://t.co/GyDaD54PEU
RT @OmidKohandelG: Brilliant.
One of our publications,
"Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and p…
Aug 22, 2022 · 1 share · 6,686 followersView post →
OG
Omid Kohandel Gargari
@OmidKohandelG · X
Brilliant.
One of our publications,
"Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients",
is cited in this article. https://t.co/8uZ1oZEaC8 https://t.co/TR9CL0S595
@Mayk_vehemente @Manolotabaiba1 @LekLaial @EsteveBoix @n3storm @SativusRaphanus @pi_tres14 @PiliYSeAcabo @Cristin62122848 @aliciacgviolin @megaitaka @Luis13104072 @CarlosVecino4 @Buenrollo13 @Dr_Pilgrim @MartinaSisters @detras @romsanra @Mrcopy19 @diecinuevedeabr @69200mu @ahivalostia @Marilaren @Xenomorfo777 @carachisteguiri @nadalibre @AnaCabrera81 @Nefernefer9 @DrRubenMejia @Yo_soy_JulyR @avogadrito @MelondeH2O @lebruceditscher @CGCOM_Esp @Javier__CB @Miss_Salmonella @84DiegoQM Lleva razón,me expresé mal: IVM y HCQ no han demostrado ningún beneficio.
" Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials"
Metaanalisis de 2022
https://t.co/7kTHwrPIZA
Aug 15, 2022 · 4 likes · 1 share · 86 followersView post →
P
PhillyPharmaBoy
@PhillyPharmaBoy · X
@DJGgenX There are many issues with this study, not the least of which is dosing. How does administering a low dose of ivermectin every 15 days prevent COVID? This aside, 9 quality RTCs this year alone show ivermectin to have no meaningful activity against COVID?
https://t.co/SeKiy6JusY
@DJGgenX The latest meta-analysis of high quality ivermectin RCTs indicate that the drug has no meaningful activity against COVID. There have been 9 negative RCTs this year alone.https://t.co/SeKiy6JusY
@mycarvinsc90 @SensibleTruth1 @ACTBrigitte The FDA and Fauci did nothing to quash ivermectin. It quashed itself with 12 negative RCTs. Ivermectin does nothing to prevent or treat COVID. The latest ivermectin meta-analysis is below. It is crushingly negative.
https://t.co/SeKiy6rTBq https://t.co/shhpMst2YL
@KeyeMartin @mendez_rod @nickmmark @jimmy_dore The Bryant meta-analysis is invalid. Two key studies were included that were later found to be fraudulent. The erratum is below. For a more up-to-date analysis see: https://t.co/SeKiy6JusY https://t.co/pqeB62IDNf
@max____headroom @TheMuffers @RinoHunters @cryptofailsafe @pelleggi2 @real_seeking @Trumpbangskids @DocDeezWhat @Resistenzanow The most devastating news to the ivermectin story is this recent (June 2022) meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by Shafiee et al. Ivermectin fails across the board. The coffin will hold no more nails.
https://t.co/SeKiy6JusY https://t.co/xCNSzQMDse
We've detected a paper from Virology Journal that cites a retracted paper post-retraction.
Citing paper: https://t.co/tOYdI6zWFK
Retracted paper: https://t.co/97DF8DxNJV
We've detected a paper from Virology Journal that cites a retracted paper post-retraction.
Citing paper: https://t.co/tOYdI6zWFK
Retracted paper: https://t.co/EsUkFKftOD
We've detected a paper from Virology Journal that cites a retracted paper post-retraction.
Citing paper: https://t.co/tOYdI6zWFK
Retracted paper: https://t.co/CtN6rTgwno
@DarrenJaSa @ranjitrao1 https://t.co/IL0SZMBARJ
"Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of COVID-19 patients and as WHO recommends, use of ivermectin should be limited to clinical trials."
RT @COVID_Evidence: PubMed: Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controver…
Jun 15, 2022 · 1 share · 2,111 followersView post →
CE
@COVID_Evidence
@COVID_Evidence · X
PubMed: Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients: CONCLUSION: Ivermectin did not have any significant effect on outcomes of… https://t.co/wkpRSIBnH7 #covid19 #SARSCOV2 #coronavirus
Jun 14, 2022 · 2 likes · 1 share · 2,111 followersView post →
フリ
フォロー＆リツイートプレゼント懸賞
@rt_present_info · X
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients - Virology Journal - Virology Journal https://t.co/c73U6uLH8q フォロー＆リツイート #キャンペーン #懸賞 #プレゼント
RT @VirologyJ: Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-…
Jun 13, 2022 · 2 shares · 6,686 followersView post →
VT
Virology Tweets
@VirologyJ · X
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients https://t.co/CkQ8DnkWgu
Jun 13, 2022 · 1 like · 2 shares · 9,697 followersView post →
S
SystematicReviewBot
@EvidenceRobot · X
RT @myjournals: Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID…
Jun 13, 2022 · 1 share · 6,686 followersView post →
M
MyJournals
@myjournals · X
Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients https://t.co/g2xrkTppLl
#Meta Ivermectin under scrutiny: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and possible sources of controversies in COVID-19 patients - Virology Journal - Virology Journal https://t.co/7gi2Ns37i3
Virology Journal, 19, 72.doi/10.1186/s12985-022-01829-8 2) Farah, R. E., et al. (2022). Ivermectin-associated adverse events in the treatment and prevention ...
doi/10.1186/s12985-022-01829-8 2) Farah, R. E., et al. (2022). Ivermectin-associated adverse events in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 reported to ...
People who used ivermectin get better faster and were much less ...
Blogs
... 10.1186/s12985-022-01829-8 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242184. Ivermectin use is extremely dangerous if you don't know ...
AM
I
PH
R
SB
J
B
AS
C
PI
KG
JS
LR
J
M
MS
PP
TL
BF
HG
DM
S
JB
TP
KJ
AH
RM
JR
GA
DR
M
MR
PD
B
P
HR
MC
TW
QW
TC
MV
JH
KM
T
H
RP
JB
MB
MH
MO
MU
CM
S
TJ
DV
AH
TB
PM
PR
Y
CC
J
W
AN
SH
L
JM
N
R
B
PB
TM
A
TN
R
O
GL
PF
TP
HP
IS
T
FS
TI
M
RG
R
S
OG
MT
C
P
SC
CE
フリ
VT
M
P