Subject and methods: 600 subjects; 400 symptomatic confirmed COVID-19 patients and 200 health care and household contacts distributed over 6 groups; Group I: 100 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 infection received a 4-days course of Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group II: 100 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 infection received hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care; Group III: 100 patients with severe COVID-19 infection received Ivermectin plus standard of care; Group IV: 100 patients with Severe COVID-19 infection received hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care. Routine laboratory investigations and RT-PCR, were reported before and after initiation of treatment. Group V stick to PPE plus Ivermectin 400mcg / kg on empty stomach to be repeated after one week, and group VI stick to PPE only (personal protective equipment) .Both groups V&VI were followed for two weeks ..
Results: Patients received ivermectin reported substantial recovery of laboratory investigations; and significant reduction in RT-PCR conversion days. A substantial improvement and reduction in mortality rate in Ivermectin treated groups; group I (mild/moderate cases), (99%, and 0.0%, respectively) and group III (severe cases), (94%, and 2.0% respectively) versus hydroxychloroquine plus standard care treated groups; group II (mild/moderate cases), (74% and 4%, respectively) and group IV (severe cases) (50% and 20%, respectively). Ivermectin had significantly reduced the incidence of infection in health care and household contacts up to 2% compared to 10% in non ivermectin group when used as a prophylaxis.
Conclusion:Addition of Ivermectin to standard care is very effective drug for treatment of COVID-19 patients with significant reduction in mortality compared to Hydroxychloroquine plus standard treatment only. Early use of Ivermectin is very useful for controlling COVID 19 infections; prophylaxis and improving cytokines storm
Here is a meta-analysis of 26 studies on ivermectin to date:
•Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19. 100% of studies report positive effects. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 26 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 67 million (p = 0.000000015).
•Early treatment is most successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.40].
•100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
•Ivermectin is effective for COVID-19. 100% of studies report positive effects. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 26 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 67 million (p = 0.000000015).
•Early treatment is most successful, with an estimated reduction of 87% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.13 [0.04-0.40].
•100% of the 10 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated reduction of 74% in the effect measured using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.26 [0.12-0.56].
The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 26 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 67 million (p = 0.000000015). https://ivmmeta.com/?fbclid=IwAR0wbsA0QxfpN2Upp0jsfGz1sYCeE-7ywtaWoDOAA63DhOFKeQN-VKP35KU
I mean it doesn't get much clearer than this. Ivermectin works as prophylactic and in early stages of infection. The data doesn't lie.
Dr. Pierre Kory had to leave his job for the second time during this pandemic. The reason, for trying to save as many lives as possible. The U.S. medical bureaucracy is an evil criminal enterprise. Very good interview outlining why he was chased out for doing his job of saving lives by any means necessary.
| Treatment time | Number of studies reporting positive results | Total number of studies | Percentage of studies reporting positive results | Probability of an equal or greater percentage of positive results from an ineffective treatment | Random effects meta-analysis results |
| Early treatment | 6 | 6 | 100% | 0.016 1 in 64 | 87% improvement RR 0.13 [0.04‑0.40] p = 0.00052 |
| Late treatment | 13 | 13 | 100% | 0.00012 1 in 8 thousand | 48% improvement RR 0.52 [0.36‑0.74] p = 0.0003 |
| Pre‑Exposure Prophylaxis | 5 | 5 | 100% | 0.031 1 in 32 | 96% improvement RR 0.04 [0.01‑0.31] p = 0.0021 |
| Post‑Exposure Prophylaxis | 2 | 2 | 100% | 0.25 1 in 4 | 90% improvement RR 0.10 [0.06‑0.17] p < 0.0001 |
| All studies | 26 | 26 | 100% | 0.000000015 1 in 67 million | 77% improvement RR 0.23 [0.15‑0.35] p < 0.0001 |
@Covid19Critical
In her story, @AP
@Beatrice_Dupuy
wrote, “no evidence has been shown to prove that ivermectin works against COVID-19.” That is 100% false. Dr. Kory provided her w/proven medical evidence. The AP says it’s standing by its story, & that no factual errors existed. #APDeadlyFail
These hack fact checkers are dangerous. Who are they getting their orders from to write such harmful pieces?
In her story, @AP
@Beatrice_Dupuy
wrote, “no evidence has been shown to prove that ivermectin works against COVID-19.” That is 100% false. Dr. Kory provided her w/proven medical evidence. The AP says it’s standing by its story, & that no factual errors existed. #APDeadlyFail
These hack fact checkers are dangerous. Who are they getting their orders from to write such harmful pieces?
@Covid19Crusher The meta-analysis from the University of Lyon has added 1 more Randomized controlled Trial of ivermectin to its database. That has increased the Bayesian probability that ivermectin is an effective treatment against death to............... 100%.
http://www.metaevidence.org/viewMAp...thology=87&selfocus=1&selSubgroup=0&domain=12
http://www.metaevidence.org/viewMAp...thology=87&selfocus=1&selSubgroup=0&domain=12
