Merck manufactures Ivermectin.
Dozens of companies manufacture Ivermectin. It's like Paracetamol, which is often prescribed for COVID-19. Yet, Paracetamol doesn't have proven efficacy or safety with COVID-19. Shall we ask any of the dozens of companies that manufacture Paracetamol if it's the right thing to prescribe? It's just pointless to do so or to bother what any company with conflicting interests has to say on the matter.
They are urging people not to take this potentially dangerous drug that has no proven efficacy against Covid 19.
As I've elaborated, this drug is not more "potentially dangerous" than any other drug. In fact, Ivermectin is one of the safest drugs you can find. It has a better safety profile than Paracetamol, comparing their toxicity profiles only, not to mention the reported severe adverse events, which are attributed to parasites and not to the antiparasitic treatment with Ivermectin, while Paracetamol has plenty of reports of hepatoxicity.
The current evidence of moderate quality suggests that Ivermectin may be efficacious against COVID-19. The claim that "there is no proven efficacy" is a play with words of some media sites to point out their own narrative. This isn't scientific. The scientific methodology requires completeness. By mentioning only one side of the coin, but not the other side of the coin, you're making an opinion out of facts. By mentioning only the flawed JAMA study, while ignoring all the other studies, these media sites are spreading an opinionated narrative.
Dr. Kory is simply not credible.
This is your opinion - based on what argument? Do you know the CVs of Dr. Kory and his colleagues? Wasn't he credible when he supported dexamethasone to be integrated into guidelines before the Oxford study was published and the official bodies responded?
The FDA and the European Medicines Agency and the World Health Organization are all advising people not to take this medication outside of clinical trials.
The NIH does not follow this standpoint. In Mexico and other countries, Ivermectin is already recommended.
The FDA hasn't reviewed the data and has not published any official and reviewed guideline. Their article is just a press release following reports of Equine Ivermectin use. Of course, they can not recommend animal products for humans. This will never change even after a large RCT.
The WHO has not transparently reviewed all the data. Their recommendation is based on a few studies that they picked while not following their own published review methodology. Dr. Tess Lawrie already analyzed the WHO recommendation and found inconsistencies in the numbers and respective interpretations. The WHO is not an independent organization. Their budget is bound to political interests, the Gates Foundation, and many vaccine manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies. This is a conflict of interest.
The EMA's review is even more intransparent than the one of the WHO since they don't provide any data or reference to what exactly they reviewed. Their stance ignores the urge during this pandemic to have a treatment where there is currently no treatment available. For vaccines, they accept long-term risks for an experimental approval. But they do not for early treatment options, which only affect infected people and not the whole population, as vaccines do ultimately. Quite the double standard, don't you think?
