×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络，最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络，最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

@Las Vegas

Dr. John Campbell介绍一篇美国论文，论文调查了4万多新冠患者，分别经过IVM和瑞德西韦的治疗，用IVM的死亡率是用瑞德西韦的0.3倍。

blueskygg(Grass)
Ivermectin, more evidence - Dr. John Campbell

Follow the evidence, wherever it leads
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfyOihhAD4A

Treatment with Ivermectin Is Associated with Decreased Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: Analysis of a National Federated Database

Purpose

To evaluate the difference in mortality,

Patients treated with ivermectin

Patients treated with remdesivir

44 healthcare organizations and 68 million patients from US,

January 1, 2020 and July 11, 2021

Methods & Materials

Retrospectively identified diagnosed adults
Recorded use of ivermectin, but not remdesivir

Recorded use of remdesivir, but not ivermectin

Controlled for, comorbidities, and treatments that may affect COVID-19 survival outcomes: age, gender, race, ethnicity, nicotine use diabetes mellitus, obesity, chronic lower respiratory disease, ischemic heart diseases, tocilizumab, glucocorticoids, or ventilator use.

Primary outcome assessed, mortality

Sith significance assessed at p less than 0.05.

Result

41,608 patients who had COVID-19

Treated with ivermectin n = 1,072

Treated with remdesivir n = 40,536

Ivermectin was associated with reduced mortality vs remdesivir
OR 0.308

p less than 0.0001.

Conclusion

Ivermectin use was associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 compared to remdesivir.

In the future, if more publications are published with the similar result to the current analyses, the certainty of evidence will increase.

Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching (Brazil)

https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162...

Background

Ivermectin has demonstrated different mechanisms of action, coronavirus infection and COVID-19-related comorbidities.

Prophylaxis combined with the known safety profile of ivermectin

Study to evaluate the impact of regular ivermectin use on subsequent COVID-19 infection and mortality rates.

Prospective, July 2020 and December 2020

Inviting the entire population of Itajaí to a medical visit to enroll in the program,

ivermectin was offered as an optional treatment to be taken for two consecutive days every 15 days at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day.

Study analysis consisted of comparing ivermectin users with non-users using cohorts

Results

223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered

159,561 included in the analysis

113,845 (71.3%) regular ivermectin users

45,716 (23.3%) non-users

Of these

4,311 ivermectin users were infected, (3.7% infection rate)

3,034 non-users (6.6% infection rate)

A 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate

Risk ratio (RR), 0.56

The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality

Deaths

25 (0.8%) deaths in the ivermectin group

79 (2.6%) among ivermectin non-users

RR, 0.32

p less than 0.0001

When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70%

There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate

44 in the ivermectin group

99 in non ivermectin users

After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67%

p less than 0.0001
Conclusion

In this large study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.

(#15052442@0)
Last Updated: 2022-12-25
This post has been archived. It cannot be replied.
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下家园 / 医药保健 / 某医疗机构调查了5万员工的新冠与疫苗的关系，图标清楚显示，从0针，1针到3针以上，针打得越多，新冠感染率越高。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-23 {235} (#15048729@0) +17
    • ADE -**🥕; 2022-12-23 (#15048752@0) +7
    • 加拿大政府数据：不打疫苗防死亡: -itwriting(halfpercent); 2022-12-23 {926} (#15049489@0) +12
      加拿大最新的年度总死亡数据来了，病毒变弱疫苗普及的2021/2022新增死亡1.7万，20年来最高！ Canada: number of deaths 2022 | Statista 2021／2022的意思是2021下半年到2022上半年，病毒变弱疫苗普及的一年，比病毒强劲没有疫苗的2020／2021，多死1.7万。 病毒强劲没有疫苗的2020／2021，比基本无疫情的2019／2020，…
      Full Story:
      https://halfpercent.wordpress.com/2022/11/06/2-246-%e5%8a%a0%e6%8b%bf%e5%a4%a7%e6%94%bf%e5%ba%9c%e6%95%b0%e6%8d%ae%ef%bc%9a%e4%b8%8d%e6%89%93%e7%96%ab%e8%8b%97%e9%98%b2%e6%ad%bb%e4%ba%a1/
    • 有年龄分组就完美一些了,再加上职业分组就更完美了 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-23 (#15049528@0) +2
    • 澳大利亚New South Wales州，2022年第48周，4针对比3针和0针，住院296 : 170 : 0, ICU 18: 15 : 0。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-23 {202} (#15049682@0) +3


      :

      • 避谈年龄是1个高招 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15050094@0) +5
        • 这是NSW政府发布的数据，你可以教教他们怎么把数据做得好看点。不过0针的住院、ICU人数是0，再怎么分年龄还是0啊。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-24 (#15051075@0) +7
          • 小朋友都知道,4针的绝大多数是高风险人群,某个短时间的抽样也是1个高招 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051310@0) +2
            • 没有疫苗时，死亡的人说成不打疫苗死的，统计从2021年1月开始，这不是异曲同工么？ -**🥑; 2022-12-24 (#15051358@0) +2
              • 疫苗有有效期,楼主一直在关心本国的政府数据.开始半年多不打针的人发病/住院/ICU的数据(人口校正后)都远超打疫苗的,O毒上阵前才扯平 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051385@0)
        • 如果谈年龄的话，死的多半是老弱。脆弱人群最应该保护，而数据说明疫苗对脆弱人群没起到保护，失败。 -wonder99(Wonder); 2022-12-24 (#15051169@0) +9
          • 疫苗只是降低了老弱的死亡率,加拿大和美国的死亡数据证实了疫苗的作用,美国的平均年龄还比加拿大年轻一些 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051313@0)
      • 打了4针，3针和0针的人口总数是多少？然后再说住院和ICU的比例，这样的数据才有用吧？ -eeeeeeeee(阿E); 2022-12-24 (#15051202@0) +5
        • 这里有比例，nsw population 8.166 million (Sep 2020) -hnryll(松树); 2022-12-24 {352} (#15051304@0)

          还说了打针很有效。。。。“由于社区的疫苗接种覆盖率如此之高，因此住院或重症监护病房 (ICU) 的 COVID-19 患者中有很大一部分现在接种了两剂或三剂疫苗。” 这句不好理解。

          ​​​​​​​

        • 这个图一目了然，还有分疫苗状况的各自总人口数。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-24 {203} (#15051412@0) +1


          :

    • link 图不清楚，下载了一个清楚的跟这里： -hnryll(松树); 2022-12-24 {200} (#15051257@0)


      :

      • 这说明高危人群，几乎都打满了3-4针，以为可以防死亡，结果，疫苗依旧无法防止死亡，结果高危人群，依旧高危，如果有对照组，就会发现，几乎没有区别。 -**🥑; 2022-12-24 {117} (#15051336@0) +7
        比如，1000人，疫苗组，最后活下2人，非疫苗组活下一人，就被宣传为，打疫苗的比没打疫苗存活高一倍，而不会告诉你具体数字。
        • 解释一下美国与加拿大感染率率相同(70%),死亡人数是加拿大的2.3倍 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051390@0)
          • 对新冠死亡的，美国政府给医院的钱多，所以有医院把阴性死亡病人硬说成阳性。另外，用瑞德西韦，政府会给奖励，所以美国医院大量使用该药，造成很多不必要的死亡。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-24 (#15051426@0) +1
            • 不是美国医生开兽药救了很多人的命吗? -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051443@0) +3
              • IVM救的人肯定没有瑞德西韦害死的人多。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-24 (#15051601@0) +3
                • 这个需要数字,目前知道的是兽药救了五六个 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-25 (#15052102@0)
                  • Dr. John Campbell介绍一篇美国论文，论文调查了4万多新冠患者，分别经过IVM和瑞德西韦的治疗，用IVM的死亡率是用瑞德西韦的0.3倍。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-25 {5541} (#15052442@0) +1
                    Ivermectin, more evidence - Dr. John Campbell

                    Follow the evidence, wherever it leads
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfyOihhAD4A

                    Treatment with Ivermectin Is Associated with Decreased Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: Analysis of a National Federated Database

                    Purpose

                    To evaluate the difference in mortality,

                    Patients treated with ivermectin

                    Patients treated with remdesivir

                    44 healthcare organizations and 68 million patients from US,

                    January 1, 2020 and July 11, 2021

                    Methods & Materials

                    Retrospectively identified diagnosed adults
                    Recorded use of ivermectin, but not remdesivir

                    Recorded use of remdesivir, but not ivermectin

                    Controlled for, comorbidities, and treatments that may affect COVID-19 survival outcomes: age, gender, race, ethnicity, nicotine use diabetes mellitus, obesity, chronic lower respiratory disease, ischemic heart diseases, tocilizumab, glucocorticoids, or ventilator use.

                    Primary outcome assessed, mortality

                    Sith significance assessed at p less than 0.05.

                    Result

                    41,608 patients who had COVID-19

                    Treated with ivermectin n = 1,072

                    Treated with remdesivir n = 40,536

                    Ivermectin was associated with reduced mortality vs remdesivir
                    OR 0.308

                    p less than 0.0001.

                    Conclusion

                    Ivermectin use was associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 compared to remdesivir.

                    In the future, if more publications are published with the similar result to the current analyses, the certainty of evidence will increase.

                    Ivermectin Prophylaxis Used for COVID-19: A Citywide, Prospective, Observational Study of 223,128 Subjects Using Propensity Score Matching (Brazil)

                    https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162...

                    Background

                    Ivermectin has demonstrated different mechanisms of action, coronavirus infection and COVID-19-related comorbidities.

                    Prophylaxis combined with the known safety profile of ivermectin

                    Study to evaluate the impact of regular ivermectin use on subsequent COVID-19 infection and mortality rates.

                    Prospective, July 2020 and December 2020

                    Inviting the entire population of Itajaí to a medical visit to enroll in the program,

                    ivermectin was offered as an optional treatment to be taken for two consecutive days every 15 days at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/day.

                    Study analysis consisted of comparing ivermectin users with non-users using cohorts

                    Results

                    223,128 citizens of Itajaí considered

                    159,561 included in the analysis

                    113,845 (71.3%) regular ivermectin users

                    45,716 (23.3%) non-users

                    Of these

                    4,311 ivermectin users were infected, (3.7% infection rate)

                    3,034 non-users (6.6% infection rate)

                    A 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate

                    Risk ratio (RR), 0.56

                    The regular use of ivermectin led to a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality

                    Deaths

                    25 (0.8%) deaths in the ivermectin group

                    79 (2.6%) among ivermectin non-users

                    RR, 0.32

                    p less than 0.0001

                    When adjusted for residual variables, reduction in mortality rate was 70%

                    There was a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate

                    44 in the ivermectin group

                    99 in non ivermectin users

                    After adjustment for residual variables, reduction in hospitalization rate was 67%

                    p less than 0.0001
                    Conclusion

                    In this large study, regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.

          • 美国死了100万，加拿大死了43万？如果是这样，美国人口是加拿大的近10倍，死亡人数仅2.3倍而不是10倍，加拿大成人疫苗率90%以上，美国60%，说明疫苗打得多，死亡反而更惊人？希望你核实数据再发言。 -**🥑; 2022-12-24 (#15051455@0) +9
            • 数字概念不错,赞1个 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-24 (#15051481@0) +1
            • 赞两个👍 -moonhalf(石室矢); 2022-12-24 (#15051636@0) +2
            • 美国死了110万，加拿大只死了4.8万，加拿大成人疫苗率90%以上，美国60%，说明疫苗保护防死亡的效果显著。顺便说一句，楼主链接中“研究”文章的数据很有问题，漏洞百出，而且图一与图二有矛盾。另外感染数量本来也是不可靠的，若是反疫苗人写的，很易造假。 -viewing(viewing); 2022-12-24 (#15051935@0) +5
              • 人口校正后美国多死了2.3倍的人 -xiaozuiba(xiaozuiba); 2022-12-25 (#15052107@0)
                • 正确。校正人口，就是按相同人口基数，美国多死了2.3倍，上面那位把你的话搞反了。曲线：每百万人进ICU，和每十万人死亡曲线： -viewing(viewing); 2022-12-25 {657} (#15052167@0)


                  :

                  :


              • 新冠死亡统计方式是有问题的，它的初衷是为了推疫苗，造成民众恐慌和对疫苗依赖心理，这种方式到最后，却形成反噬，凸现疫苗的无效，这叫搬石头砸自己的脚。美国没疫苗死了30多万，有疫苗后死了70多万，加拿大没疫苗死了2万，有疫苗后死了接近3万，总共5万. -**🥑; 2022-12-25 (#15052254@0) +3
              • 2020年底，每百万人口死亡美国1026，加拿大406，相差2.5倍。2022年底，美国3222，加拿大1277，还是相差2.5倍。疫苗打多打少没任何区别。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-25 {399} (#15052301@0) +3


                :

                :

              • 图1比较的是有没有得过新冠的人， -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-12-25 {524} (#15053066@0)
                后续的感染率，而图2比较的是有没有打过疫苗的人，后续的感染率，哪里矛盾了？论文作者可是挺疫苗的，被说成反疫苗的就太冤枉了。


                :

                :

More Topics

  • 喝刚榨出的有机蔬菜汁，水果汁对身体有很大好处。下面这篇文章提到了吃新鲜的蔬菜、
  • 看到枫树叶的帖子，回想一下四年前的情况，IMHO, 太荒诞了。不过，那一场，也让我悟识到不少
  • 土豆违法启动紧急状态对付反强制疫苗，
  • 新冠疫情时期发生了很多人类史上前所未有的事件，也是第一次全世界几乎所有的人都被强迫打没有经过严格监督下快速出世的疫苗。全世界专业人士还在monitor事件导致的可能的影响，为什么很多网友害怕讨论并不让大家在这里讨论？为什么呢？🤔
  • 大家探讨着疫苗的种种问题，有听医生说的，有发生在身边，有看研究论文的，并没有针对任何网友，但为什么每次总有疫苗好爱者恶狠狠地生气呢？没有人强迫你们不要打疫苗呀，要打现在还可以打呀，难道真的有后遗症这么一说？🤔
    • 枫下论坛主坛 /  枫下家园 /  医药保健