Rubbish meta-analysis on ivermectin from Peru swaps the arm data from the key Niaee study to conclude that it does not work.
We put it back in the right order for you and ivermectin works like a charm again (66% lower risk of death, p=.031).
medrxiv.org/content/10.110
スレッド
会話
返信先: さん
Niaee's original data below.
The hysterical Peruvian hatred of ivermectin in some quarters led to the typical sort of mistakes made when the prejudiced conclusion is prespecified.
Let's see how the authors rectify their paper and recommend ivermectin now
.
9
83
291
返信を表示
返信を表示
このツイートは、ツイートの作成者により削除されました。詳細はこちら
Who knows, but Uttar Pradesh (same population as Brazil) has used it for the last 10 months and has 94% less deaths than Brazil.
Brazil has had patchy use, India has given given recommendation to use early at home.
94% reduction is deaths is a LOT!
hindustantimes.com/lucknow/luckno
1
10
22
返信を表示
返信先: さん
Look up FLCCC. They have many answers from ppl taking ivermectin and other medicin. Most ppl get well! What is better proof??
1
1
作為的ですよね…
2
13
このツイートは、ツイートの作成者により削除されました。詳細はこちら
It hasn't been censored, the authors seem to have published a new version. To see the comments, click "View comments on earlier versions of this paper".
2
1
返信を表示
返信先: さん
Est-ce réel ? Ce jeune homme a besoin d'une aide psychologique, non ? Comment peut-on en arriver là ?
返信先: さん
Good catch! How ridiculous..and I bet this study gets promoted by some people to say ivm has mixed results.. 
1
さらに返信を表示する(攻撃的な内容を含む可能性のある返信も表示する)
表示