Even the author admitted it. The media and medical establishment did not read the study carefully. They seize on anything that supports the narrative and fail to look at the study critically.
I think you've muddied the waters and sowed doubt - you're peddling a conspiracy that is hard to believe, and ignoring studies that contradict what you say (eg the likely fraud that Pierre Cory too has acknowledged in the Egypt study). Ed's statement "if we had continued randomizing a few hundred more patients, it would have likely been significant" is very wrong and unscientific, the whole point of the notion of statistical significance is to say that the final result if sample size is increased can be trusted to fall within the given range (19 times out of 20), and not to narrow around the point obtained with the smaller sample size... It's unfortunate that you're reaching so many people with this, I know I'm just a drop in the ocean here - but just as you try to sow doubt in science and use/abuse the notion of fake news and disinformation, I am using this comment section here to call you out on fake news.
"Evidence based medicine has been corrupted by corporate interests, failed regulation, and commercialisation of academia...Until this problem is corrected, evidence based medicine will remain an illusion."
Alex Berenson, if he was a man of integrity, would actually sit down with the leading physicians battling COVID and talk about Ivermectin. It looked like he mocked Joe Rogan in his interview. He’s lost a lot of credibility in my mind.
I think it is amazing that we can no longer trust the scientific narrative in America. It seems the statistics are always skewed. Any of these trials that delayed treatment skewed the results initially...because that is the only answer no matter what they are testing.
By the way, I think I made the comment on B-Inden being gone within 3 months after he let the cat out of the bag last month about the NWO bring driven. Think he'll last a whole 3 months?
Expedience of treatment (first few days) and the use of zinc with Ivermectin (appropriate dosage) of 500 control/500 placebo. Would love to see a study like that...
Steve, Do you know why Dr. Richard Fleming keeps insisting that ‘Ivermectin doesn’t work (at least the way many say it does)?’ Although he claims it does keep it from entering the nucleus.
It should be obvious by now why denial of the effectiveness of IVM and half a dozen other drugs is happening. Everyone involved in this travesty is implicated in the deaths of millions. You'll never get any of them to admit that, which is why they keep stonewalling.
I'm so glad you wrote this. I listened to someone discussing the problems with the study and the conclusions reported by the media and Alex B. I'm so puzzled by Alex's persistent denial of IVM efficacy. But it's just one smart guys opinion in a large group of smart people who study it and treat people with great success. I look forward to Dr. Kory's analysis. I do wish he'd have a discussion with Ed. Maybe when his emotions settle a little that will happen.
"there was a 17% reduction in hospitalizations that would be significant if more patients were added."
This is circular. You're assuming that we'd see the same 17% reduction with more patients. Maybe we would -- which would be great news -- but maybe the 17% reduction in the current cohort was purely by chance and would be completely washed out in a larger trial.
To take a simple example, suppose I want to test if my coin is biased. I flip it 10 times and get 6 heads and 4 tails. 60% heads seems like a bias, but it's clearly insignificant with that amount of data. It would be absurd to then claim "But wait, if I just had more data then the result would be significant!" What's more likely is that I wouldn't see 60% heads with more data.
Yes, the study was (apparently) underpowered to significantly demonstrate a 17% effect, but is that really the effect size it should have been designed to look for? Arbitrarily small effects require arbitrarily large amounts of data.
I think that you might be 'that guy', Steve. Or maybe Dr. Kory... She's got several pieces up on her about page - that look suspiciously like PAID PROPAGANDA from Fauci and the Biden Regime's HHS (since we now KNOW that they do pay for that kind of Black Propaganda, Disinformation and Gaslighting - to the tune of Billions in tax dollars).
If I claim that I can make straw into gold by doing X, Y and Z then the only way you can disprove that is to do X,Y and Z. You cannot say that straw cannot be made into gold by doing X and Z. yet this is what so many of these studies do!! It makes me apoplectic.
I can just imagine Dr. Kory's reaction. Yet another bad and/or misinterpreted study about Ivermectin. Last I heard, he was getting pretty worn out having to read, digest, and critique these things time and time again. I know I am. Here it is to you deniers for the umpteenth time: the viral phase of Covid is about a week long and that's what IVM and Hydroxy are good for, so you have to take them early. The earlier, the better. That's always been the claim. Got it?
I think you've muddied the waters and sowed doubt - you're peddling a conspiracy that is hard to believe, and ignoring studies that contradict what you say (eg the likely fraud that Pierre Cory too has acknowledged in the Egypt study). Ed's statement "if we had continued randomizing a few hundred more patients, it would have likely been significant" is very wrong and unscientific, the whole point of the notion of statistical significance is to say that the final result if sample size is increased can be trusted to fall within the given range (19 times out of 20), and not to narrow around the point obtained with the smaller sample size... It's unfortunate that you're reaching so many people with this, I know I'm just a drop in the ocean here - but just as you try to sow doubt in science and use/abuse the notion of fake news and disinformation, I am using this comment section here to call you out on fake news.
Good for the Journal of Irreproducible Results...except they'd do it all over again. Thanks Steve!
The illusion of evidence based medicine. https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o702
"Evidence based medicine has been corrupted by corporate interests, failed regulation, and commercialisation of academia...Until this problem is corrected, evidence based medicine will remain an illusion."
Alex Berenson, if he was a man of integrity, would actually sit down with the leading physicians battling COVID and talk about Ivermectin. It looked like he mocked Joe Rogan in his interview. He’s lost a lot of credibility in my mind.
I think it is amazing that we can no longer trust the scientific narrative in America. It seems the statistics are always skewed. Any of these trials that delayed treatment skewed the results initially...because that is the only answer no matter what they are testing.
By the way, I think I made the comment on B-Inden being gone within 3 months after he let the cat out of the bag last month about the NWO bring driven. Think he'll last a whole 3 months?
Expedience of treatment (first few days) and the use of zinc with Ivermectin (appropriate dosage) of 500 control/500 placebo. Would love to see a study like that...
Steve, Do you know why Dr. Richard Fleming keeps insisting that ‘Ivermectin doesn’t work (at least the way many say it does)?’ Although he claims it does keep it from entering the nucleus.
It should be obvious by now why denial of the effectiveness of IVM and half a dozen other drugs is happening. Everyone involved in this travesty is implicated in the deaths of millions. You'll never get any of them to admit that, which is why they keep stonewalling.
That is exactly what I determined after scanning the study.
I'm so glad you wrote this. I listened to someone discussing the problems with the study and the conclusions reported by the media and Alex B. I'm so puzzled by Alex's persistent denial of IVM efficacy. But it's just one smart guys opinion in a large group of smart people who study it and treat people with great success. I look forward to Dr. Kory's analysis. I do wish he'd have a discussion with Ed. Maybe when his emotions settle a little that will happen.
If Ed Mills is on the up and up, then why the deceptive title? Did Andrew Owen strike again?
"there was a 17% reduction in hospitalizations that would be significant if more patients were added."
This is circular. You're assuming that we'd see the same 17% reduction with more patients. Maybe we would -- which would be great news -- but maybe the 17% reduction in the current cohort was purely by chance and would be completely washed out in a larger trial.
To take a simple example, suppose I want to test if my coin is biased. I flip it 10 times and get 6 heads and 4 tails. 60% heads seems like a bias, but it's clearly insignificant with that amount of data. It would be absurd to then claim "But wait, if I just had more data then the result would be significant!" What's more likely is that I wouldn't see 60% heads with more data.
Yes, the study was (apparently) underpowered to significantly demonstrate a 17% effect, but is that really the effect size it should have been designed to look for? Arbitrarily small effects require arbitrarily large amounts of data.
Someone needs to CONFRONT and CROSS EXAMINE this BigPfharma/Biden Regime STOOGE...
https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxda8q/the-ivermectin-guys-whole-thing-has-really-fallen-apart
I think that you might be 'that guy', Steve. Or maybe Dr. Kory... She's got several pieces up on her about page - that look suspiciously like PAID PROPAGANDA from Fauci and the Biden Regime's HHS (since we now KNOW that they do pay for that kind of Black Propaganda, Disinformation and Gaslighting - to the tune of Billions in tax dollars).
If I claim that I can make straw into gold by doing X, Y and Z then the only way you can disprove that is to do X,Y and Z. You cannot say that straw cannot be made into gold by doing X and Z. yet this is what so many of these studies do!! It makes me apoplectic.
Oh boy. Alex is going to get his panties in a wad again.
I can just imagine Dr. Kory's reaction. Yet another bad and/or misinterpreted study about Ivermectin. Last I heard, he was getting pretty worn out having to read, digest, and critique these things time and time again. I know I am. Here it is to you deniers for the umpteenth time: the viral phase of Covid is about a week long and that's what IVM and Hydroxy are good for, so you have to take them early. The earlier, the better. That's always been the claim. Got it?