Did the López-Medina Study in Cali Colombia Ivermectin Trial Include Protocol Deviations and 38 Switched Ivermectin and Placebo Doses?
Why did the mainstream media (e.g. CNN and New York Times) also pounce so fast on the story when so many positive trials have gone by without any interest? Critics of the positive result studies involving ivermectin have tossed indiscriminate criticism involving study design and study quality. Not surprisingly, none of the issues or concerns, including potential conflict of interest with direct pharmaceutical industry payments during the study raise even a word. And what about protocol violations in the study, including 38 switched ivermectin and placebo doses, failure of blinding and other considerations, such as the fact that there are widespread over the counter (OTC) ivermectin sales in the same city where the trial site is located. With nearly identical adverse events in both the ivermectin and control groups, just a number of questions mount. Why aren’t the experts out there critiquing this study? Is the Ivermectin finding in this case serving some underlying pecuniary interest?
Referenced Link: Here
Ivermectin for COVID-19 in Peru: 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths, p=.002 for effect by state, then 13-fold increase after ivermectin use restricted:
On May 8, 2020, Peru’s Ministry of Health approved ivermectin (IVM), a drug of Nobel Prize-honored distinction, for inpatient and outpatient treatment of COVID-19. As IVM treatments proceeded in that nation of 33 million residents, excess deaths decreased 14-fold over four months through December 1, 2020, consistent with clinical benefits of IVM for COVID-19 found in several RCTs. But after IVM use was sharply restricted under a new president, excess deaths then increased 13-fold.