Many TrialSite Network members have sent in numerous questions, issues and concerns about the recent Cali Colombia ivermectin study led by Eduardo López-Medina, MD, MSc, and published by JAMA. 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?
The study, known as “López-Medina et al., Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial” published in JAMA, 2021 was recently taken by authors David Scheim, Jennifer A. Hibberd and Juan Chamie-Quintero.
Follow the link to learn more. If the authors are correct, with actual protocol violations, 38 switched protocol violations and, more how could the JAMA reviewers not have caught this? Where is the news media shouting about design quality? Read the entire piece and determine yourself what is the situation.