Ivermectin Study Reveals Fantastic Results: 100% of 60 Patients Better in an Average of Just Under 6 Days

Ivermectin Study Reveals Fantastic Results 100% of 60 Patients Better in an Average of Just Under 6 Days

Recently, TrialSite News reported on a study sponsored in Bangladesh by Upazila Health & Family Planning Officer’s (UHFPO) Office, Chakoria, Cox’ Bazar and Abu Taiub Mohammad Mohiuddin Chowdhury, First Affiliated Hospital Xi’an Jiaotong University. The observational study was conducted from May 2 to June 5, 2020. The principal investigators observed 181 patients who tested positive for COVID-19. The Research team recently shared the results via preprint server and ResearchGate. The study team concluded that concerning the treatment outcome, adverse effect, and safety, the Ivermectin and Doxycycline combination was superior to the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin therapy in the case of mild to moderate degree of COVID-19 patients. Although both treatment regimens were observed to be effective for this study, the Ivermectin treatment was superior.

The Study

Sponsored by  Upazila Health & Family Planning Officer’s (UHFPO) Office, Chakoria, Cox’s Bazar in collaboration with Abu Taiub Mohammad Mohiuddin Chowdhury, First Affiliated Hospital Xi’an Jiaotong University, China, this study was conducted for just over a month from May to June 2020. The investigators observed 181 patients who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT PCR undertaken at Cox’s Bazar Medical College. The participants were observed carefully for family history and any comorbidities that could disqualify them for this study. As it turned out, 42 participants had comorbid conditions that could impact recovery time; 14 participants were unwilling to participate in the study and 9 participants failed to participate (3 from group A and 6 from group B) for follow up sample collection so these were excluded. Following exclusion, 116 patients were included with mild to moderate degree of illness with normal or near-normal chest radiograph and Oxygen Saturation more than 95% were included in this study. All the patients enrolled in the study were treated as an outpatient protocol.


The study patients were divided into two groups including (A) (n=60): Ivermectin 200 µgm/kg single dose and Doxycycline 100 mg BID for 10 days. Note this is very similar to Dr. Tarek Alam’s successful hospital approved protocol study at the Bangladesh Medical College. Group (B) (n=56): Hydroxychloroquine 400mg first day then 200mg BID for 9 days plus Azithromycin 500mg daily for 5 days.

Standard of Care

Additionally the principal investigators and staff treated the patients with any fever, headache, cough, myalgia, and other complaints. The participants were advised for self-isolation, proper nutrition, hydration and a sanitary environment.

Treatment Monitoring

The team evaluated the patients every 2 days starting from the 5th day (Asymptomatic patients) or the 2nd non-symptomatic day from the first day of the drug intake by PCR study or nasopharyngeal and throat swab in each group. Regular contracts were maintained to find out the adverse or side effects of the therapy.

The Results

Much like the results from Dr. Rajter at Broward County, Florida, United States and Dr. Tarek Alam, Bangladesh Medical College, the results here were quite positive.

Group A, the Ivermectin group, experienced a 100% recovery rate, with a mean symptomatic recovery duration of 5.93 days and negative PCR was on 8.93 days. The Group B results (Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin) was 96.36%, 6.99 days and 9.33 days respectively. 

55.10% of the patients in Group A (Ivermectin) gained symptomatic recovery on the 5th day. A mild degree of adverse effect was noted by 31.67% of patients; lethargy in 14 (23.3%), nausea in 11 (18.3%) and occasional vertigo in 7 (11.66%) of patients.

In the meantime, Group B experienced some degree of adverse effects; 13 (23.21%) mild type of blurring of vision and headache; 22 (39.2%) increased lethargy and dizziness, 10 (17.85%) occasional palpitation, and 9 (16.07%) experienced nausea and vomiting.


The Upazila Health & Family Planning Officer’s (UHFPO) Office, Chakoria, Cox’s Bazar in collaboration with Abu Taiub Mohammad Mohiuddin Chowdhury, First Affiliated Hospital Xi’an Jiaotong University in China has come to the conclusion that in regards to treatment outcome, adverse effect and safety, the Ivermectin and Doxycycline combination is superior to Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin therapy in the case of mild to moderate degree of COVID-19 patients. The Bangladeshi and Chinese team found that both treatments were effective in this study. However, the Ivermectin results were superior to Hydroxychloroquine.


This controlled observational study in Bangladesh produces some relatively compelling results. Patients tested positive for COVID-19 are taking a combination of Ivermectin and Doxycycline with a 100% success rate. On average, the mean symptomatic recovery was 5.93 days with a disease that can stretch for two to three weeks.

TrialSite News has interviewed Dr. Jean-Jaques Rajter, MD, of Broward County Health who conducted an off-label, county health approved protocol. On June 9th TrialSite News reported on the results: the team found that Ivermectin was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19 patients in this carefully controlled off label observational study. Interestingly Dr. Rajter hasn’t found too many eager peer review publications to publish the results despite the fact that a major U.S. County Health Board approved the off label use observational study.

Moreover, TrialSite News interviewed Dr. Tarek Alum who reported “astounding results” for the hospital approved protocol at the Bangladesh Medical College.

At the Intersection of COVID-19, Drugs, Money & Power: The Complex

TrialSite News agrees with WHO and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that an important next step for acceptance of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 would include results from randomized controlled trials. And a number of them have commenced.

One of the at least 31 Ivermectin clinical trials has been completed from the University of Baghdad. Principal Investigator Faiq Gorial is trying to get the study results published. The outcome is not clear yet. Dr.Eli Schwartz, a prominent key opinion leader out of the renowned Sheba Medical Center, will complete an Ivermectin randomized controlled trial by September/October 2020. Dr. Schwartz, a brilliant physician and researcher, has been bullish on the prospect for the anti-parasitic drug targeting the novel coronavirus. The University of Kentucky Ivermectin study is now recruiting while the Johns Hopkins University Ivermectin study for whatever reason appears to still not be recruiting.

But the complete lack of intellectual interest in the Ivermectin movement, including reputable hospital protocol approved, off-label, controlled observational studies, raises suspicions of a set point of view.

That TrialSIte News has spoken with several physicians around the world in combination with outcomes from these carefully run observational studies starts to make the team wonder if there isn’t some institutional bias against this particular alternative approach. There appears to be a strange lack of any intellectual curiosity on the part of the “establishment” we refer to as a pharma-government-academia industrial complex or “complex.”

While intriguing movements such as Ivermectin with growing data points of success are completely ignored,  Remdesivir is blindly embraced: although the drug hasn’t really demonstrated success anywhere else (e.g. not for Ebola) and shown only some positive results, they certainly aren’t any better than the apparent Avigan (Favipiravir) results, which have led to approvals targeting COVID-19 in Russia, China and India. Bizarre given the U.S. government injected $138+ million into Favipiravir just eight years ago for the exact scenario that is now unfolding: a global pandemic.

Rather, the “complex” pushes on with remdesivir to the point that no one seemed to mind when standard protocol was ignored when just weeks before the clinical trial’s conclusion, the primary endpoint was literally changed so that the study could still be relevant. The primary outcome measure established in the remdesivir protocol was chucked last minute to save the faith. That bold and seemingly brazen move raised red flags among most critical thinkers. Perhaps that is how much power is now concentrated in “complex” circles.

The world of drug development, involving large biopharmaceutical companies, major academic medical centers, and regulators perhaps becomes too cozy. Over the coming months, TrialSite News will certainly look for chinks in the armor of the “complex.” 

Lead Research/Investigator for Bangladesh Study & Jiaotong University Study

  • Abu Taiub Mohammed Mohiuddin Chowdhury, MD, First Affiliated Hospital Xi’an Jiaotong University
  • Mohammad Shahbaz, MBBS, MCPS, Upazila Health & Family Planning Officer’s (UHFPO) Office, Chakoria, Cox’s Bazar

Call to Action:  Consumers and professionals monitoring COVID-19 therapies should look carefully into any subtle, or not so subtle, institutional biases in favor of expensive, more complex treatments over basic, economical treatments that can treat much of the world. 

Source- ResearchGate


  1. Hi,
    I am 79 years old and vulnerable. I am happy to see a treatment. I hope that medicare will cover the hefty cost. What testing must be done? When will it hit the US market?

  2. Agedecemos a esta fuente por dsr a conocer este esrudio prospectivo y controlado en Formas leves y moderadas..Considero que lo ideal es usar Ivermectina en esas fases y ahora habrá que reunir una muestra mayor, procurar repetirlo el esudio en pacientes internados.
    Hallamos que Ivermectina es un milagro..y acá en Trinidad Bolivia..con una poblacion de 120 mil habitantes con curva en ascenso..de morbilidad y mortalidad.. se optó por medicar a la gente en casa..resultado..la dusminucion fantástica de estos numeros en corto tiempo.
    Sugerimos su publicacion en una fuente de llegada que publican estos estudios..
    Ivermectina es económica y ya probó en esrudio hecho por los Australianos su efevtivad reduciendo la Mortalidad..en los pactes.

  3. Muchas gracias y felicitaciones por su enfoque, no creo que sean idealistas. La humanidad necesita hoy más que nunca gente con ética y con una sólida formación científica para enfrentar a los monstruos monetarios que asechan a la humanidad.

  4. I guess you heard that the US government just bought up most of the world supply of Remdesivir. I guess that should give us a good idea of where this is all going. Everything Donald Trump touches turns to s–t.
    Wish us luck in the November election.

  5. If someone speaks Portuguese, watch Dr Lucy Kerr on YouTube relating her fantastic success rate with ivermectin. By word of mouth it’s more and more prescribed in Brazil.
    She also says Covid is not a big issue in sub-saharan Africa: ivermectin is given regularly in large scale as prophylaxis against parasites.
    It seems the boss at WHO, himself from Ethyopia, is unaware his country of 110 MM inhabitants has been largely spared from Covid : something like 100 casualties… See how Big Pharma is infiltrated in the WHO?
    It should be a scandal! But so far…
    It seems it’s really not a good thing to promote the use of ivermectin: it’s cheap and has no serious collateral effects… better promote Gilead’s remdesivir at $2400,i.e, out of reach for most of the world population…

    1. Yves thanks for visiting TrialSite News and we appreciate this tip!
      We have heard of Dr. Kerr and will look into this. We recently interviewed Dr. Redondo who mentioned there could be a Ivermectin association to treatment in Africa. As we have said there is a complex of intertwined business, professional and social networks–e.g it could be those that work in biopharma, regulatory authorities, NGOs, governments, etc. You know we have developed systems for clinical research in the pharma companies and they are some great people there that want to make a real difference. As a collective the corporation must drive shareholder value otherwise those that have good jobs won’t have jobs. So sometimes the various actors out there must build, develop or evolve a narrative that makes sense for how they must see the world. Our point is that there are systemic forces at play. In a market-like economy the best way to drive different behavior is to get educated, get activated and get engaged to let whoever is selling medicines that they had better look at some other options. We assure all if enough people make noise you will see companies move to satisfy that need. These companies need to build positive brand and one of them will get it; seize the moment to differentiate from competitors. Perhaps we are idealistic here at TrialSite News but we are believers in the inherent good of most people so always take the high road, be open to new data (you never know we could find out that we were in the wrong direction and keep positive mindset no matter how bad it gets because life is short so let’s make it has sweet as possible. But let’s raise some hell as well!

  6. If I understood correctly, people with comorbidities like obesity, coronary diseases, pulmonary problems were not eligible to participate of this trial. I would like to ask what is the meaning of make a Ivermectin medical trial without knowing if it can be useful to people with pré-diseases conditions?

    1. Frank we are not certain. We know that in the protocol they precluded those groups. Probably because what we are learning is that it is ideally used early on to stop mild cases from progressing. Now we don’t know if one has select co-morbidities are they precluded based on these emerging networks of protocols. But we most certainly will look into this for you.

  7. Hope we find a cure fast, too many are dying. Perhaps also many more people will come to know Jehovah God! Psalms 83:18

  8. COVID-19 es labil a antibióticos, ceftriaxona en dos días da excelentes resultados combinado con Ivermectina, con menos efectos secundarios y a menor costo que doxiciclina, he manejado pacientes con saturación de oxígeno d 50 agregando dexametasona por 3 días con mejoría en 48 horas logrando saturación de oxígeno hasta de 90 % sin los efectos secundarios aquí reportados, a más bajo costo, los pacientes en 2 días ya tienen apetito y mejoría clínica notoria, claro, también laboratorialmente hablando hay mejoría.

  9. These authors need to get their work out on the preprint servers, good or bad results, and TrialSite must keep up the pressure and either make all these studies available on your site, or compile a catalog of links so they can be easily accessed. No one can ever forget the tobacco industry hearing testimony and the power they had over the process. It should come as no surprise that the big pharma has even a tighter grasp. Heck, Merck, who makes Ivermectin is being quiet, what is going on? Easy, safe, available, effective and inexpensive cures will not make any money in this human tradgedy so $1000 a dose useless Remdesivir is what you get.

    1. Hi Walt.We are committed to the cause of transparency and accessibility and thank you for being part of this growing network. Btw Gilead has come out with pricing and it is $2,340 per treatment. It is on the lower end of the ICER recommendation so they are being careful how they price. They offered to give 1.5 million doses away–treatment for about 140K. But that is less than 10%of all cases in the U.S. and the cases are going up. Moreover Europe approved as well (but more constraints there). They have rapidly inked a handful of deals in India, Pakistan, Egypt and elsewhere. Their key:keep the competition at bay to monetize the situation–they have the potential to pull over $1b per year while this nasty pathogen hangs around. But importantly, low cost competitors must be destroyed…. We are publishing a piece on remdesivir today–stay tuned.

    2. We must get profit as a *motive* out of the pharmaceutical industry.

      Profit is good and necessary – I’m all for profit and generally a free-market proponent.

      But there’s a huge difference between competition in automobiles, tvs, air travel, cellphones – consumer products – and medicine.

      Discretionary products; products you *choose* to buy – and products you *need* to buy; you *must* buy; or die without.

      When a free market drives competition and innovation, provides better products, and lower consumer prices – thats good.

      But that doesn’t happen in the pharmaceutical and medical industry.

      Perhaps it’s because people will – and must – pay for some medicines simply to survive, so companies can raise the price astronomically and people will still pay it (or die). (e.g., insulin)

      Perhaps it’s because evil greedy nasty people gravitate towards making and selling drugs.

      Perhaps it’s because of overwhelming focus on quarterly earnings and quick returns on investment.

      I don’t know, and not sure I really care what the reason is – unless we need to know to fix the problem.

      We need the pharmaceutical and medical industries to become socially oriented, rather than simply profit-driven. To make a fair profit and pay their workers well. But also recognize making medicine widely available is more important than simply more money for the CEO.

      It’s extremely expensive to bring a drug to market (on the order of half a billion dollars). The successful drug’s profit has to pay for many drugs that failed.

      That’s not profit simply for profit’s sake. That’s simply balancing expenses vs. revenue.

      Maximizing medical care; making it widely available is a Good Thing. The costs to do that are reasonable.

      Maximizing profit – even at the expense of people’s lives – that is greed; it is avarice.

  10. The University of Washington in Washington State has expressed some interest in conducting clinical trial of Ivermectin as a primary preventative measure against contracting COVID-19. Contact me, and I will provide a few names of individuals at the University of Washington to speak with about this.

    1. I think using the anti viral for this Covid-19 seems to be one of the complimentary adjunct but not the alternative therapy . Since the Covid virus strain is different in a different states or countries.
      , and part of the studies are done in a different places, people start thinking that an anti virus are sensitive to a certain strain but not specific for just any Covid-19 . I think any large amount of study and publication is worth reading and trying it .
      Thank you very much .

      1. I know all of you want to find a good cure for covid-19. It’s a great blessing to see the entire world is united.We are grateful for the Scientists, Doctors, Researchers et de love you.That shows you’re concerned .Personallu, I appreciate that.May Holly Spirit be within you , guide you and tell you what finally to do in order to be done with your Researchers as soon as possible in the name of our redeemer and Savior Jesus Christ .Amen

      2. A ivermectina atua no transportador comum dos vírus, não precisa se sequer tem contato com vírus, a ivermectina anula a capacidade a importina importar o vírus paar o núcleo, independe do formato ou cepa do vírus, os vírus rna precisam da importina quando ela é incapaz se transportar o vírus sendo ele um cubo, um círculo, um quadrado o vírus não consegue se replicar

    2. This just released preprint (http://ssrn.com/abstract=3636557) contextualizes a 50% decrease in mortality achieved by ivermectin (IVM) for 173 positively tested COVID-19 patients in four Florida hospitals. But the dose of IVM used in this study, 200 µg/kg, was minimal; IVM has been well tolerated in several clinical studies at ten times that dose or higher. To oversimplify for the sake of brevity and to indicate a sample dose (not medical advice):

      Based upon an identified biological mechanism, hemagglutination mediated by bindings of SARS-CoV-2 virus spike protein to the CD147 transmembrane receptor, IVM at a low dose of 200 µg/kg is sufficient to reverse key morbidities of COVID-19 for three or four days. But IVM at, for example, 500 µg/kg and then repeated at 250 µg/kg every three days (with azithromycin at 500 mg on day 1, 250 mg days 2-10) could be sufficient to competitively block viral bindings both to CD147 and ACE2 receptors, reversing morbidities of COVID-19 and also stopping viral replication.

      Although a case report, an n of 1, has limited scientific value and is not cited in this preprint, the dramatic outcome for a friend using higher dose IVM (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wNo8HV6iKFGJhPIF1nL4l0tT4uUFGqgC/view?usp=sharing) highlighted the validity of the Florida clinical study for me and motivated my intense focus on underlying biological mechanisms and the potential for dose-response gains as reported in this preprint. Feel free to contact me, [email protected], if you’d like additional details. – David