There have been dozens of studies done on it, because there is so much demand in the developing world for something that is cheaper and easier to access than a monoclonaanic body cocktail or even the vaccines. In so far, its being completely inconclusive. Even the biggest men analyses have said, we've got some evidence it works, some evidence it doesnt. We really can't say at this point. Some countries around the world, specifically in south america, have decided that there is enough evidence to suggest that this could be effective.
Ivermectin is a cheap, widely available, anti-parasitic drug that has been proposed by many as a possible treatment for COVID-19. Dozens of trials have been started, but results have been far from clear, with inconsistent results further confused by high profile paper retractions. Nonetheless many countries have recommended the use of Ivermectin, despite WHO advice to the contrary.
Now a group of researchers have found suspect data in another influential paper which claimed a Ivermectin caused a 90% reduction in fatality. The paper, published at the end of 2020, has since been withdrawn pending investigation. In this episode of Coronapod we ask what this might mean for Ivermectin, and what's next for the controversial drug.
Correction: at 2:53 when discussing two discredited studies, we mistakenly say that the papers say "both drugs worked really well". In fact, this retracted study from the Lancet claimed that the drug hydroxychloroquine caused harm. We apologise for any confusion. More information on the scandal surrounding these papers can be found here.
News:Flawed ivermectin preprint highlights challenges of COVID drug studies
News: Latin America’s embrace of an unproven COVID treatment is hindering drug trials
Coronapod: The Surgisphere scandal that rocked coronavirus drug research
Subscribe to Nature Briefing, an unmissable daily round-up of science news, opinion and analysis free in your inbox every weekday.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.