Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, a drug repurposed for COVID-19 that almost certainly doesn't work but is still being touted as a "miracle cure" by quacks, grifters, and political ideologues. Are the data supporting it all fraud?
Last month, I discussed why ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine:, basically a “miracle cure” that isn’t. Since then, conspiracy theories about its being "suppressed" have continued to bump heads with the science showing that, at the very best, evidence for its efficacy is very weak and, at the worst, the drug is useless.
What does the best evidence tell us about hydroxychloroquine and dexamethasone?
Despite the accumulating negative evidence showing that hydroxychloroquine doesn't work against COVID-19, activists continue to promote it as a way out of the pandemic. This week, the AAPS and a Yale epidemiologist joined the fray with embarrassingly bad arguments.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, there hasn't just been a pandemic of coronavirus-caused disease. There's also a pandemic of misinformation and bad science. It turns out that doctors today are just as prone as doctors 100 years ago during the 1918-19 influenza pandemic to bypass science-based medicine in their desperation to treat patients.
Hydroxychloroquine is being promoted as a treatment or prevention for COVID-19 based on questionable evidence. The long-term impact of hydroxychloroquine on the retina introduces another reason to be cautious about its use outside of clinical trials.