https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2789362
@Strychnine meant to reply to you .
Patients who required ventilation
Ivermectin 4... ( 1.4% )
Non ivermectin.. 10 ( 4% )
Patients who died
Ivermectin 3.. ( 1.2% )
Non ivermectin 10. ( 4% )
ICU admissions
Ivermectin 6
Non ivermectin 8
You'll have to read through because the conclusion of the study is that ivermectin doesn't prevent " severe " covid.
I'd love to know the definition of " severe " to them tho. Because it certainly made a difference on deaths and ventilation.
Was a random trial of 500 approx . No deaths due to adverse events. ( 44 adverse events 33 in the ivermectin group.) But bare in mind they used a high risk group for the trials.
Most adverse events were diarrhoea. 5 were considered serious adverse effects. 4 in ivermectin group 1 in control. 2 myocardial issues, 1 anaemia 1 shock. Doesn't say if these occured in vaccinated or unvaccinated individuals.
51% of the trial were double vaccinated.
Among the 13 deaths ( 3 ivermectin 10 control )
9 were deemed covid pneumonia and 4 died from sepsis ( all in control group )
This was a group that was considered high risk for severe covid complications. All up 2.7% death rate for the entire study... 10 who didn't receive ivermectin... 3 who did.
It's clever wording to claim " makes no difference in preventing severe issues ".. when in their own data it's proven it lowers the chance of death and ventilation... ( not severe symptoms somehow)
It's also worth noting
Limitations = from the authors
Our study has limitations. First, the open-label trial design might contribute to the underreporting of adverse events in the control group while overestimating the drug effects of ivermectin..