米国NIH对伊维菌素VS Covid19 的报告
https://bit.ly/3bFBWOk
直接挑几段来翻
Recommendation
There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel
(the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the
treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and
well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific,
evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of
COVID-19.
目前没有足够证据可以说明
伊维菌素能够治疗肺炎
需要更好的实验公信力的临床实验
才能知道伊维菌素有没有用
Rationale
... However, most of these studies had incomplete information and significant
methodological limitations, which make it difficult to exclude common causes
of bias. These limitations include:
这些实验很多时候会有方法上的限制
所以没办法厘清因果关系
这些限制包括
1. The sample size of most of the trials was small.
样本太少
2. Various doses and schedules of ivermectin were used.
伊维菌素用的剂量或是方式不同
3. Some of the randomized controlled trials were open-label studies in which
neither the participants nor the investigators were blinded to the treatment
arms.
并不是双盲测试
4. Patients received various concomitant medications (e.g., doxycycline,
hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, zinc, corticosteroids) in addition to
ivermectin or the comparator drug. This confounded the assessment of the
efficacy or safety of ivermectin.
病患同时用很多药所以也不确定伊维菌素本身的效果
5. The severity of COVID-19 in the study participants was not always well
described.
到底实验中的病患病情多严重通常都没提
6. The study outcome measures were not always clearly defined.
实验的结果通常没有很清楚的定义
另外附上Table 2C
Ivermectin: Selected Clinical Data
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2c/
一张临床实验的简单比较表
就是一堆伊维菌素对Covid19的相关临床试验
包括方法结果跟限制
看完大概就有基本的概念了
连本废物56文组都看得懂
乡民应该没啥问题的
就懒得翻了
说真的拉
感觉就是可能有效但是证据不足
也不太知道到底要吃多少剂量才有用
如果你有很好的保护
大概没必要冒这个风险
可以先等等
如果啥都没有大概也只能死马当活马医
大Ca4John拉
※ 引述《newwu (说不定我一生涓滴废文)》之铭言：
: ※ 引述《Atcwpp (ATpp)》之铭言：
: : 但陈宜民说，伊维菌素的相关资料是动态性地不断增加，
: : 转捩点是2、3个月前日本Tokyo Medical Association（东京都医师会）
: : 做了一个600人临床试验，得到很好的结果，
: : 之后便建议日本民众每人随身自备4颗伊维菌素。
: 看来两三个月前这份试验很重要
: 可是
: 我怎么找都找不到这六百人试验的结果
: 网络上查到两组日本的试验计画
: 一组120+120 照计画应该最近有结果了 可是没看到
: 一组500+500
: 只有那个医师会会长放话要政府用
: 我去原原PO一直贴的那个网站看最近3个月的结果
: 我看到的600人资料只有
: 一个澳洲的号称初步结果
: 那么重要的引用
: 来源呢？
: 还有原原PO这两句是认真的吗
: : 是因为他脸书贴了几十个他亲自和印度等地前线医生教授沟通的说明，
: : 如果评估药物讲究的是实证，我觉得王副院长的作法比拿几篇论文来驳要确实，