ANALYSIS | Rand Paul has a * very * crazy theory about ivermectin

Dr. Huerta: Ivermectin gives people false security 1:33

(CNN) -

Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist by training.

Specialty that has to do with the eyes.

Not with infectious diseases.

That fact hasn't stopped Paul from repeatedly challenging Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in congressional hearings.

Or openly questioning the effectiveness of the use of masks.

Or ask questions about the covid-19 vaccine.

The latest from Paul?

He insists that ivermectin, a drug that is rarely used in humans to treat diseases including intestinal parasites and lice, is not being studied as a possible treatment for coronavirus patients because of politics.

"Hatred for Trump has upset these people so much that they are not willing to study it objectively," Paul told a group in northern Kentucky late last week.

"So someone like me who is in the middle, I can't tell you why they won't study ivermectin. They won't study hydroxychloroquine without the stain of their hatred for Donald Trump."

To be clear: Paul is NOT in the "middle" when it comes to using ivermectin.

He is VERY on the end of the conspiracy theory spectrum.

• Right-wing media promoted ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, to treat COVID-19.

  FDA says it's not safe for humans

Let's start here: Ivermectin has been making national headlines lately because some elected officials (like Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin), as well as some Fox News hosts, have promoted it as a possible way to lessen the effects and severity of COVID. - 19.

advertising

That misinformation has led to an increase in people trying to get hold of the drug.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a health advisory Thursday, warning doctors and the public about the "rapid increase" in prescriptions of the drug. antiparasitic drug.

The race for ivermectin has been so frantic that some people are turning to taking the animal form of the drug, which is prescribed to cows and horses with worms. In Mississippi, 70% of recent calls to the state's poison control center were about the ingestion of ivermectin formulations intended for animals and purchased from livestock supply centers. Calls to the Alabama Poison Control Center regarding ivermectin have more than doubled lately.

Things got so bad that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tweeted about the use of ivermectin: "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, everyone. Enough".

In the article linked in the tweet, the FDA notes that "ivermectin is not an antiviral (a drug to treat viruses)" and that "you should never use animal drugs on yourself. Ivermectin preparations for animals are very different. of those approved for humans. "

• Why did the sale of ivermectin grow despite not working against covid-19?

(Footnote: These seem like things the FDA shouldn't have to say. But ...)

Why were supporters convinced that, contrary to science, ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19?

By a study that has now been discredited.

As

Nature

recently

wrote

:

"Throughout the pandemic, the deworming drug ivermectin has attracted a lot of attention, particularly in Latin America, as a potential way to treat COVID-19. But scientists say shocking recent revelations of widespread flaws in data from a pre-printed study, reporting that the drug greatly reduces COVID-19 deaths, blunts the promise of ivermectin, and highlights the challenges of investigating drug efficacy during a pandemic ... ".

"... The document summarized the results of a clinical trial that appeared to show that ivermectin can reduce death rates from COVID-19 by more than 90%, one of the largest studies on the drug's ability to treat COVID -19 to date. But, on July 14, after Internet detectives raised concerns about plagiarism and data tampering, prepress server Research Square withdrew the article due to 'ethical concerns'. "

Then there's this: A recent review of 14 studies on ivermectin produced zero evidence that the drug is an effective means of treating COVID-19.

As the study authors wrote:

"Based on current low-to-very-low-certainty evidence, we are unsure of the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID-19. The completed studies are small and few are considered high quality. conducting several studies that may produce clearer answers in review updates. In general, the available reliable evidence does not support the use of ivermectin for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19 outside of well-designed randomized trials. "

• Doctor investigated for prescribing ivermectin thousands of times to treat covid-19 despite FDA warnings

Therefore, there were at least 14 studies on the efficacy of ivermectin to treat coronavirus.

Which is not like what Rand Paul has argued that no one is willing to do studies on the drug because they hate Donald Trump.

Paul's problem is not that ivermectin is being ignored as a potential treatment for COVID-19 patients.

It is that the data, which make it clear that there is no benefit (at least to date) of using the drug, does not agree with what its base wants to believe.

Which is your problem, not ours.

ivermectin