@rick43pen @FlavioCadegiani https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@Harper__Flynn @FlavioCadegiani Uh, no. It's a joke of a study. https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@Go_BullDawgs @FlavioCadegiani Literally the worst executed research to date. Cochrane didn't even consider it in their review of literature. For good reason. https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@krsmckenna @sfchronicle No, they would not. Every review of studies that removes the bogus ones shows it's useless. https://t.co/5z79dpInB9 There's literally no exception. https://t.co/omeXonqEAq And the largest trial to-date was just released: https:/

@JGisSatoshi @sbhank @drdrew That's simply false. It's how the FLCCC liars pull their BS but including all the bogus and retracted studies. Here are two excellent summaries of the literature to-date EXCLUDING the fake sh1t: https://t.co/omeXonqEAq And fr

@AdamKaraNO @mikestockmusic A couple more btw: Vaccines show the same efficacy everywhere around the globe based on age & rates: https://t.co/2H3LI1sf2F Ivermectin is useless https://t.co/5z79dpInB9 Really useless once you ditch the bogus FLCCC toute

@howienudet @Bamabeast256 @lisasalright @jbizzy6969 @VitalisSigna @KleeOntheRight @the_lorean @rksais1 @JoeyDrew10 @JamesLauder12 @ShellyRKirchoff @Mike44502881 @Krensharpaw @CarlBotha2 @TrumpLOST5 @JAlan21813286 @RogerRa09234150 @Flaffenbam @2_drac @Hunte

@danbots247 @Cliveja03988823 @BareReality @GBNEWS @EstherMcVey1 @PhilipDaviesUK No. It doesnt. https://t.co/SBNh4jiqHH

@danbots247 @Cliveja03988823 @BareReality @GBNEWS @EstherMcVey1 @PhilipDaviesUK Not nonsense. https://t.co/SBNh4jiqHH

@techwoods52 @ThevoiceAlexa @jonzy0322 https://t.co/diFrM9QZwq

@DrMarcoEF @doc_BLocke @nickmmark No, you just feel for obvious disinformation from ivmmeta, when you don't have even a basic understanding of the statistics needed in this topic. https://t.co/xBZStjSirJ https://t.co/sLyR0qyMZl https://t.co/9M8djQcme2 ht

@DeanyWinchy @DrNeilStone https://t.co/ufrpoOXCNm… https://t.co/ch72usknEp… https://t.co/1ibtoK0AJD… https://t.co/DBgRSGdJ2w… https://t.co/2uhsFrixOg https://t.co/emDjUi8Ird https://t.co/4D6voWE227 https://t.co/cersrNFGTi https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@JennyLStamm @AngryFleas @GeorgePapa19 No, it's not buried. No, there isn't a lot of evidence. At all. Summaries of the state of knowledge (Cochrane is the well regarded global health education non-profit): https://t.co/5z79dpInB9 https://t.co/J9bODcYeV6

@toddm92 @AlastairMcA30 Stop trolling. 🙄 https://t.co/xBZStjSirJ https://t.co/sLyR0qyMZl https://t.co/9M8djQcme2 https://t.co/zb4TicYfsr https://t.co/ty49vkgTld https://t.co/YGSCnMWmp4

@Treeps3 @Puppieskitts @TamiBone @judysimpson222 @StevenWilson777 @stephen1e4 @Anymous84861064 @BreezerGalway @HeyNurseKat @The_Ouroboros__ @DiamondJimLowe @AdamYoung329 @appyman @BRIANARNOPP @AmaryllisPot @Rolo_Tamasi @johnsgunn @JordanB4815 @SoiferErica

@Treeps3 @judysimpson222 @TamiBone @Puppieskitts @StevenWilson777 @stephen1e4 @Anymous84861064 @BreezerGalway @HeyNurseKat @The_Ouroboros__ @DiamondJimLowe @AdamYoung329 @appyman @BRIANARNOPP @AmaryllisPot @Rolo_Tamasi @johnsgunn @JordanB4815 @SoiferErica

@M1066R @pmcdunnough @BogochIsaac Meta studies often don't have independent funding. Try this one from the very well regarded Cochrane team: https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@EstadoDono @JosianaZs 5- Começa a ler mais, quem sabe assim não acredite em qqr mentira que te contam. 😉 https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@asgraziano1 @JosianaZs 5- Agora segue um contra-argumento científico. Tenho mais vários se estiver realmente disposta a ler. 😘 https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@NoirRain2 @JosianaZs 3- Esse "maravilhoso estudo" postado por ela usou métodos, variáveis e grupo de intervenção errado. 4- E ainda foi publicado com um "erro de digitação" na Figura 2 e ela postando como se fosse grande informação. 5- Vamos a algo real

@BoldriniBonomo @JosianaZs 3- Esse "maravilhoso estudo" postado por ela usou métodos, variáveis e grupo de intervenção errado. 4- E ainda foi publicado com um "erro de digitação" na Figura 2 e ela postando como se fosse grande informação. 5- Vamos a info

@MadeLou57 @JosianaZs Esse "maravilhoso estudo" postado por ela usou métodos, variáveis e grupo de intervenção errado. E ainda foi publicado com um "erro de digitação" na Figura 2 e vc realmente acha que é um link com muita informação. 😂🤣😂 Piada? Toma info

@marioqm @petricor1970 https://t.co/VJvjCugnbD

@houseoflight_ @AlanSouzaPinto @Ringo3513 @sens8tionallyLC @border_canadian Again - instead of that chart (based on lies) find ONE double blind clinical trial - the cornerstone of modern medicine - that supports the drug. There are ten major ones this yea

@misabelmelo1 @Bolsonaro7Cris Agora se vc acreditou nas falácias que leu, vai se informar melhor ao invés de pagar de moralista no tt. https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@MARCELOELOY9 @misabelmelo1 @JosianaZs Toma aqui a essência, mas não sei se consegue ler e entender. https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@rodolforosseto @misabelmelo1 @JosianaZs Argumentos tenho vários, mas não vou perder tempo com quem espalha falácias de propósito. Vc quer argumentos? Comece com esses. https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@misabelmelo1 @JosianaZs Mais fácil mesmo, pq é esse nível dela. E não estou aqui para mudar a cabecinha de gente que espalha falácias de propósito. Mas se vc quiser começar a ler estudos fique a vontade, também sei posta-los. https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@Rafinhagds Vamos começar. Eu começo daqui te mostrando não é eficaz e vc refuta com os seus grandes estudos científicos que supostamente comprovam. Vamos lá. https://t.co/6lJk7DLayf

@AllanicFabian @KnopfFrancois L'ivermectine n'a pas d'effet probant contre le COVID. https://t.co/eoSNEOo1W7 Et puis je croyais que le médicament qu'on avait depuis le début c'était l'hydroxycloroquine ?

@Ringo3513 @houseoflight_ @sens8tionallyLC @border_canadian I have the same job (scary). The "thousands of studies" is just nonsense. See these three independent reviews: https://t.co/omeXonqEAq https://t.co/5z79dpInB9 This doesn't even include the last

@houseoflight_ @Ringo3513 @sens8tionallyLC @border_canadian No, all ten large RCTs in 2022 show the same thing. It's not a narrative. It's double blind clinical trials. Happy to share all of them with you. Only grifters selling it at this point. https://t

@insins31544458 @ivanrioufol En tout cas aucune étude ne démontre son efficacité…. https://t.co/4MTzPrr9by. Au bout d’un moment …

@barratt_ash @presDonldSkroob @beeljo @IdeahAgency @TomFitton Here, for your reading pleasure, is an unbiased review with critical appraisal of included studies: https://t.co/iK8grfsM3C

@CDisco5 Tess Lawrie is a grifting shyster, preying on the gullible and vulnerable. No evidence ivermectin is effective. https://t.co/QG88pmbNgL

@roxslater @LeannePergel @thesalariedGP @Crypto_Nyte @EmergMedDr @DrHoenderkamp Yeah, ivermectin is not a recognised or proven treatment for Covid 19. https://t.co/7Fxd8EDRwu

@maddoxrules @thebradfordfile Please stop lying, stupid people might believe you and that would be sad. https://t.co/rO3cjBo22Y

RT @S96405539: 【補足】参考までに、“イベルメクチンの新型コロナウイルス感染症に対する安全性/有効性”に関して現時点で得られる最良のエビデンスの一つは、コクランレビューでしょう。 医師であれば、このエビデンスを踏まえた上で患者さんへ治療法や予防法を提案する必要が…

@JohnnyBravo8532 @IdeahAgency @TomFitton Read the systematic review from Cochrane. It critically appraises the evidence from studies of Ivermectin and Covid. There is not good evidence to support it and it is dangerous to try to convince others that it an

@Jbrdm1 @JonathanRueb If you're a non-expert who claims what ivmmeta says is compelling, yet almost all the informed experts say otherwise, then it's probably because the experts know stuff that you don't. Ivermectin doesn't work; ivmmeta is nonsense. ht

@BadDude62 @BreezerGalway @BruceRand9 @bourbonisgood2 @richeggleston @k_b_lvi @onebetterthanQ @thisisnothappen @compsciman @pmcox @PierreKory @TwitterSafety @TwitterSupport https://t.co/zyHQCfdEWm

@DavidCu87627414 @JohnBoweActor @NewstalkFM @nurseforethics @Iobey10 @MRobertsQLD @SaraHaboubi1 @SeivwrightTrudy @AndersonAfDMdEP @GBNEWS @CristianTerhes Do you know what a Cochrane Review is? You should find out and read one. https://t.co/RF2zAhnX48

@Jbrdm1 @GidMK ivmmeta is a long-debunked disinformation website, akin to vaccine denialist blogs that falsely claimed to have studies showing MMR vaccination caused autism. https://t.co/YqxsHgUqbd https://t.co/sLyR0qQonV https://t.co/9M8djQtXCC https://

@FreeMIN24465256 @Laurentpiot1 @kekiliacecile38 @insins31544458 @Luc60730 @DIVIZIO1 https://t.co/F1W3zt1sbG

@FarrightliberaI @WulfgangIsAMyth En voor ivm https://t.co/o4utMIYnDG

@SavvyTruffle909 @tylerblack32 One from Cochrane: https://t.co/XEkRGSE9hx

@FreeMIN24465256 @Laurentpiot1 @insins31544458 @Luc60730 @kekiliacecile38 @DIVIZIO1 bah non, aucune étude n'a réussi a prouvé un gain mortalité traitement covid en hospi et le bilan est negatif en prevention https://t.co/F1W3zt1sbG

@PhilfyBondi @Idoubteveryone I look at science and evidence, I don't care for your conspiracy theories. "We found no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection" https://t.co/7bLgr8fFMs

@FiliaVeritas @HEW12345678 @veen_els Maar hier dan een meta analyse van cochrane https://t.co/pxB5pbGT1k Ziet er ook niet al te best uit wel?

@Johnny458885406 @ben_halbesma @RUDOLFJ15 https://t.co/RzP6mK6xcH Cochrane heeft er vorig jaar nog een systematische review over uitgegeven, waarbij alle beschikbare onderzoeksresultaten tot dat moment vergeleken werden.

@stephen1e4 @johnsgunn @TamiBone @rw_christian @Anymous84861064 @Incitatus_MP @Ravi1236541 @BreezerGalway @Rolo_Tamasi @dann58638436 @KITTYKAT99 @judysimpson222 @DanTheBum @BitcoinBum2 @StevenWilson777 @Marcucio_Lab @JordanB4815 @HeyNurseKat @SoiferErica @

@Malu99 31 ensaios e só o seu que está certo? https://t.co/rqy6RCoYkr

@GunsAddict @PhillyPharmaBoy There's so much fraud promoting the drug given the money involved, but here are two reviews of the studies that aren't fraudulent: https://t.co/omeXonqEAq https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

RT @alexandrosM: So, in their 2021 meta-analysis, Popp et al. found the classic "no evidence". There were concerns they made their criteria…

RT @alexandrosM: So, in their 2021 meta-analysis, Popp et al. found the classic "no evidence". There were concerns they made their criteria…

RT @alexandrosM: So, in their 2021 meta-analysis, Popp et al. found the classic "no evidence". There were concerns they made their criteria…

RT @alexandrosM: So, in their 2021 meta-analysis, Popp et al. found the classic "no evidence". There were concerns they made their criteria…

So, in their 2021 meta-analysis, Popp et al. found the classic "no evidence". There were concerns they made their criteria too tight, in order not to find enough evidence, but eventually they'd have to update their analysis with new studies, right? https:/

@Moehrenmann Dir ist schon klar, dass man mit dummen Menschen irgendwann die Geduld verliert? Ivermectin hat keine Evidenz bei Covid19 https://t.co/8pPr5HDkt3 Ivermectin wird gegen Krätze oder Fadenwürmer verschrieben -> lebende Tiere in Menschen. 1/10

@Damo__T @waltjosephs @Nugget74403455 @gabs22341 @NSWHealth Which one are your referring to? But in any case the independent Cochrane Institute has this to say about its meta analysis of ivermectin studies https://t.co/7bLgr8fFMs

@GGabrielsquared @RJust_ice @uhmmkristina That study has been widely debunked. Just junk. Good news though - there have been actual clinical trials to assess it's efficacy. None show it's useful. Here's a great up-to-date summary from Cochrane: https://t.

@RepMTG "We found no evidence to support the use of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection." https://t.co/Mq3P57ktJq Also: https://t.co/DTi59ZsKnV

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

@okanogen2022 @luckyburritos @6Hypothetical @Nick__Bryant This might help https://t.co/omeXonqEAq Or even https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

#receipts #earlytreatmentworks but denied by #TheScience #BlueCheckMedicine

@Michelle17Q @Kathlee68669960 @victori_roe13 Here's the most trusted medical non-profit in the world: https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@alexandrosM @RonJCarson1 Since Hill's analysis 12 negative RCTs with various endpoints have published, including two high-dose ivermectin studies showing no effect on viral load. What will these RCTs will do the the meta-analysis? Cochrane says IVM of lit

RT @Newcli0: コクランもEMAも臨床試験以外では使うなとするイベルメクチンをお勧めしワクチン接種率向上に目もくれない医療ジャーナリスト（）伊藤隼也さん… https://t.co/MfVOkq4z79 https://t.co/Q1DlpuKK4f https:…

@RonJCarson1 @alexandrosM The latest meta-analyses of RCTs show no effect of ivermectin on a number of outcomes, including hospitalization and death. If memory serves, 14% of placebo patients in the TOGETER Trial were hospitalized vs. 12% IVM. No effect.

@TextbookAmI @errolenv That's what I thought initially. SMH. https://t.co/DG54Cxjiya

@trevtrey1 @mmpadellan Yes. And HCQ. Here's are two reviews of all reputable clinical trials to-date: https://t.co/5z79dpInB9 https://t.co/omeXonqEAq

@sammyrejc @Lee_Tennant @ItsJustaRide @phuromnee @Freedom28323857 Let me help. When you ditch the shitty studies, retracted papers, and small sample junk, all you are left with are...clinical trials that clearly show it doesn't work for COVID. At all. Her

@ptcjoneses @SaltaoVladimir @cbeckj @mpc_xetts @JohnRee58027351 @JRoschuk @BradBargle @ryanbeed @JonathanSarfat1 @TakethatCt @real_seeking @OXHarryH1 @msabouri @Dalmane15 @paulwiggins @effink777 @backwoodsohm @villagerssn @tickerguy @Vaxed2DaMax @Tmafkab @

@ptcjoneses @ryanbeed @cbeckj @SaltaoVladimir @real_seeking @villagerssn @TakethatCt @JohnRee58027351 @Vaxed2DaMax @Tmafkab @effink777 @KlaasvanDijk5 @Dalmane15 @KStateTurk @dksdata @gtuckerkellogg @OXHarryH1 @JonathanSarfat1 @mobindondon @TigerlillySusan

@fahypat @SavtaGaby @UFCRAMly @jakeshieldsajj That's typical research caveats. Ten large RCTs this year. It's settled. Here's the cautious Cochrane review of evidence: https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@vikleroy @AlexSamTG @TatianaVentose Encore ? (visiblement non) https://t.co/KfPOhWHoca

@joshmdecker @DrSusanOliver1 Where is your data it saved millions? All quality research shows the drugs he recommends are ineffective except paxlovid which has a narrow window so requires early testing. https://t.co/xYe0CUMIyP https://t.co/2ylzXU0cRS

@FlugschuleE In meinem Internet kam die Studie 2031 auf ein anderes Ergebnis ... 🧐 https://t.co/RTny2KkIA6

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

@LaineRodolphe @FlorianJ69 @TatianaVentose @NansFLORENS https://t.co/ltUFhvYA30

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

RT @Newcli0: コクランもEMAも臨床試験以外では使うなとするイベルメクチンをお勧めしワクチン接種率向上に目もくれない医療ジャーナリスト（）伊藤隼也さん… https://t.co/MfVOkq4z79 https://t.co/Q1DlpuKK4f https:…

@Diane49713312 @ArtVandalay000 @nprpolitics And those same idiots post bogus and retracted research to convince people to keep paying them for prescriptions. You can read a summary by objective researchers here: https://t.co/omeXonqEAq Or even the very w

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

@VPrasadMDMPH Do you have any response to this prominent physician's comment below? https://t.co/er5Ia4gecz

RT @MDaware: publication dates: I-TECH: February 18, 2022 EPIC: March 4, 2021 IVERCORCOVID: May 5, 2022 TOGETHER: 02 July 2021 Cochrane m…

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

RT @MDaware: publication dates: I-TECH: February 18, 2022 EPIC: March 4, 2021 IVERCORCOVID: May 5, 2022 TOGETHER: 02 July 2021 Cochrane m…

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

publication dates: I-TECH: February 18, 2022 EPIC: March 4, 2021 IVERCORCOVID: May 5, 2022 TOGETHER: 02 July 2021 Cochrane meta-analysis: 21 June 2022 is VP ignorant of the RCT evidence he says we need? or is he feigning ignorance for …reasons? https:/

RT @nickmmark: We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5…

We really don’t need more ivermectin RCTs. Every large RCT was negative I-TECH https://t.co/dtEqV3SiE0 EPIC https://t.co/K5IbMZSLh6 IVERCORCOVID https://t.co/QBkSjGMg1h TOGETHER https://t.co/k6d7Eph8xv A Cochrane meta-analysis was also negative https://t

@rig_s13 @ClaudeSteve6 @lety75014 Tout les autres disent que les effets st inexistant voir dangereux (11 essaies) https://t.co/4VW3EZ2HsY

@applegat14 @RogueTr51010193 @NSWHealth @OdyseeTeam Also for some non biased info collected for your benefit. It’s in plain English and scientific. This is a collection of all trials going and on going and is updated regularly. https://t.co/WbsYKgwVZZ

@48HDpanhead https://t.co/3d52eHmJD1

@SuryaFaridaa @MinnesotaDFL Even Cochrane now: https://t.co/5z79dpInB9

@willywo06261169 @krebiozen @JonathanHannah @LifeAfterWEF @AndrewLazarus4 @Mr_Magoo5 @JuliaHadley15 @whykeepitup @FvckYourFear @SkepticalMutant @The_Seeadler @nyx200 @MsTrixter @FillmoreWhite @AngryFleas @mcfunny @DrGeniusGino @TonyBaduy @dunningsback @Jun