Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following

Re:Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following by didjathinkmess on Sunday October 24, 2021 @12:05PM (#28979174)

Took a look through through that Intercept article. It reads like any of the biased opinion based drivel passing for journalism these days. Trying to conflate politics with medicine and say Doctors who risked their careers to speak up for Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin are "extremely pro Trump". Immediate red flag.

They call out Simone Gold for posting anti-vax content on Twitter by retweeting Joe Rogan's experience that he got covid and treated it with a cocktail of drugs including Ivermectin. This first hand account of recovery was apparently not true because... Ivermectin isn't shown to be effective.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following by klyrs on Sunday October 24, 2021 @12:26PM (#28979394)

Only, politicians have insinuated themselves into medicine, so that ship has sailed. When a medical professional is both sending strong political signals and their professional opinion is strongly aligned with the party line (and also conspiracy theorists), far out of line with the vast majority of their profession, that's suspect.

Joe Rogan's treatment is a single anecdote, and invermectin was one component of a "cocktail." He recovered, yes, but there's more noise than signal and most people recover from covid without any treatment.

[ Parent | on HN ]