Here's the paper: https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/articles/effects-of-ivermectin-therapy-on-the-sperm-functions-of-nigerian-onchocerciasis-patients.pdf
It's not terribly exciting and deals with a small sample (37) of men who have taken the drug for 11 months to treat river blindness (onchocerciasis) . There's no data on long-term effects. I found it pretty noteworthy that they rejected 90% of the people they screened (of 385) for already having very low sperm counts or being too weak to continue beyond the screening. I'm curious what the effects of onchocerciasis on sperm health are alone.
The results show a modest drop in sperm counts in every patient, though generally not enough to put them at abnormally low levels if they weren't already low. Motility and percent of sperm with abnormal morphology seem to be more impacted.
That's about all there is here; it's not a very long paper. Also it's from 2011.
Yeah, looking at the actual paper, there's not a lot of evidence backing up the headline. More than the "Ivermectin cures COVID-19" crowd has, but still not much.
That's not to say we can't have fun with this, but let's not get carried away believing it's real.
But here we have a case where a deliberate misinformation campaign can save lives! Chud lives, but lives none the less. In the post truth world you gotta fight lies with lies.
Here's the paper: https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/articles/effects-of-ivermectin-therapy-on-the-sperm-functions-of-nigerian-onchocerciasis-patients.pdf
It's not terribly exciting and deals with a small sample (37) of men who have taken the drug for 11 months to treat river blindness (onchocerciasis) . There's no data on long-term effects. I found it pretty noteworthy that they rejected 90% of the people they screened (of 385) for already having very low sperm counts or being too weak to continue beyond the screening. I'm curious what the effects of onchocerciasis on sperm health are alone.
The results show a modest drop in sperm counts in every patient, though generally not enough to put them at abnormally low levels if they weren't already low. Motility and percent of sperm with abnormal morphology seem to be more impacted.
That's about all there is here; it's not a very long paper. Also it's from 2011.
The headline is highly sensationalized.
the media is shit at reporting science. shitty science reporting is responsible for a lot of climate change denial.
deleted by creator
Yeah, looking at the actual paper, there's not a lot of evidence backing up the headline. More than the "Ivermectin cures COVID-19" crowd has, but still not much.
That's not to say we can't have fun with this, but let's not get carried away believing it's real.
But here we have a case where a deliberate misinformation campaign can save lives! Chud lives, but lives none the less. In the post truth world you gotta fight lies with lies.
Makes me feel better about the kids who’s parents are giving them the stuff.