It’s quite clear: Ivermectin is just for parasites

Let’s not ‘cancel’ MP Craig Kelly, when so much can be gained from quoting him at length.

Craig Kelly says he isn’t anti-vaccine but examination of his Facebook feed, including posts by others, betrays a narrative. Picture: Gary Ramage

Let’s not “cancel” MP Craig Kelly, when so much can be gained from quoting him at length. But it is also important to understand the accusation he is levelling – the Prime Minister, his government and their health teams have caused mass death.

“If you’ve been an Ivermectin or HCQ denier, please read this, and then pray for forgiveness for your part in the legacy of over a million deaths worldwide of people denied access to these cheap and effective treatments (when administered early and with zinc).”

This is Craig Kelly on Facebook in January. Again:

“THEY ARE DROPPING LIKE FLIES: The Argentine province of La Pampa has also just surrendered in the War against Ivermectin. Just like the collapse of the Central Powers at the end of WW1, those that have waged the War Against Ivermectin are collapsing everywhere as they cannot avoid the inevitable. Yet a few hold outs will hang on doggedly, determined to continue to fight to deny people access to this medical treatment.”

And more:

“FOLLOW THE SCIENCE & THE EVIDENCE: To urgently save lives, Ivermectin & HCQ Denial must end. Immediately. And the ignorant, the prejudiced & the stupid that smeared, ridiculed and vilified these treatments must be held to account for the deaths of those that perished, denied access to these drugs.”

Yet again:

“If you’ve been an Ivermectin Denier, if you’ve labelled my posts ‘misinformation’ and called for them to be censored – watch this video and remember that 900 Australians have died, denied access to Ivermectin, and reflect on the evil you’ve been part of.”

Consider now a statement from Merck/MSD, the maker of ivermectin, dated February 4: “Company scientists continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:

• No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from preclinical studies;

• No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and;

• A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

“We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.”

Ivermectin is currently approved for use in the treatment of intestinal parasites. After Kelly’s resignation, he went on television to tell host Andrew Bolt that “hundreds of thousands of lives around the world could have been saved by early use of Ivermectin”. Government “agencies and bureaucrats” were “trying to deny the obvious” and it was “just untenable that we can have a group called the National Covid Evidence Taskforce who everyone in government is relying upon” who are “not doing their job properly” and have “let the nation down”.

Our National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce formulates unified clinical guidelines for COVID-19. It’s made up of 32 peak clinical bodies and more than 200 leading medical experts from across primary, acute and critical care settings. The taskforce meets and updates frequently as new and reliable evidence emerges, and issues “living guidelines” using an evidence-based approach.

Taskforce executive director, Associate Professor Julian Elliott says there is “limited high quality evidence evaluating the effectiveness of ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19”. Given this, the taskforce “recommends that ivermectin only be used in the context of randomised trials with appropriate ethical approval, from which reliable evidence on its effectiveness or otherwise can be generated.”

A number of trials are underway and when their results are published, the taskforce will “incorporate these findings into the evidence review and update the relevant recommendations as appropriate”. The taskforce maintains “daily surveillance of COVID-19 research and rapidly updates the national guidelines as new evidence becomes available”, meaning the guidelines are the “most frequently updated in the world”.

It would be irresponsible of the taskforce to recommend a drug for treatment when all the regulatory hoops haven’t been jumped through. Especially so, when the maker of the drug itself recommends against it.

However, that argument doesn’t wash with Kelly; he wants it used now and said it should have been used all along. Why so fixated? Kelly says he isn’t anti-vaccine but examination of his Facebook feed, including posts by others, betrays a narrative; vaccines are unnecessary and part of a government plot, which is all about control. We don’t need vaccines, we just need these drugs.

The professionals on the taskforce are not paid for their time, they volunteer out of concern for public health. These people are the embodiment of everything we should admire; expertise and knowledge, combined with a sense of civic duty. Yet these people are badgered and slandered by a crowd of belligerent know-it-alls, led by a few in politics and the media. In opposition to this ignorance, the taskforce has my grateful thanks.