On Friday, September 18, 2020, 05:54:16 AM PDT, Peter Fairbrother
   <peter@tsto.co.uk> wrote:

   On 18/09/2020 01:22, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
   > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 12:45:36PM +0100, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
   >> On 16/09/2020 21:59, jim bell wrote:
   >>> Also, search 'covid ivermectin'
   >>
   >> Doesn't seem to work, or at least not very well. Promoted by many of
   the same
   >> people who promoted chloroquine, incidentally.
   >
   >
   > Why do you say that "[ivermectin] doesn't seem to work, or at least
   not very well" ??
   >It is far easier to investigate drugs in cell cultures than in whole
   humans, so researchers try many drugs in cell cultures to see if they
   work.
   Yes, this is an article from a month ago confirming what you say:
   [1]https://theconversation.com/ivermectin-is-still-not-a-miracle-cure-f
   or-covid-19-despite-what-you-may-have-read-144569
   Also, one of the early methods to decide which drugs to try involved a
   method of comparing the physical structure of thousands of drugs to
   various places on a virus (or a cell) which might inhibit it.   This
   technique is potentially quite useful, because it identifies likely
   (existing) drugs that could have promise.
   >That doesn't mean they will work in humans (or not work in humans, you
   can miss potential treatments too), but it is fairly easy to do and
   gives some hints about what may work.
   >You can also try a lot more different drugs in cultures than you could
   try in humans.
   >Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit COVID replication in cell
   culture.
   It is very effective at doing this. But only at levels which are too
   high for use in humans.

References

   1. https://theconversation.com/ivermectin-is-still-not-a-miracle-cure-for-covid-19-despite-what-you-may-have-read-144569