The average 5 year survival rate of cancel is 70% so that 80% had no worse symptoms is going to be within the sample size error for this sort of thing. There's also probably issues with how the sample is taken.
At first glance, I'd conclude this "study" at this point without further analysis basically tells us ivermectin does nothing.
This specific study only really tells us ivermectin and mebendazole aren't incredibly toxic, everything else, good or bad, is left in the realm of unproven speculation.
No control group, no attempts to account for other concurrent treatments effects, and no comparison to typical remission rates. Just "we gave these to people and they happened to survive"
Worthless.
The average 5 year survival rate of cancel is 70% so that 80% had no worse symptoms is going to be within the sample size error for this sort of thing. There's also probably issues with how the sample is taken.
At first glance, I'd conclude this "study" at this point without further analysis basically tells us ivermectin does nothing.
This specific study only really tells us ivermectin and mebendazole aren't incredibly toxic, everything else, good or bad, is left in the realm of unproven speculation.
No control group, no attempts to account for other concurrent treatments effects, and no comparison to typical remission rates. Just "we gave these to people and they happened to survive"