Image copyright Los Angeles Times Image caption Andrew Wakefield, a UK-based doctor who claimed vaccines cause autism, is one of those pushing for Ivermectin
(LA Times )
Vaccines and Ivermectin seem to go together. Why?
Because many anti-vaccination groups – or “anti-vaxxers” – deny the basic fact that they can be quite effective.
Vaccines contain compounds derived from viruses. They are injected into people’s bodies to stop dangerous infections from taking hold.
But some of these substances are known to cause immune reactions – and make for problematic vaccines.
Ivermectin, for example, is a drug made from the sap of the rosemary plant. It is meant to stop the infections in cattle from killing them and spreading disease in the herd.
It may work because it looks and smells like the urine of infected cattle.
Unfortunately, it can also produce serious allergic reactions.
There’s a debate about it, but one faction will tell you any anti-vaccination action has to come from talking about the research.
You see, that group has some doubts.
Lots of people might have had even a few allergic reactions to Ivermectin. But their research – the Los Angeles Times found – does not back up that claim.
Scientists did look at the possible allergy risk and concluded there is just not enough evidence.
That’s important, because it may help anti-vaccinators explain away how there are still no big health concerns associated with the drug.
This is how you’ll hear it: “If you want to reduce your risk of getting an allergy in the first place, maybe you should start vaccinating. It could make the difference between an allergy and a condition like eczema.”
Sound reasonable? I think you might find that Imermectin is anti-vaxxers’ latest drug of choice.
Because they make money from the right type of people: people who don’t like vaccines at all, or only need them as a last resort.
This article was originally published in the Los Angeles Times and re-published with permission