Fact checking the fact checkers
AngryAnt posted a fact check that ‘debunked’ the claim that Ivermectin functions as a SARS Cov 2 3CL protease inhibitor which is interestingly what the new Pfizer drug does.
First Anty seems to believe that factchecker sites on the internet operate without bias and agendas which history suggest is not true. The Snopes example is instructive
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/deansterlingjones/snopes-cofounder-plagiarism-mikkelson
Anyway I am sure Reuters being owned by a private equity firm whose assets are managed by Blackstone are quite free of bias.
Anyway lets look at the article Anty posted and fact check it, First the heading
Fact Check-Pfizer's trial COVID-19 drug is not the same as ivermectin
I find the heading misleading. The Zero hedge article it is fact checking has a heading ‘Pfizer launches final study for Covid Drug that’s suspiciously similar to horse paste” While it might draw implications that it is the same it does not make that assertion. In the body of the article it states
“Coincidentally (or not),Pfizer's drug shares at least one mechanism of action as Ivermectin- an anti-parasitic used in humans for decades, which functions as a protease inhibitor against Covid-19, which researchers speculate "could be the biophysical basis behind its antiviral efficiency."
Lo and behold, Pfizer's new drug - which some have jokingly dubbed "Pfizermectin," is described by the pharmaceutical giant as a "potent protease inhibitor."
The thrust of the article concentrates on the irony of a new drug which has the same mechanism as Ivermectin being developed at the same time as the confected horse dewormer narrative was dominant in the media.
The article posts a tweets that suggest that Pfizer is simply rebadging Ivermectin but the tweet clearly has a “/sarcasm” footer attached
The pfizermectin line is clearly identified as humour and misconstrued by the Reuters fact checkers to be a statement of fact
By
Reuters Fact Check This is clearly misleading
An article shared hundreds of times on social media claims a new COVID-19 preventative drug being trialed by Pfizer is “suspiciously similar” to ivermectin, an anti-parasitic medication that the World Health Organization (WHO), European and United States regulators have not recommended for treating the disease. However, Pfizer and an independent virologist told Reuters the two drugs function differently.
The statement is true but offers no insight on whether Ivermectin is an effective protease inhibitor.
Social media users have shared the Sept. 28 article, published by financial market website Zero Hedge
here), hundreds of times (
here,
here,
here).
This is possibly true …and?.
Some suggested Pfizer planned to launch a rebranded ivermectin: “It's official now - Pfizer will launch unpacked #ivermectin for of course significantly higher amounts than the medicine has been available so far,” (translated,
here).
Once again true but how people respond to an article is irrelevant to the fact checking of the article. Here the fact checker seeks to go beyond the words of the article and seems to be implying a fellow traveller conspiracy. It is a carefully constructed scenario with negative connotations.
Pfizer announced on Sept. 27 the start of phase 2/3 trials of its new antiviral medicine, known as PF-07321332, for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (
here).
True
The following day, Zero Hedge published its article comparing PF-07321332 to ivermectin, claiming the two drugs share “at least one mechanism of action”. It referenced ivermectin’s qualities as a “protease inhibitor” and Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a “potent protease inhibitor”.
True
The widely shared article adds: “That’s exactly what ivermectin, the prophylactic used for a number of reasons in both humans and animals, does”.
Including a screenshot of Pfizer’s March 23 press release on phase 1 of the drug’s trial (
here), Zero Hedge then compares the language in a report about ivermectin in the Future Virology Journal (
here). It highlights Pfizer’s description of PF-07321332 as a "protease inhibitor" with journal’s description of ivermectin as a "blocker of viral replicase, protease and human TMPRSS2".
True
However, this comparison lacks context, according to experts who spoke to Reuters.
“Pfizer’s drug has protease inhibitor activity like ivermectin, but they are a very different kettle of fish on a variety of levels,” said Dr Cheryl Walter, a virologist at the University of Hull.
First I am happy to accept Dr Walters credentials as a virologist but the above statement is misleading or deceptive as Reuters mention they spoke to’ experts’ but then just quoted one.
Ivermectin formulations have been approved in the U.S. for use as an anti-parasitic in animals, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (
here). It adds that for humans, specific ivermectin doses are approved to treat some parasitic worms, while topical formulations can be used for external parasitic conditions, such as headlice.
True
Despite the article’s claims Ivermectin has saved “thousands” of COVID-19 patients’ lives,
I find this statement false. The article says “And unlike Pfizer's experimental drug, ivermectin already MAY have saved hundreds of thousands of lives from India to Brazil.
“May”: is not a definitive statement of fact. It expresses possibility.
an FDA consumer update says (
here “Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing."
True but lacks context. Fact checkers should in balance highlight that the FDA is conflicted because it is funded by the entities it regulates and that as public funding has waned and drug industry funding has increased the number of approved drugs that have been withdrawn or black labelled has increased significantly. It should also be noted that drug approval advisory panel members receive significant sums of money from the companies whose drugs they evaluate many in 6 figure sums some in 7 figure sums
Dr Walter explained that PF-07321332 is a “direct acting antiviral drug”, while ivermectin “has multiple mechanisms of action on animal and human cells as well as some serendipitous antiviral activity”.
True but misleading. Ivermectin was developed as an anti parasitic drug but researchers discovered its anti viral effects thereafter. Monash university researchers found out in 2012 that it could kill dengue, zeka, influenza and many others. The word serendipitous means chance random or fate but is does not affect the real fact that it is possesses anti viral properties. Another example of the negative narrative being advanced. If you are killed serendipitously by an aircraft tyre falling on your head you’re still dead.
This means ivermectin likely has a range of “off-target effects on animal/human proteins,” Dr Walter said, adding: “We know it has multiple mechanisms of action and some of these actions could have unwanted, even dangerous side effects.
On one level this is a motherhood statement. We don’t know what we don’t know. However coming form a virologist who has real life knowledge this is bordering on liar liar pants on fire untruth. On WHO Vigiaccess data on medication adverse events Ivermectin is 300 times safer than covid vaccines. It has an unparallelled safety record over 30 years and 4 billion doses administered (to humans). A famous French toxicologist in studying 30 years of research found that there was no reported evidence of a fatality form an accidental or DELIBERATE overdose. The Chief Medical officer of England Chris Whittie wrote a paper where he stated that doses TEN times the recommended dose are safe. Dr Walters should be aware of these facts so the emphasis on dangerous side effects would be part of developing the negative narrative and clearly misleading at best. Cleverly it also downplays that Ivermectin has MULTIPLE mechanisms of actions against the virus and presents them as a NEGATIVE. Very clever but duplicitous deception
“What Pfizer have done is create a drug with a single job - stop the SARS-CoV-2 protease.”
Again very clever in presenting a limitation as a positive
A Pfizer spokesperson also denied the connection between the drugs, telling Reuters in an email: “Pfizer’s protease inhibitor is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism.”
I find this statement borderline false but definitively misleading. Ivermectin was a medication developed for humans and 4 billion human doses administered. It is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines and its inventers won the Noble prize for HUMAN medicine (one of whom is advocating for its use to treat COVID). The Pfizer spokesman clearly is playing up the popular horse dewormer theme for public effect. Anti-biotics on the ivermectin criteria are also livestock medication as they are used extensively on animals particularly cattle to keep them free of bacteria and fatten them up for profit. Similarly porridge is horse feed
They added: “For COVID-19, protease inhibitors are designed to block the activity of the SARS-CoV-2 protease, which is an enzyme the virus needs to multiply and replicate itself in the body, and as a result, stop symptoms from worsening.
True
“Applying this powerful and potent mechanism of action to COVID-19 could alter the course of the pandemic.”
Absolutely true and why I and many others having been urging regulators to not ignore treatment, particularly early treatment (especially when SERENDIPITOUSLY you have a generic anti viral with this mechanism and an impeccable safety record sitting around available for use) at the expense of a one size fits all public health response
VERDICT
Missing context. The two drugs are different and do not use the same mechanism.
VERDICT; The fact check is misleading. It deliberately misstates the thesis of the article and then falsely attributes statements to the article which were not made. (Maybe Anty is lead author) It does not attempt to address in any scientific manner why Ivermectin’s mechanism of action as a SARS COV 2 3CL protease inhibitor is materially different from the Pfizer molecule. It does not provide any scientific context. For example the Campbell Video presents a number of papers from eminent publications which shows Ivermectin having the highest binding affinity of all the molecules they tested (at that time). The fact check says it talked to experts but quoted only one who actually only provided generic statements of fact or cliches without ever addressing in any technical detail HOW or WHY they differ and why Ivermectin would not work if it acts on the same protease. The expert was also misleading in not providing context for her statements about safety. The fact checker quotes a Pfizer spokesman which should be a red flag for any intelligent sceptic out there. (Hey I’ll just check Labor’s fiscal plan by asking Josh what he thinks about it). Again the Pfizer spokesman makes a misleading statement about Ivermectin being horse medication and then provides no details of how their medication is more effective. As far as I know there is no published results of the new molecule trial apart from a Pfizer press release. There are 60 ivermectin trials that show efficacy and many that outline the mechanism of action which is the subject of the article and debate.
BTW here is a BMJ article on Pfizer data integrity issues in their original Covid trial
Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports In autumn 2020 Pfizer’s chairman and chief executive, Albert Bourla, released an open...
www.bmj.com
This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work
here .
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
retractionwatch.com
