For STDs, some people might consider a nut flour.
Thread 
I am again confused by your response. I never said anything about “the Left” - in the text you quote, I very specifically said “Dopers”. I’m also at a loss as to why I’m somehow required to get “the Right” to reform their ways before I’m allowed to so much as make a request of fellow Dopers that they stop using inaccurate and misleading terminology.
At this point, I think I’ve more than said my piece, and I don’t think there’s any point in my continuing to respond. So, I guess, have fun saying “horse dewormer”.
Horse dewormer horse dewormer horse dewomer! Wheeeeeee!
I prefer to say that they are sipping sheep sauce.
It isn’t inaccurate or misleading. I thought you had come around on that.
I’m still confused by the request. What difference could it possibly make that people are calling it horse dewormer? Factually correct or otherwise?
If you’re taking Sildenafil for your blood pressure and I call it ‘boner pills’. It’s as factually (in)correct as horse dewormer.
That might be a valid request (that I stop saying boner pills) since someone might not want to be shamed for taking their appropriately prescribed medicine for a valid, on-label, health concern.
However, if you go to the gas station and get some Extenze or Rhino Horn capsules to treat your blood pressure instead of seeing a doctor, yeah, I’m gonna give you a hard time for taking boner pills for your heart problem…because it’s dangerous and you shouldn’t do it.
At least your heart disease isn’t contagious. So you’re only going to hurt yourself (and whoever your car smashes into if you’re driving when your heart finally gives out).
Straight from the mouth of quacks:
2020 (PDF) - FLCCC scrubbed it, but the wayback machine keeps you honest:
By initiating the protocol within 6 hours of presentation in the emergency room, the need
for mechanical ventilators and ICU beds will decrease dramatically.
…
…
Oral Hydroxychloroquine
a. 400 mg every 12 hours for one day
b. switch to 200 mg every 12 hours for a total of 4 days
Pre-exposure/Post-exposure/Incubation Symptomatic Phase Pulmonary/inflammatory phase Hydroxychloroquine Unclear Benefit No Benefit ?Trend to harm
I can’t wait to see what they push in 2022.
You said in your OP that you wanted us to stop “objecting to its use in humans” and “ridiculing people for taking ‘horse dewormer’.”
The problem I have with that is that it is factually a horse dewormer. That is the most common use of this medication in the US. It’s no different than my calling my SSRI an antidepressant, even though I take it for OCD and anxiety.
And the people being described are not using it in a way that is approved for use in humans. No one is mocking people who are using this drug as a human dewormer. The people being ridiculed are those who are willing to use this drug for COVID-19, for which this drug has not been approved for humans, when they won’t take a human-approved vaccine.
Your objections seem to amount to no more than the common simplifications that people tend to use when speaking. Sure, we’re not saying that the drug is also sometimes for human deworming, since human deworming is rare in the US. Sure, we’re not saying that we are okay with it being used for human deworming. Glossing over understood information is not the same thing as being misleading.
If omitting information is a problem, then your title is inaccurate. You say “ivermectin isn’t horse medicine.” But it factually is. What you mean is “ivermectin isn’t only a horse medicine.” But people aren’t taking you to task over that simplification that you used for effect.
Sure, if I’m talking to someone who sincerely doesn’t know about the topic, I’m going to give more information. I already have on Facebook. A Facebook friend of a friend chimed in when someone called the drug a horse dewormer, saying that, while it was stupid to just go buy it yourself from a vet store, some doctors were using it and getting good results. I did not call it a “horse dewormer” then. I called it a neurotoxin and antiparasitic. She brought up some studies, and so I told her that those studies had worked in a test tube, but not in people. I pointed out that it’s really hard to get an accurate dosage, and that too much could lead to seizures and death. I pointed out that the vaccines were known to actually reduce the number and severity of infections, without any such risk, and so you’d be better off getting one of those.
But I also joined in with my nurse friend who was incredulous that people were using a “horse dewormer” rather than getting the vaccine. I didn’t feel any need to say “how dare you call it a horse dewormer! It’s also sometimes used as a people dewormer!” That would, well, completely miss the point.
Judge orders hospital to administer Ivermectin to critically ill COVID patient:
No, Ivermectin is used as a drench ie internal treatment of parasites
For a sheep “wash” or dip for external parasites then you’d use something like Cooper’s Yellow Arsenic Dipping Powder, though the modern alternatives are preferrable.
That use of the word “drench” is a new one for me.
Me too. I’m surprised it doesn’t imply soaking their wool in it, given we have flea powders and so forth for parasites applied to fur.
- wet thoroughly; soak.
“I fell in the stream and was drenched” - forcibly administer a drug in liquid form orally to (an animal).
“three-times-a-year drenching for calves”
Coming from a grazing family in a low rainfall area I was familiar with the second before the first. 
Apparently there’s no ivermectin available in San Diego:
I saw a headline that San Antonio Zoo is doing likewise. Being in Texas, that seems like a more likely place that the Feed and Tractor Stores would be sold out of horse ivermectin.
I haven’t been back to the thread about the hospital being ordered to administer ivermectin, but at the outset, there was factual misinformation based on the veterinary medicine misconception. People were castigating the judge for ordering it, which means people wanted the judge to step in and make a medical judgment.
It should be viewed, and perhaps is now in the thread, as similar to how a doctor prescribing hydroxychloroquine was. It’s off label, but legal for a doctor to prescribe it. There’s no real evidence that it will do any good, and some evidence that it will do harm. The hospital has good reasons for not wanting to do it. But the questioning of whether the hospital should be made to do it shouldn’t have anything to do with whether it is also a veterinary drug, or people are also misusing nonpharmacy versions without a prescription. (Which was happening.)
Imagine that it turned out that prescription migraine medicine actually made Covid less severe. A doctor prescribing it off label would not be doing anything wrong, and a hospital refusing to give it could be seriously in the wrong. And a judge ordering it to be given would not likely be castigated. And it would be dumb to criticize its use by calling it grain fungus.
It is the doctor prescribing ivermectin with no medical basis that deserves castigation and licensure consequences. And not because the medicine prescribed is also a veterinary medicine.
If it isn’t approved for that purpose and if it has any side effects, then I can certainly buy into the stance that the prescribing doctor is indeed wrong. If a lawyer representing an entire hospital tells me (the judge) that the doctor is a quack and prescribing off-label medications that we do not feel comfortable giving, I’m going to give their word a lot of weight.
As I’ve noted elsewhere, it could turn out that ivermectin has value, but we’ve heard the same thing (from the very same people) about many other drugs that didn’t pan out and also had side effects. If it’s that important, work towards approval, don’t post misinformation on your website to try to sell your consulting and “apple-flavored freedom paste” services.
There’s nothing wrong with off-label prescribing as it’s currently done 95+% of the time. Lots of drugs were found to be safe and effective for off label uses, sometimes they’re the only effective treatment known. Drug companies don’t seek out other use approval to offset the ‘off label’ designation because it takes tons of time and money to do so. I prescribe stuff off label weekly if not daily, as it’s standard accepted medical therapy for many conditions to use it that way.
Sure, but I’m guessing that in your case the usage is as good or better than anything that might be approved for treating a specific condition, probably with a number of studies to back that up.
Is that a fair statement?
Generally there’s a decent body of evidence supporting it. At times I’ve prescribed things that haven’t been shown to help much if at all, because the risk is low and there’s nothing else to try. I did that with colchicine back in the day, for idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis. It was being researched, turned out not to help, but people died of PF within 5 years of dx when standard therapies were being used.
They’ve got somewhat better treatments now, but people still tend to die of it in 5-6 years after diagnosis.