I dunno, I've seen Medicare (PBS, NDIS) approve some treatments/drugs that have really spurious research behind them... but let's not get into that.
Yes, but we also believe in evidence based medicine - though to be fair, sometimes Medicare does disagree that evidence is required.
Oh okay - I'll fix that later if I can find it again.
I copped a lot of abuse/skepticism about the effectiveness of Ivermectin earlier on this thread but it appears that Pfizer is now going to conduct its own trials as both a prophylaxis and a treatment. Also there's now 50 independent studies reporting positive effects of Ivermectin on COVID19 - Ivermection meta-study.The link is dead, but I have been watching the ‘papers’ on Ivermectin for maybe 6 months now, they’re showing ‘interesting’ results for sure, but none of the trials, if they’re even to be considered trials have been particularly large, properly randomised and next to none of them I can see as being peer reviewed.
Wouldn't it be funny if the answer was a drug that was actually banned in this country as a treatment for COVID19? In fact you and your GP could both go to prison in Queensland if you used it.
The results look positive, but it’s like looking at a dice, seeing a 3 and concluding every number is likely to be a 3.
If Pfizer is finally coming around to it then there must be something there - I don't understand the bloody minded position of some state governments in having such draconian penalties for using the drug. Isn't the decision of treatment choice supposed to be between the doctor and their patient?
Well Medicare does rebate chiropractic and acupuncture which I have always found disturbing. I have serious issues with this, and I can legitimately say I have gone to more effort than most to change it.
Pseudoscience being funded by the government was the cause behind me temporarily relocating myself for the purposes of government agencies (especially the AEC) to a colleague’s address in the seat of Sturt ahead of the 2016 federal election.
At the time I was living in Kingston and was dismayed that the local NXT candidate was an acupuncturist. What concerned me greatly was having to be a part of the process of potentially electing him to parliament - he’s got some extremely ‘quirky’ views that lie well outside of demonstrable science, and I actually referred him to AHPRA prior to him even running for election.
After many long and detailed discussions with the NXT candidate for Sturt (a proper, actual, serious, Dr) and an actual meeting with Nick himself, about my local candidate and how I was concerned about having someone like that anywhere near the strings of Medicare I came to the conclusion that my only option for the sensible use of my vote was to enrol myself in the electorate of Sturt, and to try and have a decent science based Dr elected.
Alas, having gone to that effort, shifting my licence, tax and all sorts of stuff, I lost interest in the election in general and didn’t vote at all, then I moved to Boothby, Southcott, also a Dr, had retired, and now it’s just held by another smeg lawyer, who is going to leave parliament, probably resume being a lawyer, have to read her computer screen a lot and decide that acupuncture is required to ‘fix’ her eyes…