Flogging the Dead Fluvoxamine Horse

Some people just can't let go of their obsession with toxic drugs

Regular readers are aware that on March 19, 2024, I offered to debate fake health freedom activist Steve Kirsch. The topic I wanted to take him to task for was his aggressive pimping of fluvoxamine. Kirsch was recklessly recommending the toxic SSRI as a ‘COVID’ treatment, despite clinical trials having repeatedly shown it to be an abysmal failure for this purpose.

My offer was a response to Kirsch’s boast that no-one wanted to debate him on any subject, because everyone was allegedly too afraid to confront him.

In the World According to Kirsch, Stevie is an imposing conquistador whose intellect towers above all others. In this deluded world-view, all of Stevie’s critics tremble uncontrollably at the knees at the thought of having to debate him one-on-one.

In reality, Steve Kirsch is a pseudoscientific pissant whose self-appraisal stands at stark odds with his demonstrated scientific ineptitude. He thinks informal internet polls and anecdotal case reports constitute the same standard of evidence as data from double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

Kirsch is all PR and no substance. He is a gutless, self-aggrandizing coward who issues loud challenges but scampers like a rat when someone who knows their subject calls his bluff.

I’ve documented numerous such instances here.

My March 19 reply can be seen here. Kirsch never responded to my debate offer. A few days later, I discovered his $25,000 fluvoxamine challenge and promptly gathered the evidence to meet his challenge.

The pathological liar that is Kirsch refused to give me my $25,000. Not because I failed to meet the criteria, but because he is an out-and-out liar who will never admit he’s wrong, a grifter whose challenges are not issued in good faith but for misleading PR purposes.

This morning, I received notification that someone had replied to my comment at Kirsch’s challenge post.

The comment is authored by one Vinu Arumugham, whose hashtag is “#Kennedy24.”

Ah yes, another false prophet for president. You can click here and here to see RFK’s real views on vaccines (“I am pro-vaccine, I’ve always been fiercely pro-vaccine, and I had all six of my children vaccinated” ).

Here is what Vinu posted, and my reply:

For those wondering, yes, I’m a huge Ramones fan, but no, I have not changed my name by deed poll. I had to use a pseudonym, because when I tried replying I kept being greeted by the following, despite already being logged in on Substack:

Yep, it looks like Stinky Steve added me to his long list of banned “trolls” and “spammers.” These terms are Kirsch-speak for “people who are smarter than me and ask inconvenient questions.”

Vinu seems to suffer an ailment that is absolutely endemic in the medical and health sciences:

Namely, an obsession with metabolic minutiae, and a complete disregard for controlled clinical outcomes in real live human beings.

It’s all well and good to wank on about mast cells and cytokine storms and other observations derived in glass receptacles in a lab, but when data from controlled clinical trials involving real life outcomes in human beings flatly refutes your theories, it’s time to let those theories rest in peace.

Some people are clearly incapable of doing this. Instead of accepting the RCT evidence, it’s much easier for ‘experts’ and ideologues to ignore it and cling to the lower tier evidence, be it in vitro or uncontrolled epidemiological data.

It’s a huge and pervasive problem, and you as a consumer of health information must always be on the lookout for it.

PS. For those wanting to view the evidence showing fluvoxamine to be a monumental flop in treating ‘COVID’, refer to the following links:

Fluvoxamine: A Toxic and Potentially Deadly Antidepressant, Now Here to Save You From ‘COVID’

Dear Steve Kirsch: Fluvoxamine is a Toxic SSRI and Does NOT Treat 'COVID'

A brief summary of fluvoxamine harms can be viewed here:

Steve Kirsch Memepool: A Tribute to our Fearless Defender of Toxic, Suicide-Inducing Antidepressant Drugs

Update May 2, 2024: In the comments section below, someone with a Substack called Collapse Podcast has linked to a page titled “Fluvoxamine for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 21 studies.”

They offer no discussion of the contents of that page, but I assume they believe it to be some sort of rebuttal to what I’ve posted above.

Not bloody likely.

That page is to be found at the website c19early.org, run by unnamed individuals who claim “We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor.”

I hope their contribution is a lot less than very minor, because their methodology is appalling. Most of the fluvoxamine studies included in their so-called meta-analysis aren’t even clinical trials, but uncontrolled observational studies.

Here’s a quick rundown of the ones classed as clinical trials.

c19early.org lists Farahani et al under "Early treatment," but the study did not even examine effect of fluvoxamine in preventing or treating COVID! Outcomes were effects on alleged post-COVID "neuropsychiatric" symptoms. There was no statistically significant difference in any outcome except for fatigue, which could easily be explained by fluvoxamine's stimulant effect. Twice as many fluvoxamine subjects discontinued treatment than placebo subjects (6 vs 3), with no explanation as to why.

Wannigama et al was the unblinded and untenable farce from Thailand that I discussed in detail here.

Siripongboonsitti et al was another unblinded Thai study, this time showing no benefit to fluvoxamine.

Reis et al (TOGETHER trial) was an absolute shitshow, and https://c19early.org/reis10.html actually admits it. I discussed TOGETHER and the shady characters behind it here.

Lenze et al 2020 was riddled with conflict of interest and dubious data, as explained here.

In Reierson et al (STOP-COVID 2), fluvoxamine was an out-and-out failure and the trial was aborted early.

Bramante et al examined metformin, fluvoxamine and ivermection: "None of the three medications that were evaluated prevented the occurrence of hypoxemia, an emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death associated with Covid-19."

Seo et al was the Korean trial that found no benefit of fluvoxamine compared to placebo.

The c19early.org page Collapse Podcast links to falsely claims Stewart et al/ACTIV-6 showed 31% "improvement" in "progression" which is utter bollocks. Here's what the study actually found: “Fluvoxamine, 100 mg twice daily, does not shorten the duration of symptoms in outpatient adults with mild to moderate COVID-19."

I also discuss the ACTIV-6 results here.

From this overwhelming mass of failure, the crew at c19early.org cherry pick outcomes and egregiously claim "the most serious outcome reported shows 39% [22‑53%] lower risk. Results are similar for Randomized Controlled Trials."

Which is complete nonsense.

To top it all off, no mention is made of fluvoxamine’s appalling safety profile, including the increased risk of suicidal behaviour it causes. In their inane “conflicts of interests” section, no mention is made that most of the trials claiming benefit for fluvoxamine were co-authored by Eric Lenze and/or Angela Reiersen, who are co-holders of a patent for the use of fluvoxamine as a COVID treatment.

Whoever put that page together has no business commenting on health matters, because their incompetence is dangerous.