Scott Alexander argues that doctors should prescribe fluvoxamine for COVID-19 despite FDA inaction, urging them to overcome discomfort with off-label use when evidence supports it. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the use of fluvoxamine (Luvox) as a potential treatment for COVID-19. He argues that despite strong evidence from clinical trials showing its effectiveness, many doctors are hesitant to prescribe it due to it being off-label use. The FDA has not added COVID-19 to the drug's label, citing bureaucratic issues. Scott criticizes this inaction and suggests that doctors should be willing to prescribe off-label when evidence supports it, even if it feels uncomfortable. He relates personal experiences of hesitating to prescribe off-label medications due to social pressure and encourages doctors to critically examine their reasons for not prescribing fluvoxamine for COVID-19. Shorter summary

Scott provides updates on efforts to get FDA approval for fluvoxamine as a COVID-19 treatment and reports on the early approval of Paxlovid. Longer summary

This post is an addendum to a previous article about Luvox and COVID-19 treatment. It updates readers on recent developments in the effort to get FDA approval for fluvoxamine (Luvox) as a COVID-19 treatment. Scott reports that Dr. Ed Mills and colleagues have found a way to submit an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) application to the FDA for fluvoxamine, despite the initial hurdle of not having a sponsoring drug company. The post also mentions the FDA's approval of Paxlovid, another COVID-19 drug, which happened earlier than expected according to prediction markets. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander responds to comments on his ivermectin article, discussing criticisms, the worms hypothesis, vaccine skepticism, and journalism quality. Longer summary

This post highlights comments on Scott Alexander's previous article about ivermectin as a potential COVID-19 treatment. Scott responds to criticisms from ivmmeta.com, discusses the worms hypothesis with various commenters, addresses concerns about the TOGETHER trial, and shares perspectives on vaccine skepticism and journalism quality. He also reflects on his own writing process compared to traditional journalism. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander analyzes ivermectin studies for COVID-19, finding most positive results likely due to methodological flaws, fraud, or confounding by parasitic infections. Longer summary

Scott Alexander provides an in-depth analysis of ivermectin studies for COVID-19 treatment, examining methodological issues, potential fraud, and confounding factors. He concludes that ivermectin likely doesn't significantly reduce COVID mortality except potentially in areas with high parasitic worm infections. The post explores broader issues around scientific credibility, fraud detection, and public trust in science. Shorter summary