Ivermectin : the BonSens.org association attacks Dr Hill’s meta-analysis as fraudulent science

The BonSens Association demands the withdrawal of Dr Andrew Hill’s meta-analysis.

As part of its commitment to defend the health of its members and the health of citizens in countries throughout Europe and the world,  BonSens.org announced today that it had sent a letter to senior academic leaders at the University of Liverpool about the preprint paper ‘Preliminary meta-analysis of randomized trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection’ by Dr Andrew Hill and his project team.

BonSens.org is currently participating in the forthcoming legal action to secure an emergency use authorisation for ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 patients in France. The letter highlights the serious concerns about the scientific credibility of Dr Hill’s paper, following concerns raised by professional colleagues of Dr Hill, who are also participating in ivermectin research.

A member of the Association's office confirms that:

"We are concerned about unethical scientific interference in the production of Dr Hill's preprint paper, by the project’s promoters Unitaid or other as yet unidentified actors."

On Monday (22/3/21), the European Medicines Agency advised against the use of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, outside of clinical trials.  The Association questions whether the purpose of this scientific interference in Dr Hill’s meta-analysis, "is to delay emergency authorizations for the use of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, in France and throughout the world".

The Association commissioned a forensic communication consultant to assess the paper. Arising from this work, an email was sent to Dr Hill on 18 March 2021 seeking further information or explanation in respect of 23 important questions about the paper. Dr Hill has not yet responded to this email of any of the issues raised in it.

The Association’s office has confirmed that BonSens.org has "requested the immediate withdrawal of this study , pending a full investigation of the concerns we have raised and the concerns about Dr Hill’s paper already in the public domain."