Redux

Why do you need Ivermectin to not work? As a safe medicine, should we not give it fair trials and actually get the data without compromised results? Meanwhile in NH https://yournews.com/2022/03/16/2315005/new-hampshire-house-approves-over-the-counter-ivermectin/ In Ohio https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/ohio-doctors-could-soon-be-required-to-promote-ivermectin-to-treat-covid-19?_amp=true In Tennessee https://www.wsmv.com/2022/04/09/ivermectin-its-way-becoming-available-without-prescription-tennessee/ I guess for me, it's the fact we're talking about a safe and world renowned medicine being wrongfully stigmatized by CNN and the like. And even if it's only effective when Covid19 is combined with parasitic infections and you only know that after the fact, why wouldn't we want to have another tool in the tool box? We want the same thing after all.

Why don't you want a safe treatment option?

Why would they unless there is enough collective data to back up a claim? And there won't be enough data, not any time soon.

I find it really sad and concerning you're so against a harmless treatment option. But then again you were calling it horse medicine so I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but actual science is misinformation because it doesn't fit your narrative. It was a joke you curmudgeon

Yeah, the FDA wouldn't be selective in choosing what gets touted and what gets villainized.......... No, that's ridiculous. People should be able to ask for and receive a harmless people medecine as a treatment option. Hence why it's being adopted as an option like I showed yesterday. Wait, if the trials were rushed.....that would mean any Ivermectin trials would have been rushed too and...oh wait I think I'm seeing an obvious pattern here. Enough with the Horse stigma, I already debunked that lunacy.

https://ivmmeta.com/ https://c19ivermectin.com/

Because it wasn't designed to treat a virus, that's quite obvious. Again, off label use is not a new concept. If it works for some that's great, if it doesn't and there are no real risks why not use it? Expect for when it does but we ignore that because the media called it horsey medecine right?

Welcome to most clinical trials. Also, those conflicts of interest are coming from the side that doesn't want to find a successful treatment. Again we're talking about a non harmful people medecine, so if it doesn't work for everyone as a treatment it's not a big deal. So why would there be so much "conflict? No, it's not proven yet to treat Covid. Probably never will be because, vaccines. Again it's non harmu, and off label use is not a new concept. Vaccines are preventative, medecine is treatment. Why wouldn't we want both to help fight a pandemic? You hear how ridiculous that sentiment you make is right? And that effectiveness you're touting has as much time being tested as Ivermectin does as a treatment. It wasn't lazy, it was intentional misinformation to deter people from seeking out Ivermectin. Last time, a non harmful people drug that has been tested and used successfully as a treatment medecine. The only reason you or anyone else is so against a non harmful people medecine as a treatment is because you've been indoctrinated to so so.

I guess resort to desperation? Whatever works for ya Fauci contradicts himself constantly. He's not THE authority on science, you know that right? A lot of what he predicted was wrong, a lot of the guidelines weren't perfect because we were all guessing, you know that right? I'm advocating for treating Covid if someone gets it, and getting vaccinated beforehand if it isn't a health risk. And by treatment I mean harmless medicines that I've debunked in the last day or so that people were calling horse dewormer. If it works amazing and if it doesn't no harm no foul. Echo chamber with who, myself?

You literally like your article more than I like mine. LITERALLY this is why "CITE YOUR SOURCE" is moronic in most cases

*your If you followed the money you'd know WHY any harmless treatments were cast as nonsense like Horse Dewormer in favor of vaccination.

https://www.unz.com/proberts/must-read-breaking-news-japanese-clinical-trial-concludes-ivermectin-is-safe-and-effective-treatment-of-covid/

https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching Trust the science

Why shouldn't they do both? Why would you be against potential treatment, wish death?

No the problem is that the documentation was canceled mid trial in some instances, and only clinical studies where Ivermectin could not be determined as having any effects were released to where people can find them. The reason being that if people hear "horse medecine" and "not enough information that it's beneficial" they'll instead seek out a vaccine. Which, by the way, are also not 100% effective regardless of variant. Suppressing information, which happened just ask the quacks (lol), is sickening. I would urge listening to McCullough and Malone about why Ivermectin and Quinine were smeared. I want a working vaccine and treatment. I also want political tribalism to go away from anything pandemic related.

Why are you anti treatment? I'll wait.

I did You're focusing on quotes from pro vaccine only Doctors cited in the article. I coule pull up favorable quotes for Ivermectin and you'd ignore it. So what's your point? If it works, it works. Even if it's on a smaller scale. Why are you anti treatment?

So if there is no harm and people have had success in using it as a treatment, what's the problem? What's the harm? Why continue to lie about it being veterinarian?

Nope. We should be looking for treatment AND a vaccine. Ignoring and smearing potential treatment is ridiculous.

I'm sorry, where does it say that Ivermectin is harmful? And nobody from that study showed any signs of improvement? Sure... From 2 days ago: https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/ohio-doctors-could-soon-be-required-to-promote-ivermectin-to-treat-covid-19?_amp=true

Since that was all you read, I'll offer some cliff notes that haven't changed since 2021 Or just click this: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04381884?term=Ivermectin&cond=COVID-19&draw=2&rank=1

Yup, now try to pretend for a second you don't already have your mind made up and look for any and I do mean ANY objective article or study about Ivermectin. Good luck, don't use Google FYI. Because if it's really about science, shouldn't we all want to know if there is a safe treatment with decades of use? Why supress that? We already know Ivermectin is a safe medecine.

https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/ Yes, if you read, there is not enough information (wonder why) to encourage or discourage the usage of Ivermectin as a treatment (not a cure, don't be dense).

That's putting it pretty open ended. Ivermectin has been around since the 70's and won a nobel prize, has had research out the wazzu and until 2020 was heralded as a wonder drug (yes, the human form). Now if you Google Ivermectin, you are only really going to see how It's NOT intended for usage against Covid. Nevermind that off label use of drugs and medecine is not a new practice by any stretch of the imagination, but why would that be? Spoiler Alert, not because countless morons died from horse pills.