Originally Posted by
dera
The problem your assumption has is that you believe there are "myriad studies" (sic) that show ivermectin is an effective treatment, when there are none that are peer reviewed such as this one.
There are actually numerous peer reviewed studies that show Ivermectin is effective as both a prophylaxis and treatment. I would be happy to supply you with several.
What the study posted by the OP fails to mention is the dosage given or how long the patients had Covid as the study hasn’t even been published. Not even Dr. Fauci knows how this study was conducted. The only thing we do know is that it was only tested for 3 days. Yea, I’m sure it was extremely in depth.
I still find it laughable that the only studies that show Ivermectin is ineffective are all funded by the very drug companies that have billions to lose to a competing drug. I wonder if that’s why NONE of these studies use the drug as intended. They all only test for 3 days or only give 10% of the normal dosage or test people who don’t even have Covid, etc. The peer reviewed studies that do show ivermectin being effective, almost all have no conflicts of interest listed. Before 2020, every sane person would agree this all seems a little fishy. Every doctor that has used Ivermectin advocates for it. But in todays world, we only give someone credit if theyre given airtime on TV channels that receive most of their ad revenue from drug companies.
Also, the Department of Defense and Eco Health Alliance (helped fund the Wuhan lab) acknowledged in April 2020 that Ivermectin was a curative for Covid. That is a fact. While not proven yet, Dr. Fauci was most likely aware of this fact as he worked with Eco Health Alliance while these discussions were taking place with the DoD.