Wrong.
All the studies showed some advantages to Ivermectin.
But with some people, there are better things to try.
You keep trying until you find one that works for each individual.
There will never be one treatment for all people, because it is not the virus you need to treat.
It it the patient's own immune system you have to treat, and each one is different.
I took the Moderna, and would not recommend it to anyone.
Worst 3 weeks of my life.
And the vaccines have killed near to 10,000, and only last 3 months.
The text in that post of mine you quote was an excerpt from the link, and my bad for not making that clear. Here's a more interesting, FYI, excerpt;
...
In North America, trials to get those answers have begun. The Together trial is an
adaptive, multi-arm trial—which means it enrolls people on an ongoing basis and uses statistical techniques to swap drugs in and out as they either succeed or fail. Besides helping dispatch hydroxychloroquine, the Together trial has now similarly shown that the antidiabetes (and sometimes anti-aging) drug
metformin doesn’t make much of a difference, either.
But political activists didn’t turn metformin into a rhetorical tool; ivermectin has stans so aggressive they make Gamergaters seem chill. Mills says he and his colleagues have been abused and threatened by ivermectin adherents; the trial designers even went through the rigorous process of changing the dosage administered to comport better to the fans’ preferred regimen of three days instead of just one. “We tested, what, seven other drugs? Nobody abuses us about the other drugs. We even showed one of them worked,” Mills tells me. His team touted positive results for fluvoxamine, “and that crowd doesn’t seem to care. If you ask them, ‘Why do you feel so strongly about ivermectin?’ they will say, ‘Because we feel there should be a cheap, effective drug that can be used by poor people.’ OK, well, we have that. We have it with fluvoxamine, and with inhaled budesonide. Why do they not care about those drugs? They don’t have an answer. They just want to talk about ivermectin.”
I’ve written about this problem
before. Since the pandemic began, physicians and researchers have launched hundreds of trials for Covid-19 drugs, involving thousands of volunteer participants. But drug trials are complicated and expensive. Taken individually, few of those trials had the rigorous design or statistical power to give
results robust enough to change the standard of care. A few did, of course. The drug remdesivir—in a trial partially supported by a pharma company—showed some success. Expensive monoclonal antibodies (
touted by Florida governor Ron DeSantis as an alternative to vaccines or masks) were hits, too. But a health care worker has to administer them. “There was this notion of a 1,000 flowers blooming, all these individual sites doing local trials. But there was no integration of those, so you couldn’t generate answers that would change guidelines,” Hernandez says.
...
Studies have been small and often not great. The best info so far says don’t use it, get vaccinated, and hang in there for the more promising meds being tested.
www.wired.com
~~~~~~~~~~~
Having already "caught" COVID and recovered, I'm not expecting to need either the vaccine or treatment(s) since my immune system seems fairly healthy on this issue now.
