WOKE idiots! And how can Covid survivor get a vax after COVID when doctors say it’s unsafe & useless?

imgflip.com/i/5m7o0y
Yep there are idiots taking Ivermectin for live stock but a version has been approved for humans since 1980s. Dubbed a "wonder drug" as outlined in a 2011 publication. Also a publication titled "global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in covid-19" has 52 pages of studies and why the Merck Drug Co that owns the drug declined to submit for Clinical trials

The drug is for treating parasites, not viruses. Viruses are not parasites. You should read that paper. I doubt you have.

If you had, you'd know part where the first trial was in Australia where they applied the horse paste directly to the virus. Where it did destroy the lipid shell. In vitro. Not in a body. In a test tube.

And that to achieve that effect in the human bloodstream, they estimated that it would take 10 times the safe approved parasite dosage levels. If you think about it, if it's breaking down cell walls (that lipid barrier) what's it gonna do to you at 10xs the safe dosage levels?

That's probably why Merck has declined to submit it for any clinical trials.

Then search in the study for this name: Elgazzar.

I'll save you some time. It's here: 117) Elgazzar A, Hany B, Youssef SA, Hany B, Hafez M, Moussa H: Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19 pandemic. Research Square preprint. doi; https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-100956/v1

A LOT of fuss has been made about that study. It claimed that ivermectin is really effective in treating covid-19 and it had a lot of positive results.

Then it was discovered that the study had been faked. Names were made up. Results were cherry-picked or even outright fabricated. Often they were doubled up. The math wasn't just wrong, it was faked. It's all a lie.

And any conclusion on the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin using that study is inherently false.

So, on one hand, we have a vaccine that has FDA approval with reams of documentation about its success. And there's 0 out of pocket expense for you to get it.

On the other hand, we have some horse paste meant to kill parasites, that the FDA has said explicitly "don't use this!!", the manufacturer won't submit it for official testing, what testing has been done on it makes it look dangerous AND successful results have been faked, AND you have to pay for it.

Read the 52 page publication? Yes I read about 40 pages of it. Why do you keep calling it horse paste? It has been used in humans since 1980s. In the publication it was brought up of concern of the high doses could cause issues but they said even in normal doses it proved beneficial.

There are many trials the publication lists and large ongoing ones. The manufacturer won't submit for trial because why would they when they're developing a pill for treating covid. More money in new medicine. Ivermectin for humans is not dangerous. It is used all over the world for humans since 1980s. Like any drug, if used incorrectly, it can be dangerous.

Your reasoning isn't sound.

Why would a manufacturer spend money to develop a new drug when they have one on the shelf ready to go at no cost? Because they have it right there, already developed, and it's at no development cost. They could sell it right away at wildly inflated prices and make far far far more money than developing a new drug.

Why should I spend time and money making a new thing, when I can repackage an old thing and make the same amount of money?

ivermectin isn't approved by the FDA for use in the treatment of covid. There are few studies on it now, and they're literally still in the experimental stage with no early conclusive evidence. The manufacturer has said there is no sound scientific evidence for its use in covid treatments.

Encouraging people to consider using it is reckless at its best and dangerous at its worst.

"Why would a manufacturer spend money to develop a new drug when they have one on the shelf ready to go at no cost? Because they have it right there, already developed, and it's at no development cost. They could sell it right away at wildly inflated prices and make far far far more money than developing a new drug."
I cannot tell what side you're arguing?

The manufacturer stated that prior to even any studies done.

As far as reckless encouragement, I guess take that up with the doctors prescribing it.

Stated prior to any studies being done? Sure seems like a weird thing to do.

Especially, since it says right there in the statement that there is no evidence from either pre-clinical and clinical trials. https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

So...they're lying?

Well, let's check. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/

That has all the studies done about ivermectin and covid. Including the flawed one. Let's do a search for 2020.

Huh. Would you look at that. Results for studies completed in 2020.

Wow. It's like they weren't lying.

So. You're going to trust your life to a study that literally faked its data?

That's a risk you want to take?

An experimental treatment that contains outright lies and fabrications?

That seems reasonable and scientific to you?

You mean like the global warming studies? Talk to your doctor and make a decision.

I read through your info and almost said "oh OK, my mistake" but...
They made that announcement in Feb of 21. Yes trials were done in 2020. Merck declined to enter in to trial sometime between April 28 2020 and May 13 2020.

Original "global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in covid-19" mentioned on this as well as one article below Gives time frame.

https://trialsitenews.com/kitasato-university-in-discussions-with-merck-to-conduct-ivermectin-clinical-trial-targeting-covid-19/

Here is one more that shows their history of denial and cover up.

https://trialsitenews.com/mercks-deadly-vioxx-playbook-redux-a-debunked-smear-campaign-against-its-competing-drug-the-fda-approved-nobel-prize-honored-ivermectin/