Covid vaccine vs Ivermectin. Which is better for treating covid?

Why does the left always want to stifle free speech like Hitler did?

did you just say you want to ban profiteers from contradicting whatever narrative is being pushed by the establishment

no

where u get that

Which to your concrete way of thinking can only be accomplished by ban.  I see.  What if, instead, Republicans simply acknowledged the truth as it manifests, rather than misinforming for power and grift?

wiki + common knowledge

ok pal

Ivermectin shows some promise, judging by the trials in Uttar Pradesh. It will be interesting to see the results of more specific trials rolling out in Asia. As to the media screech-fest over adverse effects, it's an entirely manufactured problem. Ivermectin, when taken at the proper dose, is a very safe medication. The poisoning cases are happening because humans are taking veterinary ivermectin. Why are human's taking veterinary ivermectin? Because they can't get safe human doses of ivermectin. And why can't they get safe human doses of ivermectin? Because regulatory bodies in the US are trying to make it difficult for doctors to prescribe it, and the media is stirring up a firestorm over it. The whole 'crisis' would go away if doctors were just encouraged to prescribe proper doses of ivermectin. At worst, it would just be like prescribing a placebo.

Overall, most of vaccine hesitancy has to do with phase 3 trials being skipped. This means that nobody really knows what kind of long term effects it has. Ramming through FDA approval won't change that fact, and trying to mandate vaccination by law will just make people more suspicious. Ivermectin has been prescribed all over the world for decades and its side effects are very well known. If it provides an effective prophylactic effect, the vaccine hesitant ought to be encouraged to take it, as it's pretty clear by the numbers coming out of Israel that the vaccines aren't very effective at fighting new variants (shocker, I know, it's almost like there's a reason that we don't typically vaccinate against coronaviruses). If the big concern du jour is the unvaccinated taking up emergency wards, an effective prophylactic solves that problem. But of course large companies don't hold lucrative patents on Ivermectin, those expired in 25 years ago. Without any moneyed interests to grease beltway pockets, the right thing will seldom get done. So we'll just continue to manufacture an absurd situation where desperate people are taking veterinary medicine and then pull our hair out as if it isn't just another instance of our retarded country shooting itself in the foot.

The recent meta-analyses of the random control trials which exclude the falsified Egyptian study suggest that Ivermectin is not effective for treating COVID-19. The notion that it was potentially effective had to do with how the COVID-19 virus responded to it in a petri dish or something. This is quite different than having Ivermectin in the blood, and to get the same amount of Ivermectin in contact with that virus the doses would have to be very high. This might be the thinking some people have when taking very large doses of the drug and then ending up calling poison control centers. There is some R&D in to Ivermectin, trying to get it in some vaporized form to be inhaled so that the respiratory tract can have high levels of the drug where it would be in direct contact with the COVID-19 virus like it was in the original petri dish study. This would avoid the necessity of ingesting dangerously large quantities. However, this method requires new technologies and testing which haven't been developed yet. So, it will probably be some time before we know for sure about it. Hopefully the developing technique produces a good treatment.