6 Sep 2022 8:51 am
It's not a double blind study. And...the sample size was tiny (something that you **** are complaining about all the time, except when it's something you like), and there was no treatment adherence function to confirm that the participants were following procedure. In other words, in the real world of real science, it's ****.GHETTOBLASTER » 06 Sep 2022, 8:27 am » wrote: ↑ I don't think these researchers were getting paid by Big Pharma to release these findings.
If these findings were proven fraudulent in a law suit brought by BIG PHARMA ..imagine the harm it would do to the LITTLE PEOPLE who are posting their positive findings about ivermectin.
Ivermectin Shows Antiviral Activity Against COVID-19 and May Reduce Transmission (infectiousdiseaseadvisor.com)
But let's say, by some action there is some impact on the shedding of already damaged and non-functional virus remains. So **** what. Ivermectin is not an affective treatment to stop Covid-19 from making people sick or killing them. And I'm not taking a possibly toxic drug to keep myself from infecting people when I'm recovering from Covid-19...
I'M WEARING MY **** MASK.
And there's only one invitro research study done (in a **** test tube, not a human being bluto
) that shows any affect on active Covid-19 virus...and it was at a dose level 25 times higher than the maxiumum non-poisonous human dose.Give it a **** rest.