Your post suggests some sort of an equivalence between the information we provided but in fact that couldn't be further from the case. Your articles are little more than Big Pharma's sales pitches.
Take your first link for example. They try to make a big deal out of a new
patented anti-viral pill, that took them well over 2 years and a million dead Americans to finally come up with, when hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have been 99+% successful in conjunction with zinc and azithromycin or doxycycline, ever since March of 2020.
I've learned a little more about the Merck experimental pill than Pfizer's, which they paid hundreds of millions of dollars to acquire the rights to. Then demonized their own product ivermectin in order to advance their new crap. They claimed it would be 50% effective but once it hit the market it was shown to be only about 30% effective.
Why would Merck try to kill their Nobel Prize winning miracle drug for COVID?
And to top it off the experimental pill could be capable of causing cancer.
Merck pill may cause cancer
Their ineffective new pill costs about $800 per course of treatment while I paid about $1 per pill for ivermectin and even if I had to double dose for 5 days, at my weight the whole treatment would cost me $15. But when I treated myself for Omicron I used a 1-1/2 dose on day 1 and day 3 ($3) then HCQ on day 4 and 5 with half dose of HCQ on day 6 (~$5 total), because I had already completely recovered. Plus, I took a medication that has proven itself to be virtually 100% effective, while having been shown to be one of the safest drugs on the planet over the last 35 years with billions of doses having been taken by humans.
The WHO says that mass distribution of IVM is an underutilized public health strategy.
WHO Bulletin-Mass treatment with ivermectin underutilized public health strategy
As was unequivocally demonstrated in Uttar Pradesh India as compared to their neighboring state of Kerala.
230 million people, 310,783 cases April, cut 97.1% in June, just 22 cases August