It may work, but that's why you get recommendations for "vaccine made me magnetic" and other garbage like that whenever you search for videos.
It's the same group that was pushing hydroxychloroquine as a miracle drug
What is their vested interest in a generic, cheap, decades old, off patent drug? Vested interests tend to be in new, patented treatments. That's where big pharma profit is. So let's try a rephrase: Many people pushing patented treatments have a vested interest in proving off patent alternatives are unnecessary.
For example, here's Merck warning against using Ivermectin for Covid-19:
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use...
Then a few months later, "Merck Announces Supply Agreement with U.S. Government for Molnupiravir, an Investigational Oral Antiviral Candidate for Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19"
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-...
If ivermectin was authorized as a viable treatment the vaccines receiving emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been possible. There were and still are billions on the line.
None of them are as effective as Ivermectin (allegedly). It is only logical that efficacy is also important.
Same as in coding, you eventually reach a point where you learn that when in doubt, you must read the source.
And so far we do not have any. So until then this story is pushed way further than it has any right to. Weinstein thrives on the censorship, but the fact of the matter is that there simply is no proven efficacy and until then this has no business being promoted to a mainstream audience who might get themselves into a lot of trouble, or who might forego getting vaccinated.
Any other treatment is basically unnecessary at this point because COVID deaths in vaccinated people are less than 1 in a million.
That's why anti-vaxxers are so vested in other treatments. It's the only way they can rationalize not getting vaccinated
Vaccines and covid are going to come back every year for sure.
if I was so worried about such a thing i might start to think maybe I was being manipulated to fear something that didnt exist.
Nobody has implemented vaccine passports. And nobody will.
But the idea of a treatment even close to effective as a vaccine is attractive to those that believe that in such magical thinking
Ivermectin might be cheap but the vaccine is literally free if you're in the US. There's zero reason to not get it, and zero reason to hang onto hope that alternatives will work. We already have an extremely effective treatment, so effective it can wipe of the virus entirely, and its totally free.
Our government under Trump bought the vaccine en masse for a few dollars a dose. Those that refuse such a miracle treatment when the rest of the world dies of COVID are a stain on America's sheen
New York's Excelsior Pass is a vaccine passport, and has been called such by New York Times and other sources.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/09/nyregion/excelsior-pass-v...
https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/topstories/new-york-s-excels...
The line of reasoning hinges on the vaccines being "experimental" and only being distributed under an Emergency Use Authorization, as opposed to a full approval. The FDA policies for EUA indicate they're only to be used when there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative. This makes a lot of sense - if (let's say) someone comes up with a new flu vaccine (an mRNA one, to continue this example, as that would be kinda exciting), you really want it to go through the full approval process instead of EUA, even if it is better. That's because we have plenty of good, approved flu vaccines.
So, the theory goes, if we had an approved treatment for Covid, then the EUA for the vaccines would be illegal. And so that creates incentives for the pharmaceutical companies to suppress a miracle cure like (they claim) ivermectin.
To anybody with the capacity for rational thought, this is obviously bullshit. We have fully approved treatments already, including remdesivir. The idea that a treatment for Covid, even a pretty good one, would make vaccines unnecessary makes no sense.
I am fairly confident in making the following prediction. Full FDA approval for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines is likely by the end of the year[1], at which point the above line of reasoning will no longer be applicable. Antivaxxers will smoothly transition to another line of argument.
I do think this "theory" is one reason you see a significant overlap between pro-ivermectin and antivax, for example in the comments of Bret Weinstein videos.
[1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/covid-vaccines-what-full-fda...
The vaccines are as effective as the one that eliminated smallpox. To be against it, you need some serious FUD
For young people, the cost-benefit analysis isn't clear at all--much less risk of anything bad at all from covid itself, plus far more years of life to lose or suffer from vaccine injury, which is a totally unknown risk.
To boot, the vaccines contain at least three entirely new technologies never before adopted in vaccine treatment.
If a better treatment was available that would lower the death rate that much, it would change the equation.
Under the PREP act, pharma companies have total immunity from liability. Why would that be. Maybe because the vaccines are still only in stage 3 of clinical trials? Because the long term effects are unknown because it hasn't been long? With worrying reports about side-effects including at least 5000 deaths in the U.S. VAERS database, do you think those quotes are appropriate?
> The idea that a treatment for Covid, even a pretty good one, would make vaccines unnecessary makes no sense.
Actually, it makes perfect sense to many people.
You are shooting down the weak version of this argument. I think you are confounding necessity from the point of view of the state and institutions with necessity from the point of view of many people.
You are correct that the state and health institutions do want to get people vaccinated regardless of other cures, the evidence for that is overwhelming and existence and availability of some alternative strategy/cure isn't going to stop immediately that intent.
However, if there was, hypothetically, an accessible and efficient medication/treatment with profylactic or curing effects for COVID-19, this would make substantial portion of population skeptical about getting the vaccine, especially now that the number of serious cases is low and manageable.
It's one of the biggest infectious disease success stories since the invention of penicillin
If there was anything dangerous within even 3 orders of magnitude of those that have died because they didn't get the vaccine it would be front page news.
Get vaccinated
https://vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_...
And the person you are responding basically said that the new vaccines are so safe that it didn't have to be on that list.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27513984
I don't mean this as a personal attack on that user, but It is really concerning how blind and apologetic some people are to the various things that can go wrong with a Vaccine.
Oh, that is great! Where can I find this tracker and the reports of side-effects? And this number we have, what is it? Can you write it here?
Should I rely for this information on my TV news?
What do these people (the promoters) get out of it? Attention? A more dedicated following?
The narrative for "the Ivermectin story" is particularly compelling, as it involves brave maverick doctors working selflessly to get the word out, suppression and censorship by shadowy organizations (big pharma fearing competition, the big Internet companies just lusting after the power of thought-control), and the empowerment of people to take medical decisions into their own hands.
Incidentally, this was the exact same narrative as HCQ, and is being pushed by a lot of the same people. The end of the story may turn out differently, as the evidence on HCQ is overwhelming that it doesn't work, so you only see dead-enders pushing it, but there is a good chance that Ivermectin will turn out to be at least moderately effective, though the jury is still out.