If iver is a good gamble, then wouldn't the vaccine be a better gamble?
After all, unlike iver, there is very good hospitalization data about vaccinated vs unvaccinated now.
After all, unlike iver, there is very good hospitalization data about vaccinated vs unvaccinated now.
The only reason one would be taking iver prophylactically, is because one wasn't vaccinated. And the only reason to take iver after covid symptoms develop is because you didn't take the vaccine.
If one was vaccinated and are feeling sick enough to take iver, she would be better off with oxygen and hospital SOC.
For instance, if you get tetanus after having the vaccine, you'll still be given antibiotics. If someday ivermectin is proven to have a positive effect against Covid, we won't withhold it from vaccinated patients.
Do republicans or liberals get better probabilities? Or is it only for Covid related odds?