I'd love to believe in this free market utopia where the end result is always in the best interest of the community. In reality it's well known that companies rely on cartels to protect their shared interests.
We can't know if pharmaceuticals are actively holding back any cure but it would be naive to completely trust organizations which only need to answer to their shareholders.
Dangerous rhetoric? It is true that western governments and organizations have been quite disappointing when it was about checking anything that wasn't the vaccine.
If there is something i might be doing in case i get the virus before I can get my shot i'd like to be given that chance.
Hey you don't own the streets so if someone slower is in front of you, you might just slow down for a while and don't give a damn about slowing traffic. Better safe than sorry.
While it's true that this site is putting together every study available, there have been also meta analysis studies which only used a subset of higher quality studies. Here is an example where you can see a plot where only the randomized controlled trials are used https://b3d2650e-e929-4448-a527-4eeb59304c7f.filesusr.com/ug... which still show improvements linked to Ivermectin
Yes I saw it in the list, but if you expand it they explain the flaws. + every news article on the topic that came out in the last weeks mentions it as proof of how uneffective ivermectin is.
I've followed the topic quite a while and there seem to be many trustworthy proponents for the use of Ivermectin at any stage of the disease. On the contrary people against it seem to be only pointing to the fact that there isn't enough quality research in favor for its use (which doesn't seem to be the case), or to this study https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389 , which is raising many red flags to plenty of researchers as being a badly designed study.