I didn't downvote -- the pro-ivermectin comments from swader999 are being made in good faith, and from what I can tell, the FLCCC's position is being held in go

I didn't downvote -- the pro-ivermectin comments from swader999 are being made in good faith, and from what I can tell, the FLCCC's position is being held in good faith, too, not from a political or conspiratorial position -- but it's at least worth taking a look at criticisms of the FLCCC's methods that are out there. The big criticisms of ivermectin as a treatment for Covid-19 are largely criticisms of the way trials have been conducted. An actual quote from Pierre Kory, one of the FLCCC's founders, is, "We disagree with how most practice evidence-based medicine. We think they are way too biased toward randomized controlled trials." https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/90552 https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/90552 And, it's possible that Dr. Kory's dislike of randomized controlled trials is in part because when they're run on his treatment methods, they don't seem to back them up: "Adults with mild Covid-19 who took a five-day course of the anti-parasite, tropical disease drug ivermectin showed no significant reduction in time to symptom resolution compared to patients taking placebo in a randomized, single-site clinical trial from Columbia." https://www.physiciansweekly.com/covid-19-antiparasite-drug-ivermectin-shows-no-benefit https://www.physiciansweekly.com/covid-19-antiparasite-drug-... The MedPage Today article notes that this isn't the first time this group of physicians' approaches have run into this "they think it works but the RCTs don't support it" problem, either. "Marik is known in the field for developing the HAT protocol for sepsis…a combination of hydrocortisone, ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and thiamine. His group's 2017 observational study of the protocol, published in CHEST, garnered excitement about the combination. But that hasn't been borne out in subsequent trials, including [names three studies]. Marik said the group adapted the protocol for COVID-19, using a more potent steroid and adding an anticoagulant, along with other elements." So, this is controversial because they came up with a protocol for sepsis that hasn't been shown to work in randomized controlled trials, modified that protocol to treat Covid-19 in a way that so far doesn't seem to have been shown to work in randomized controlled trials, either, and are arguing that what this actually demonstrates is that randomized controlled trials suck. Maybe they're right, or maybe future RCTs will support this treatment as other doctors run similar trials. But, at slightly more than first glance, it seems to me that caution about ivermectin being a wonder drug in this context is warranted.