> then pre-maturely shutting down other potential treatments (ivermectin, fluvoxamine, hcq), when there isn’t really a consensus for either thing. You listed 1

> then pre-maturely shutting down other potential treatments (ivermectin, fluvoxamine, hcq), when there isn’t really a consensus for either thing. You listed 1 drug proven to work, Fluvoxamine, with two that have repeatedly failed in well designed RCTs… The problem with HCQ and Ivermectin are they are both being oversold as a near-certain cure. They’ve been politicized and you see the media reacting to that. Traditional media by debunking, social media by ineffectively trying to slow the spread of the false claims that you don’t need a vaccine or masks or social distancing because of HCQ and Ivermectin. HCQ is pretty clearly a dud. Ivermectin has a chance of having a small effect like 10% or 20%. Fluvoxamine is the real deal but why are you complaining about media censorship here? Google News for “Fluvoxamine” shows plenty of positive coverage e.g. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22619137/fluvoxamine-covid-ivermectin-together-study-mcmaster https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22619137/fluvoxamine-covi... > The limited, promising literature around fluvoxamine prompted its inclusion in the large-scale study of treatments for Covid-19 run by Ed Mills at McMaster University and primarily conducted in Brazil. Dubbed the TOGETHER study after other prominent mega-clinical trials like RECOVERY and SOLIDARITY by other organizations, it randomized patients across eight prospective treatments, including metformin (a diabetes medication), hydroxychloroquine (an antimalarial), and ivermectin (an antiparasite). > The team announced their results at an August 6 symposium that was sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. Most of the treatments failed: Their study couldn’t detect an effect. “A lot of drugs against Covid just don’t work very well,” Mills told me. Two other treatments were still in progress, and it was too early to rule out the chance that they’ll work. > But fluvoxamine was a different story. In the trial, it improved patient outcomes substantially — and while it’s not the first drug to do that, ease of delivery and price give it the potential to have an outsized impact on patient care, especially outside the rich world