While I cannot vouch for the validity of the study, taking a look at your comment history I don't see you regularly calling out hyperbole in headlines. There i

While I cannot vouch for the validity of the study, taking a look at your comment history I don't see you regularly calling out hyperbole in headlines. There is very much a difference between a reporter reporting on something where they often use headlines with hyperbole to grab attention and the actual underlying data. Unlike most articles written this one actually includes a easy link right to the study. https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis... It seems quite disingenuous to associate a reporter writing a headline to grab attention to the actual scientist who conducted the study as if they endorsed such headlines. Looking at the article I don't see that this was written by the underlying scientist who conducted the study so you cannot act like they support this headline. The abstract of their study does not even hint that they believe this proves anything.