3 ms·

c19study.com You're wrong.

• nemothekid 3y ago
  This meta-analysis site has been shilled since the early days of COVID and has given thousands of people, who have no business trying to parse medical data, a false sense of understanding of these dubious medical reports. This is despite the fact that no governing medical body has approved or shown the efficacy of these drugs; even those bodies that have no economic bias, such as China or Russia. I'm not enthused at the idea of various "nsa-study.com" sites popping up claiming god-knows-what poorly backed up by poorly understood NSA nginx logs.
  • believecty 3y ago
    "Shilled". I love how you just dismiss evidence that demonstrates how wrong you are by insulting it. Go get your 10th booster vaxxie.
    • nemothekid 3y ago
      I didn't dismiss it by insulting it. I dismissed it because despite the "evidence" no one has seen consistent results. If IVM and HCQ are so cheap and widely available, why hadn't China and Russia reported any success using these drugs? What motivation does China have in continuing to buy MRNA vaccines and prop up American pharma companies? Both Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have easily made generics, and yet China and Russia stuck with vaccines and saw no success with alternatives. Somehow the greatest minds of c19study.com came to great conclusions, but the people in charge of spending money and saving lives - in the West and abroad - opted not to use ivm. You ignored my entire post in order tone police me.