I'm not a fan of IVM being used for acute Covid, but this is where things go off the rail. Do you have a list of DB-RCT studies on injecting sunlight and drinking bleach? The problem with IVM is the studies are all over the place, the methodologies are lax, and the sample sizes are often small. In the end, most medical professionals believe the evidence of any significant efficacy is lacking.
But calling it horse paste or comparing it to drinking bleach doesn't really help. HCQ didn't pan out, and I wouldn't be surprised if we find out Remdesevir was less effective than we thought (same thing happened in Ebola when they finally did a higher quality trial).
And for Long Covid, we haven't really studied it yet because no one can agree on what it is or how to diagnose it. Sound familiar?
In general, I wish we had better studies on both therapeutics and Long Covid (which they initially just called psychological and completely ignored) with more reliable methodologies and larger sample sizes. It's somewhat inexcusable that 1.5 years into a pandemic that has cost trillions of dollars and millions of lives that it's hard to recruit 1,000 people for a clinical trial or get funding.
That's why we are where we are. Without several million dead people, there would be no Long Covid. Without a worldwide crisis, this would just be another Incline Village where they ostracize and minimize anyone with long term health issues for the rest of their lives. And they would still be telling us maybe we need to 'get out' more often. (Just kidding, they'll still tell us that.)
This.
