Given:
1. the outstanding safety profile for Ivermectin established over decades;
2. an obviously much shorter history of devel. & use for Merck pill
3. the necessarily limited number of clinical studies (>1?)
1. the outstanding safety profile for Ivermectin established over decades;
2. an obviously much shorter history of devel. & use for Merck pill
3. the necessarily limited number of clinical studies (>1?)
https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1466206976371793930
just how much more effective *was* the Merck pill than ivermectin in the best IVM studies that Merck should get immediate authorization despite doubts while ivermectin is still only permitted in clinical studies?
Over 30 years, ivermectin has the third fewest adverse events, orders of magnitude fewer than even aspirin & tylenol (but dangerous horse paste!)...and the C19 approved ahead of it: 2.4 million adverse events reported in year 1. 
Show it doesn't work--fine. But do not claim it can only be used in clinical trials because its safety is not established, while the vaccines and now Merck's pill get approved.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
