[tired&retired]

I agree with you that Ivermectin looks good as a treatment.

However, it is important to understand the greater picture that is already unfolding.

Science does not stop at “It Works.” Science investigates why it does or does not work in order to find better solutions.

[tired&retired]

“For example, rhesus macaques who were vaccinated with the Spike protein of the SARS-CoV virus demonstrated severe acute lung injury when challenged with SARS-CoV, while monkeys who were not vaccinated did not.

Similarly, mice who were immunized with one of four different SARS-CoV vaccines showed histopathological changes in the lungs with eosinophil infiltration after being challenged with SARS-CoV virus. This did not occur in the controls that had not been vaccinated.

A similar problem occurred in the development of a vaccine for FIPV, which is a feline coronavirus.”

[Candor7]

Science does not stop at “It Works.” Science investigates why it does or does not work in order to find better solutions.>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes, true when scientists are not living in fear of infection brought about by the use of such therapy as Ivermectin.

Dr. Pierre Kory approves of this message:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeYoXGoh96w

How Ivermectin works:

“Ivermectin docks to the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain attached to ACE2”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343390023_Ivermectin_docks_to_the_SARS-CoV-2_spike_receptor-binding_domain_attached_to_A

[cgbg]

Science investigates why it does or does not work in order to find better solutions.

This is correct--unless big corporate profits or big government grants are on the line.

Then scientists turn into back alley whores.

[Maelstrom]

It appears that there is NO science in any venue of COVID-19 beyond its inception in the Wuhan Lab, and its Gain of Function research.