“More recently, the evidence for ivermectin’s efficacy relied very substantially on a single piece of research,...”
This is lie. It is not merely wrong, or an error, it is a deliberate untruth.
************************************************************
Which is the lie? This piece or the many success stories of Ivermectin (and Hydroxychloroquine)?
The claim that the evidence for IVM rested on a single study. That was never the case, and the authors know it.
The evidence that convinced the world consists of three meta-analyses, each conducted independently, and each reaching the same conclusion that IVM is a safe, effective treatment for early stage (viral stage) COVID, and as a prophylaxis.
Andrew Hill, Tess Lawrie, and Paul Merick’s groups all have published independently, and made the same findings. Tess Lawrie has already analyzed the effect of excluding the cited study, and has published her results in pre-print, showing that removing this study has no effect on the findings.
The authors are simply lying. There is no other way to describe this piece.