This is not good enough to draw reliable conclusions.
It is, you know. According to the American Journal of Therapeutics, who have published a gold standard review of 24 randomised trials conducted in 15 countries among more than 3400 people worldwide, showing infections fall and deaths are dramatically reduced when ivermectin is administered!!! So that is good enough after all.
https://pressreleases.responsesource.com/news/101445/expert-scientists-welcome-news-of-uk-government-funded-research-into-ivermectin/
if Oxford does a good study and concludes that there is a clear benefit, that's great news. If their conclusion is not positive, will you accept that?
yes it is great. So I have nothing to say , and nothing to accept or reject ; I am absolutely confident Oxford will find the same thing as Tess Lawrie, repeatability is how science works. btw: Another trial the Together Trial is due to report soon, again if it it done correctly, it is bound to be be another repeat of Tess Lawrie's work.
https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/whats-the-deal-with-ivermectin-and-covid/
regardless of patents, Merck seems to be the only manufacturer of the drug, so don't see why they would hold it back. It would make them lots of money. Your theory is just a guess at a conspiracy.
They would hold ir back if they have anothe fish to fry, that's how business works.
Since we now know for certain ivermectin works, so I expect Merck's objections to be brushed aside like a bit of fluff. Here's a list of 105 alternative makers of ivermectin: https://www.medindia.net/drug-price/ivermectin.htm
I'd be surprised if I'm not right, since thanks to Dr Lawrie, we now Know ivermectin works well, and that is just a plain fact according to 24 randomised trials conducted in 15 countries among more than 3400 people worldwide, showing infections fall and deaths are dramatically reduced when ivermectin is administered.
You'll just have to take your ivermectin and move on, thinksaboutit!!!
As for some greater "conspiracy" by Merck. The patent expired almost 25 years ago. So generics would be trivial to produce if demand was there.
Sanofi have reverse engineered it, they market it as an over the counter head lice cure called Sklice.
Who would have known? An over the counter head lice lotion cures covid19, no wonder Merck want to keep it very quiet to protect the market and price. Another study on ivermectin, to show it Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019
https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692(20)34898-4/fulltext
We're done here ivermectin works, and Merck is at it.
I am absolutely confident Oxford will find the same thing as Tess Lawrie, repeatability is how science works.
Except that it appears that they will not be repeating: https://covid19up.org/university-of-oxford-study-ivermectin/ . Dr Tess Lawrie has already voiced her concerns over this trial. There is a lot of dosh for big pharma hanging on a negative outcome. Arguments against the test methodolgy need to be made loud and clear before it is started.
Meanwhile, this report is very positive. Shame the mainstream media avoid such stories.
As for some greater "conspiracy" by Merck. The patent expired almost 25 years ago. So generics would be trivial to produce if demand was there.
Sanofi have reverse engineered it, they market it as an over the counter head lice cure called Sklice.
Who would have known? An over the counter head lice lotion cures covid19, no wonder Merck want to keep it very quiet to protect the market and price. Another study on ivermectin, to show it Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019
https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692(20)34898-4/fulltext
We're done here ivermectin works, and Merck is at it.
Good news, so far. The logical follow on is that the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for the 'vaccine' products becomes invalid, you'd have thought.
