Mauserand9mm: You are obviously a least fairly intelligent. Why don't you do a search on The Journal of Antibiotics on Ivermectin and read their February 15, 2017 article about Ivermectin and its action against parasites and microbes. This article was written long before Ivermectin use for Covid-19 became a controversy.
You see Ivermectin has been used on humans for decades and it is rather disingenuous to disparage it as "horse butt paste". You have to know there has to be some bad motive to the hysteria in the medical hierarchy of the associations and journals concerning the off label use of what was previously known as a wonder drug that saved or improved millions or billions of human lives.
Ivermectin is not "butt paste", it is administered orally, topically, or by injection and the veterinary drugs are exactly the same drug as prescription Ivermectin sold for human use.
Anyway, take a read if you have time and would be willing to see what was said about the drug prior to 2020.
Best wishes
Why do you ignore rigorous testing and obvious fraud by those who push Ivermectin, and believe in it regardless of its lack of significant efficacy?
''High doses of the drug ivermectin, controversially recommended by some high-profile political and media figures during the COVID-19 pandemic, is ineffective at treating the COVID-19 virus, say University of Oxford- affiliated researchers in a study published today in eLife.''
To quantify the effectiveness of ivermectin against COVID-19, the team used the PLATCOV trial to compare the rates at which different drugs reduced the viral load of SARS-CoV-2 from patients. The study participants were previously healthy adults between the ages of 18–50 with early, symptomatic COVID-19.
Participants were randomized to one of six treatment schedules. There were 205 patients in total; 46 were given a high dose of oral ivermectin daily for a week; 40 were administered the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab (10 prespecified as unblinded for the analysis); 45 received no drugs and the remainder were randomized to other drugs. Swabs were taken serially from the participants' tonsils throughout the course of the study (20 in total per person), allowing the researchers to characterize the decline in the viral load of SARS-CoV-2.
The findings support claims that the drug has little antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2—and help resolve the controversy about the effectiveness of ivermectin in treating COVID-19.''
I am going to trust studies and data that preceded the Covid-19 scare more than the "information" put out after the big push to disparage the use existing drugs. There was too much money involved in pushing the vaccines that were almost certainly harmful in some cases. And there is the suspicious zeal of the governments in mandating "vaccines" in situations where they could financially frighten employees, corporations, and soldiers into compliance. I have never seen this much hysteria and threatening over the flu epidemics. You were basically free to get a flu vaccine or not.
By the way, as to the flu vaccine. At my wife's busy pediatric practice over half the flu cases are in vaccinated kids.
And as to the safety of the mRNA corona vaccines, I have 3 close acquaintances that died unexpectedly after being shot up with the stuff. And I know a bunch of folks that caught the disease after being "vaccinated".
I know of nobody or no animal being harmed by Ivermectin even when overdosed. I routinely give a 1200 pound cow a 1400 pound dose for good measure and have nothing but good results.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
