I listen to my evolutionary biologist.
I don’t think we have good reasons for why a larger, more rigorous trial of Ivermectin hasn’t been conducted. That looks suspect me.
In part, because the vaccines receiving the Emergency Authorization required that no therapeutic treatments could be available; no drugs could serve in off-label usage.
That set up mal-incentives for how our pharma industry was evaluating responding to this crisis, and it’s not clear to me that the powers at be haven’t been captured by those incentives.
If it was just about the drugs getting a full authorization, which doesn’t care if therapeutic treatments exist, I would be less suspicious. As we stand, this to me needs to be settled, and the lampooning I’ve seen of people who explore Ivermectin on their own, strikes me as pretty un self-aware.
There will always be people at the margins who act in exploratory ways, and if our system fails to test or (in)validate what looks like viable alternatives; you’re asking for counter-movements to emerge; for narratives you can’t hand waive with assurances. You need data.
They should have been quicker about this, and it doesn’t help that the public health system has been caught lying about other matters.
They have responsibility here Pat, you can’t tell me they didn’t, and you can’t tell me that lying at any stage was a good idea.
And hey, let me just point this out; the EAs were issued under the Trump Administration. They would have culpability here; it’s not just a Democrat thing.