IME ivermectin is only peddled as a treatment for covid by anti-vaxxers.
People who are vaccinated should be asking why we aren't throwing the same global resources and billions of €$£ at finding an effective treatment, though. Not necessarily Ivermectin, just any treatment which keeps people out of hospital.
If we could nail that, we could actually, properly end this thing. Long term.
The vaccines in their current form aren't going to do that. At least not anytime in the foreseeable future.
That's probably why so many 'anti-vaxers' are asking for more research. I think it's partly wishful thinking and partly sheer frustration and perhaps a little bit 'this isn't adding up'.
The worrying part for me though is the complete shut-down of any sort of discussion or debate. The fact checkers who have crowned themselves the authority on all factual-science (as if there was such a thing) and provide no actual facts or arguments or reasoning or 'here is how they might think this is factual but actually this study says X'. Nope. Treat everyone like they're 5 with a blanket "NO EVIDENCE" statement. Which helps nobody. I have read some studies which go "against the narrative" and I want them to actually prove it wrong not just tell me "this other doctor says there's no evidence".
This strategy, though, never ever works the opposite way against the narrative. The bias of the narrative is everywhere i.e calling it "horse dewormer" in news articles when it's an anti-parasitic drug in the same way as head lice treatment is an insecticide and heparin is an anticoagulant - both of which are types of medicine used on animals.
It's like Brexit and Trump have taught us nothing. The whole 'cutting out his tongue doesn't prove you're right, only that you fear what he might say' applies.
And there's a slightly different one that I'm not clever enough to put into a saying but basically: when has mimicking or minimising ever changed an opinion? The arguments are so full of strawmen and slippery slopes and sweeping generalisations and attacks on the person rather than logical discussion and nuance.
Ivermectin = Horse Dewormer
Brexit = racist
AZ = you take the pill ffs get a massive grip
Why aren't Pfizer legally on the hook? = anti vaxxer
This will lead to domestic vax passports = conspiracy theorists
Why aren't we counting hospitalisations properly = covid denier
Does the science on masks add up = covidiot
And that's when the mass hysteria has somewhat died down and we've gotten past calling everyone granny killers.
All this does is disengage people. They switch off. Science isn't this set in stone factual thing and a strategy based on said ever changing science should have sensible discussion. Debate. Questions. Some actual investigative fucking journalism.
And the final one is the bad faith arguments you see all the time on here. Telling people the vaccine was safe in pregnancy months ago, when there was literally 0 evidence of that (and not a single 1st tri vaxed baby born). Telling people it's the same as the flu shot (the main ones here are absolutely not but that doesn't mean they're not safe - they're just not the same at all). The AZ clots was another one. And on this very thread arguing that of course pharma would push a drug if they thought it worked. Sorry, what? A cheap as chips, widely available, off-patent drug. I'm not even sure if these are bad faith or just sheer naivety but either way... frustrating and helps nobody.
There are rarely black and white answers but a lot of black and white statements. Not just here, it's rife in just about every form of media and it's not good for anyone.