Talk:Heather Heying

Claim that Heather Heying is spreading misinformation is disinformation
There are multiple studies that point to the potential toxicity of the spike protein:

SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein and Lung Vascular Cells, SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Elicits Cell Signaling in Human Host Cells: Implications for Possible Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccines, SARS-CoV-2 binds platelet ACE2 to enhance thrombosis in COVID-19

Considering PolitiFact as a source of the fact check is ironic. They just admitted that their "Pants on Fire Lie" rating of the lab leak hypothesis was false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinshinshingan (talk • contribs) 06:54, 2 July 2021 (utc) (UTC)


 * You posted the same thing at Bret Weinstein. It is irrelevant here too. Alexbrn (talk) 06:56, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Care to explain why, instead of expecting readers to waste time searching the Bret "talk" page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.204.220.84 (talk) 18:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * At last but not least: Lab leak theory is no longer considered a misinormation. --AsiBakshish (talk) 10:43, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Alexbrn, as a senior Wikipedia contributor I ask You, what are You going to do in order not to slander Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying? Or has Wikipedia become a tool o willingly slander people? Do You still see the current state as appropriate? --AsiBakshish (talk) 12:17, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's fine. I've added more appropriate links. Alexbrn (talk) 12:50, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2021
Change "fears" to fears 104.178.252.234 (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done  Terasail [✉️] 02:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌. Undone. It's a quoted word from the source, and should not be in Wikivoice. Alexbrn (talk) 03:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2021 (2)
INCORRECT: "Weinstein and his wife Heather Heying have spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic on numerous occasions.[5][6][7]"

PROBLEM: The claim is a logical fallacy [appeal to authority] and is in NO way scientific. The sources cited, Vice, Politico and Reuters, are NOT scientific sources.

To be clear, Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, are exploring two COVID-19 hypotheses: 1. COVID-19 may have escaped a viral lab in Wuhan, China. 2. Ivermectin, a ubiquitous and affordable drug with a long-standing record of safety and efficacy, may be safe and efficacious as a prophylaxis and treatment for COVID-19.

Weinstein and Heying have had esteemed scientific experts on his Darkhorse podcast, now threatened by YouTube censorship, including the inventor of the mRNA vaccine, Dr. Robert Malone. Malone agrees and validates Weinstein's hypotheses related to lab leak, Ivermectin, and COVID-19 vaccine hazards, specifically toxicity of spike proteins.

This Wikipedia page is NOT correct, and is politicizing a public health issue, shutting down critical thinking and public dialog, and Dr. Weinstein's professional reputation is impuned. It appears Wikipedia's incorrect claim is political -- not factual -- by design. The censorious nature of Wikipedia's false claim is deeply alarming.

Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, are not advancing misinformation. To the contrary, they are advancing and exploring QUESTIONS and HYPOTHESES, the questions to which are not yet clear or definitive. Furthermore, Weinstein and his wife are NOT anti-vax. They believe that futher conversation will inevitably lead to scientific evidence supporting public health measures benefitting all humanity.

REQUEST FOR CORRECTION:

Wikipedia could make a simple correction:

"Weinstein and his wife are well-known for employing scientific methodology, exploring controversial hypotheses and questions related to origin, hazards and treatments associated with COVID-19."

I submit this request in good faith. Thank you for your time and serious consideration.

SOURCE: Dr. Robert Malone

RW Malone MD, LLC’s was co-founded and managed by Dr. Malone.

The inventor of mRNA vaccines and one of world’s foremost experts on messenger mRNA therapeutics - having invented the field in 1988, Dr. Malone has extensive research and development experience in the areas of pre-clinical discovery research, clinical trials, vaccines, gene therapy, bio-defense, and immunology. He has over twenty years of management and leadership experience in academia, pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, as well as in governmental and non-governmental organizations. 76.92.26.208 (talk) 06:55, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌. Answered elsewhere. Malone's claims about himself are not verified by independent sources. Alexbrn (talk) 07:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2021
Hello,

According to your policy for administrators to edit wikipedia pages, " Administrators... are expected to observe a high standard of conduct, to use the tools fairly, and never to use them to gain advantage in a dispute." There has been a serious campaign to silence Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying, who are evolutionary biologists, careful thinkers, and look at up to date science and report on the science involving the pandemic from around the world. YouTube has been working with our government ( https://taibbi.substack.com/p/a-case-of-intellectual-capture-on ) to keep Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying from talking about repurposed drugs that seem to work. I realize it sounds improbable, but I've been witnessing it in real time, all the while checking into Bret and Heather's sources as they post/show them. I've found multiple articles from the NIH on the data Bret and Heather are reporting on regarding Ivermectin: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34145166/ ; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/ ; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

Please delete the sentence saying "Heying and her husband Bret Weinstein have spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic on numerous occasions.[3][4]". Regarding the spike protein and cytotoxicity [3][4], I refer you to another NIH article calling into question the spike protein, which is a conservative view on the topic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7827936/. A quote from another published article: "In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease". This is from the Salk Institute, which links to the actual study in this article: https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/.

Please also delete the section on Heying's Wikipedia page, "Further information: COVID-19 misinformation Both Heying and Weinstein have said that they have taken ivermectin to guard against COVID-19 and that they not been vaccinated because of their "fears" about COVID-19 vaccines. Heying compared the use of ivermectin for this purpose to taking anti-malarial drugs.[20] There is no good evidence of benefit from ivermectin in preventing or treating COVID-19.[21][22]" You may keep the part saying, "On January 29, 2021 Heying appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher along with Weinstein, presenting the "Lab Leak" hypothesis around the origins of SARS-CoV-2.[19]", as it is true. For this deletion request, I refer you to the initial NIH articles regarding Ivermectin's potential efficacy above. For convenience, here they are again: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34145166/ ; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/ ; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/. To be clear, I am not asking for a replacement at this time. Please simply delete these sections and work with Heather Heying on what to replace them with. I am sure she will be more than fair in describing herself for others to see.

In the future, I would strongly encourage all the administrators from Wikipedia to look for data from medical journals regarding COVID-19, not news media. When reading medical journals, always be sure to check the conflicts of interest sections, financial disclosures, and the comments, if any. These sections in a medical journal are a secondary source of scrutiny on medical journals and their robustness of methodology and accuracy of reporting data.

Thank you,

Katelyn Woodworth 76.17.212.95 (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ This is essentially the same edit request with the same links as you made on Talk:Bret Weinstein. Not done for essentially the same reason. e.g. sources are not WP:RSMED Adakiko (talk) 05:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * @76.17.212.95 not done, because you don't agree with the conclusions. The use of ivermectin, lab leak etc. have further been substantiated.

https://wokeguru.org/brazil-study-shows-ivermectin-prophylaxis-reduces-covid-19-mortality-90-percent-hospitalizations-deaths-2021/

https://ncats.nih.gov/news/releases/2021/large-clinical-trial-to-study-repurposed-drugs-to-treat-covid-19-symptoms

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971221009887

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/japan/ivermectin-omicron-japan-kowa-co-b2004901.html

There is plenty of evidence in support of their discussions. Whoever is doing these replies, actually LOOK at the other side. All the other side has large financial incentive to silence this side. No one profits, however, from the ivermectin. The lower and middle class, and largely minorities could be helped if this information were found to be correct. Let the discussion happen. LysolPionex (talk) 16:39, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Modification proposal
Two changes need to be made to this article. I provide the corrections required, a summary of the supporting background information plus context, as well as the sources.

Under the section personal life sub heading covid 19. Two points, one statement is clearly defamatory the other contains a FALSE statement that spreads medical misinformation :

1. Defamatory statement reported as accurate and credible ( ie a famous oncologist claims Bret is spreading medical misinformation): "David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and scientist known for exposing pseudoscience,[39] described Weinstein as a prominent "COVID-19 contrarian and spreader of disinformation" who supports using ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.[40]" 2. False stament on page: " There is no good evidence of benefit from ivermectin in preventing or treating COVID-19.[42][43]"

1. Strike the claim reporting that Weinstein is spreading medical misinformation. Rationale: This content is defamatory especially when presented as an unchallenged pronouncement from an authoritative source who's ALSO making uninformed defamatory statements. The discussion of his ban from YouTube for violating their policy fails to report Alphabet' (YouTube's parent company) financial interest in the RNA vaccine company that holds the IP for the Moderna Vaccine, which under curent federal law would lose its emergency authorization to distribute vaccines if Ivermectin was acknowledged to be a safe reliable and effective treatment (reporting his YouTube ban as resulting from violating their policy against spreading medical misinformation without providing this context is misleading and also defamatory). Furthermore, the sources that were cited are low quality not reliable and contradict the extensive indepemdent scientific literature documented below. Giving the benefit of the douht to this wiki, the author is at best guilty of cherry picking the data. The actual literature available on this topic is extensive, peer reviewed, free financial coflicts of interest, high quality, internally consistent, consistent with our  current understanding of biology, biochemistry, medicine, immunology, and virology, as well as providing results that were independently and repeatedly REPLICATED, bringing me to me the second requested edit.

2. Insert the text below in place of the text that currently says "There is no evidence..."

"Despite many individuals corporations and institutions with conflicting financial interests [127] attempting to smear Dr Weinstein over the issue of using Ivermectin to treat and prevent covid, he has consistently and accurately presented the FACTS surrounding this research which clearly demonstrates Ivermectin to be a safe and effective treatment, at great personal risk to his own financial wellbeing. To correct previously inaccurate statements circulating online it is important to state that the available scientific evidence clearly and overwhealmingly demonstrates that Ivermectin is a safe and effective treatment for covid.  This statement is consistent with the WHO's published data on the subject and 7 other meta analyses examining over 60 studies using Cochrane methodology."[1], [2],...,[125],[126]

Rationale supporting the above changes: Currently all statements about Ivermectin in this article are flagrantly innaccurate and fundamentally antiscientific and unlike Bret Weinstein ACTIVELY promote medical misinformation, as there's a mountain of high quality evidence including 36 randomized controlled studies 32 peer reviewed articles covering over 18,000 participants all demonstrating that Ivermectin is effective along with dozens more establishing its mechanism of action and likely impact on the pandemic if widely adopted. [1],[2],...,[125],[126].

The science here is NOT CONTROVERSIAL. To see the current state of the science on Ivetmectin see the meta analysis published at ivmmeta.com as well as 8 other meta analyses they systematically review that are comsistent with their findings (including the results published by the WHO[OR]). Their analysis covers over 60 studies with more than 18,000 total participants meet the exclusion criteria for a Cochrane meta analysis that shows Ivetmectin performs as well if not better than the vaccine as prophylaxis, has a SIGNIFICANTLY superior safety profile to the vaccines, provides instant reliable protection (vs a wait for of up to 6 weeks for full immunity in the case of vaccines), and reduces mortality by 96% in those who are treated AFTER being infected.

The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 61 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 354 billion (p = 0.0000000000028)

The WHO meta analysis cited above clearly establishes the effectiveness of Ivetmectin demonstrating an 81% improvement over control in the data they examined. The WHO position that references this report was formulated by a heavily politicized committee consisting of individuals with industry conflicts who claim there's insufficient evidence. Agian the WHO position INCONSISTENT with the numbers the WHO cites to justify their recommendations. These recommendations contradict those recently issued by another committee CORRECTLY recommending the approval of Ivermectin as a safe treatment for scabies on an order of magnitude less evidence (10 small trials with less than 900 total participants and less over all effectiveness).

Sources: 1. Abd-Elsalam et al., Journal of Medical Virology, doi:10.1002/jmv.27122, Clinical Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in COVID-19 Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Study, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.27122. 2. Adams, B., Fierce Biotech, Merck must do a new trial for faltering $425M COVID-19 drug the U.S. government asked it to buy, https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biot..rug-u-s-government-asked-it-to-buy. 3. Afsar et al., SSRN, Ivermectin Use Associated with Reduced Duration of COVID-19 Febrile Illness in a Community Setting, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3734478. 4. Ahmed et al., International Journal of Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2020.11.191, A five day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220325066. 5. Ahsan et al., Cureus, doi:10.7759/cureus.14761, Clinical Variants, Characteristics, and Outcomes Among COVID-19 Patients: A Case Series Analysis at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan, https://www.cureus.com/articles/56..-care-hospital-in-karachi-pakistan. 6. Alam et al., European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, doi:10.24018/ejmed.2020.2.6.599, Ivermectin as Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for COVID-19 among Healthcare Providers in a Selected Tertiary Hospital in Dhaka – An Observational Study, https://ejmed.org/index.php/ejmed/article/view/599. 7. Altman, D., BMJ, doi:10.1136/bmj.d2304, How to obtain the P value from a confidence interval, https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d2304. 8. Altman (B) et al., BMJ, doi:10.1136/bmj.d2090, How to obtain the confidence interval from a P value, https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d2090. 9. Anglemyer et al., Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 4, doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2, Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials, https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cd..0.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2/full. 10. Aref et al., International Journal of Nanomedicine, doi:10.2147/IJN.S313093, Clinical, Biochemical and Molecular Evaluations of Ivermectin Mucoadhesive Nanosuspension Nasal Spray in Reducing Upper Respiratory Symptoms of Mild COVID-19, https://www.dovepress.com/clinical..peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-IJN. 11. Arévalo et al., Scientific Reports, doi:10.1038/s41598-021-86679-0 (preprint 11/2/20), Ivermectin reduces in vivo coronavirus infection in a mouse experimental model, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86679-0. 12. Babalola et al., QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcab035 (preprint 1/6), Ivermectin shows clinical benefits in mild to moderate COVID19: A randomised controlled double-blind, dose-response study in Lagos, https://acReporting that Weinstein is spreading medical misinformation is defamatory. ademic.oup.com/qjmed/adv../doi/10.1093/qjmed/hcab035/6143037. 13. Baqui et al., The Lancet Global Health, doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30285-0, Ethnic and regional variations in hospital mortality from COVID-19 in Brazil: a cross-sectional observational study, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214109X20302850. 14. Behera et al., PLoS ONE, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247163 (preprint 11/3), Role of ivermectin in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in India: A matched case-control study, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/..le?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247163. 15. Behera (B) et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-208785/v1, Prophylactic role of ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-208785/v1. 16. Bello et al., Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, doi:10.1080/07391102.2021.1911857, Elucidation of the inhibitory activity of ivermectin with host nuclear importin α and several SARS-CoV-2 targets, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07391102.2021.1911857. 17. Bernigaud et al., Annals of Dermatology and Venereology, doi:10.1016/j.annder.2020.09.231, Ivermectin benefit: from scabies to COVID-19, an example of serendipity, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S015196382030627X. 18. Bhattacharya et al., Int. J. Scientific Research, doi:10.36106/ijsr/7232245, Observational Study on Clinical Features, Treatment and Outcome of COVID 19 in a tertiary care Centre in India- a retrospective case series, https://www.worldwidejournals.com/..ctober_2020_1614017661_0932284.pdf. 19. Biber et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081 (results 2/12/21), Favorable outcome on viral load and culture viability using Ivermectin in early treatment of non-hospitalized patients with mild COVID-19, A double- blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1. 20. Bryant et al., American Journal of Therapeutics, doi:10.1097/MJT.0000000000001402 (preprint 3/11/21), Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines, https://journals.lww.com/americant..ention_and_Treatment_of.98040.aspx. 21. Budhiraja et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.11.16.20232223, Clinical Profile of First 1000 COVID-19 Cases Admitted at Tertiary Care Hospitals and the Correlates of their Mortality: An Indian Experience, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.16.20232223v1. 22. Bukhari et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.02.02.21250840 (results 1/16), Efficacy of Ivermectin in COVID-19 Patients with Mild to Moderate Disease, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.02.21250840v1. 23. Cadegiani et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.10.31.20223883, Early COVID-19 Therapy with Azithromycin Plus Nitazoxanide, Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine in Outpatient Settings Significantly Reduced Symptoms Compared to Known Outcomes in Untreated Patients, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.31.20223883v1. 24. Camprubí et al., PLoS ONE, 15:11, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0242184, Lack of efficacy of standard doses of ivermectin in severe COVID-19 patients, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/..le?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242184. 25. Carvallo et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.09.10.20191619, Safety and Efficacy of the combined use of ivermectin, dexamethasone, enoxaparin and aspirin against COVID-19, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.10.20191619v1. 26. Carvallo (B) et al., NCT04425850, Usefulness of Topic Ivermectin and Carrageenan to Prevent Contagion of Covid 19 (IVERCAR), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT04425850. 27. Carvallo (C) et al., Journal of Biomedical Research and Clinical Investigation, doi:10.31546/2633-8653.1007, Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Topical Ivermectin + Iota-Carrageenan in the Prophylaxis against COVID-19 in Health Personnel, https://medicalpressopenaccess.com/upload/1605709669_1007.pdf. 28. Chaccour et al., EClinicalMedicine, doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100720 (preprint 12/7), The effect of early treatment with ivermectin on viral load, symptoms and humoral response in patients with non-severe COVID-19: A pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, https://www.thelancet.com/journals../PIIS2589-5370(20)30464-8/fulltext. 29. Chachar et al., International Journal of Sciences, 9:31-35, doi:10.18483/ijSci.2378, Effectiveness of Ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Patients, https://www.ijsciences.com/pub/article/2378. 30. Chahla et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-495945/v1 (original preprint 3/30), Cluster Randomised Trials - Ivermectin Repurposing For COVID-19 Treatment Of Outpatients With Mild Disease In Primary Health Care Centers, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-495945/v1. 31. Chahla (B) et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.03.26.21254398, A randomized trial - intensive treatment based in ivermectin and iota-carrageenan as pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 in healthcare agents, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254398v1. 32. Choudhury et al., Future Medicine, doi:10.2217/fvl-2020-0342, Exploring the binding efficacy of ivermectin against the key proteins of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis: an in silico approach, https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/fvl-2020-0342. 33. Chowdhury et al., Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology, doi:10.14744/ejmo.2021.16263, A Comparative Study on Ivermectin-Doxycycline and Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin Therapy on COVID-19 Patients, https://ejmo.org/10.14744/ejmo.2021.16263/. 34. Concato et al., NEJM, 342:1887-1892, doi:10.1056/NEJM200006223422507, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm200006223422507. 35. Covid Analysis, Analysis of López-Medina et al., https://c19ivermectin.com/lopezmedina.html. 36. COVID-NMA, COVID-NMA weekly update, May 14, 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/202105..58/https://www.covid-nma.com/news/. 37. de Melo et al., EMBO Mol. Med., doi:10.15252/emmm.202114122 (preprint 11/22/20), Anti-COVID-19 efficacy of ivermectin in the golden hamster, https://www.embopress.org/doi/abs/10.15252/emmm.202114122. 38. Deaton et al., Social Science & Medicine, 210, doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.005, Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953617307359. 39. Deng, H., PyMeta, Python module for meta-analysis, http://www.pymeta.com/. 40. Descotes, J., ImmunoSafe Consultance, Medical Safety of Ivermectin, https://www.medincell.com/wp- conte.._MDCL_safety_ivermectine-50321.pdf. 41. DiNicolantonio et al., Open Heart, doi:10.1136/openhrt-2020-001350, Ivermectin may be a clinically useful anti- inflammatory agent for late-stage COVID-19, https://openheart.bmj.com/content/7/2/e001350. 42. DiNicolantonio (B) et al., Open Heart, doi:10.1136/openhrt-2021-001655, Anti-inflammatory activity of ivermectin in late-stage COVID-19 may reflect activation of systemic glycine receptors, https://openheart.bmj.com/content/8/1/e001655. 43. Elalfy et al., J. Med. Virol., doi:10.1002/jmv.26880, Effect of a combination of Nitazoxanide, Ribavirin and Ivermectin plus zinc supplement (MANS.NRIZ study) on the clearance of mild COVID-1, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.26880. 44. Elgazzar et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-100956/v2, Efficacy and Safety of Ivermectin for Treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19 Pandemic, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-100956/v3. 45. Elgazzar (B) et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-100956/v2, Efficacy and Safety of Ivermectin for Treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19 Pandemic, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-100956/v3. 46. Errecalde et al., Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2021.01.017, Safety and Pharmacokinetic Assessments of a Novel Ivermectin Nasal Spray Formulation in a Pig Model, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022354921000320. 47. Espitia-Hernandez et al., Biomedical Research, 31:5, Effects of Ivermectin-azithromycin-cholecalciferol combined therapy on COVID-19 infected patients: A proof of concept study, https://www.biomedres.info/biomedi..-proof-of-concept-study-14435.html. 48. Eweas et al., Frontiers in Microbiology, doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.592908, Molecular Docking Reveals Ivermectin and Remdesivir as Potential Repurposed Drugs Against SARS-CoV-2, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2020.592908/full. 49. Faisal et al., The Professional Medical Journal, doi:10.29309/TPMJ/2021.28.05.5867, Potential use of azithromycin alone and in combination with ivermectin in fighting against the symptoms of COVID-19, http://theprofesional.com/index.php/tpmj/article/view/5867. 50. Francés-Monerris et al., ChemRxiv, doi:10.26434/chemrxiv.12782258.v1, Has Ivermectin Virus-Directed Effects against SARS-CoV-2? Rationalizing the Action of a Potential Multitarget Antiviral Agent, https://chemrxiv.org/articles/prep..itarget_Antiviral_Agent/12782258/1. 51. Galan et al., Pathogens and Global Health, doi:10.1080/20477724.2021.1890887, Phase 2 randomized study on chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin in hospitalized patients with severe manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20477724.2021.1890887. 52. Gonzalez et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.02.18.21252037, Efficacy and safety of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine in patients with severe COVID-19. A randomized controlled trial, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.18.21252037v1. 53. Gorial et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.07.07.20145979, Effectiveness of Ivermectin as add-on Therapy in COVID-19 Management (Pilot Trial), https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.07.20145979v1. 54. Guzzo et al., J. Clinical Pharmacology, doi:10.1177/009127002237994, Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Escalating High Doses of Ivermectin in Healthy Adult Subjects, https://accp1.onlinelibrary.wiley...7/009127002237994?sid=nlm%3Apubmed. 55. Hariyanto et al., Reviews In Medical Virology, doi:10.1002/rmv.2265, Ivermectin and outcomes from Covid-19 pneumonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trial studies, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rmv.2265. 56. Hashim et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.10.26.20219345, Controlled randomized clinical trial on using Ivermectin with Doxycycline for treating COVID-19 patients in Baghdad, Iraq, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.26.20219345v1. 57. Heidary et al., The Journal of Antibiotics, 73, 593–602, doi:10.1038/s41429-020-0336-z, Ivermectin: a systematic review from antiviral effects to COVID-19 complementary regimen, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z. 58. Hellwig et al., International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106248, A COVID-19 Prophylaxis? Lower incidence associated with prophylactic administration of Ivermectin, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920304684. 59. Hill et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-148845/v1, Meta-analysis of randomized trials of ivermectin to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-148845/v1. 60. Huvemek Press Release, Kovid-19 - Huvemek® Phase 2 clinical trial, https://huvemec.bg/covid-19- huveme..linichno-izpitanie/za-isledvaneto/. 61. Jans et al., Cells 2020, 9:9, 2100, doi:10.3390/cells9092100, Ivermectin as a Broad-Spectrum Host-Directed Antiviral: The Real Deal?, https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/9/9/2100. 62. Jeffreys et al., bioRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.12.23.424232, Remdesivir-Ivermectin combination displays synergistic interaction with improved in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.23.424232v1. 63. Kalfas et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.11.30.20236570, The therapeutic potential of ivermectin for COVID-19: a systematic review of mechanisms and evidence, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.30.20236570v1. 64. Khan et al., Archivos de Bronconeumología, doi:10.1016/j.arbres.2020.08.007, Ivermectin treatment may improve the prognosis of patients with COVID-19, https://www.archbronconeumol.org/e..ognosis-articulo- S030028962030288X. 65. Khan (B), T., PharmaShots, Merck Signs ~$1.2B Supply Agreement with US Government for Molnupiravir to Treat COVID-19, https://pharmashots.com/61076/merc..or-molnupiravir-to-treat-covid-19/. 66. Kishoria et al., Paripex - Indian Journal of Research, doi:10.36106/paripex/4801859, Ivermectin as adjuvant to hydroxychloroquine in patients resistant to standard treatment for SARS-CoV-2: results of an open-label randomized clinical study, https://www.worldwidejournals.com/..August_2020_1597492974_4801859.pdf. 67. Kory et al., American Journal of Therapeutics, doi:10.1097/MJT.0000000000001377, Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19, https://journals.lww.com/americant.._Evidence_Demonstrating_the.4.aspx. 68. Kory (B), P., Dr. Pierre Kory Talks About Human Rights and The Big Science Disinformation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UTuT9TSRFQ. 69. Kory (C), P., FLCCC Alliance Statement on the Irregular Actions of Public Health Agencies and the Widespread Disinformation Campaign Against Ivermectin, https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp..INFORMATION-CAMPAIGN- 5.11.2021.pdf. 70. Krolewiecki et al., EClinicalMedicine, doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100959, Antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin in adults with COVID-19: A proof-of-concept randomized trial, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258953702100239X. 71. Lawrie et al., Preprint, Ivermectin reduces the risk of death from COVID-19 – a rapid review and meta-analysis in support of the recommendation of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, https://b3d2650e-e929-4448- a527-4e..b655bd21b1448ba6cf1f4c59f0d73d.pdf. 72. Lee et al., Arch Intern Med., 2011, 171:1, 18-22, doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2010.482, Analysis of Overall Level of Evidence Behind Infectious Diseases Society of America Practice Guidelines, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/j..nternalmedicine/fullarticle/226373. 73. Lehrer et al., In Vivo, 34:5, 3023-3026, doi:10.21873/invivo.12134, Ivermectin Docks to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-binding Domain Attached to ACE2, http://iv.iiarjournals.org/content/34/5/3023. 74. Li et al., J. Cellular Physiology, doi:10.1002/jcp.30055, Quantitative proteomics reveals a broad‐spectrum antiviral property of ivermectin, benefiting for COVID‐19 treatment, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcp.30055. 75. Lima-Morales, Effectiveness of a multidrug therapy consisting of ivermectin, azithromycin, montelukast and acetylsalicylic acid to prevent hospitalization and death among ambulatory COVID-19 cases in Tlaxcala, Mexico, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971221001004. 76. López-Medina et al., JAMA, doi:10.1001/jama.2021.3071, Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389. 77. Loue et al., J. Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology, doi:10.23937/2474-3658/1510202, Ivermectin and COVID- 19 in Care Home: Case Report, https://www.clinmedjournals.org/ar..idemiology-jide-7-202.php?jid=jide. 78. Madrid et al., Heliyon, doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05820, Safety of oral administration of high doses of ivermectin by means of biocompatible polyelectrolytes formulation, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844020326633. 79. Mahmud et al., Journal of International Medical Research, doi:10.5061/dryad.qjq2bvqf6 (preprint 10/9/20), Ivermectin in combination with doxycycline for treating COVID-19 symptoms: a randomized trial, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03000605211013550. 80. McLean et al., Open Forum Infect. Dis. September 2015, 2:3, doi:10.1093/ofid/ofv100, Impact of Late Oseltamivir Treatment on Influenza Symptoms in the Outpatient Setting: Results of a Randomized Trial, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4525010/. 81. Merck, Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic, https://www.merck.com/news/merck-s..-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/. 82. Merck (B), Over 30 Years: The Mectizan® Donation Program, https://www.merck.com/stories/mectizan/. 83. Merino et al., SocArXiv Papers, doi:10.31235/osf.io/r93g4, Ivermectin and the odds of hospitalization due to COVID-19: evidence from a quasi-experimental analysis based on a public intervention in Mexico City, https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/r93g4/. 84. Mody et al., Communications Biology, doi:10.1038/s42003-020-01577-x, Identification of 3-chymotrypsin like protease (3CLPro) inhibitors as potential anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents, https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-020- 01577-x. 85. Mohan et al., Research Square, doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-191648/v1, Ivermectin in mild and moderate COVID-19 (RIVET-COV): a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-191648/v1. 86. Morgenstern et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.04.10.21255248, Retrospective cohort study of Ivermectin as a SARS-CoV-2 pre-exposure prophylactic method in Healthcare Workers, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.10.21255248v1. 87. Mountain Valley MD, Mountain Valley MD Receives Successful Results From BSL-4 COVID-19 Clearance Trial on Three Variants Tested With Ivectosol™, https://www.globenewswire.com/en/n..ariants-Tested-With- Ivectosol.html. 88. Mourya et al., Int. J. Health and Clinical Research, Comparative Analytical Study of Two Different Drug Regimens in Treatment of Covid 19 Positive Patients in Index Medical College Hospital and Research Center, Indore, India, https://ijhcr.com/index.php/ijhcr/article/view/1263. 89. Nardelli et al., Signa Vitae, doi:10.22514/sv.2021.043, Crying wolf in time of Corona: the strange case of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Is the fear of failure withholding potential life-saving treatment from clinical use?, https://www.signavitae.com/articles/10.22514/sv.2021.043. 90. Niaee et al., Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine, doi:10.4103/1995-7645.318304 (preprint 11/24/20), Ivermectin as an adjunct treatment for hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients: A randomized multi-center clinical trial, https://www.apjtm.org/article.asp?..66;epage=273;aulast=Shakhsi;type=0. 91. Nichol et al., Injury, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.03.033, Challenging issues in randomised controlled trials, https://www.injuryjournal.com/article/S0020-1383(10)00233-0/fulltext. 92. Okumuş et al., BMC Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1186/s12879-021-06104-9 (preprint 1/12), Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Safety of Adding Ivermectin to Treatment in Severe COVID-19 Patients, https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral..rticles/10.1186/s12879-021-06104-9. 93. Open Letter by 170+ US Doctors, JAMA Ivermectin Study Is Fatally Flawed, https://jamaletter.com/. 94. Podder et al., IMC J. Med. Science, 14:2, July 2020, Outcome of ivermectin treated mild to moderate COVID-19 cases: a single-centre, open-label, randomised controlled study, http://imcjms.com/registration/journal_abstract/353. 95. Pott-Junior et al., Toxicology Reports, doi:10.1016/j.toxrep.2021.03.003, Use of ivermectin in the treatment of Covid-19: a pilot trial, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214750021000445. 96. Qureshi et al., Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, doi:10.1080/07391102.2021.1906750, Mechanistic insights into the inhibitory activity of FDA approved ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2: old drug with new implications, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ab..02.2021.1906750?journalCode=tbsd20. 97. Rajter et al., Chest, doi:10.1016/j.chest.2020.10.009, Use of Ivermectin is Associated with Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 (ICON study), https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012369220348984. 98. Ravikirti et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.01.05.21249310, Ivermectin as a potential treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19: A double blind randomized placebo-controlled trial, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.05.21249310v1. 99. Reuters, WHO joins Europe, Merck in recommending against ivermectin for COVID-19, https://news.trust.org/item/20210331135538-tajza/. 100. Rochwerg et al., BMJ, doi:10.1136/bmj.m2924, Remdesivir for severe covid-19: a clinical practice guideline, https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2924. 101. Roy et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.03.08.21252883, Outcome of Different Therapeutic Interventions in Mild COVID-19 Patients in a Single OPD Clinic of West Bengal: A Retrospective study, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.08.21252883v1. 102. Saha et al., Structural Chemistry, doi:10.1007/s11224-021-01776-0 (preprint 3/1), The Binding mechanism of ivermectin and levosalbutamol with spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs- 160254/v1. 103. Samaha et al., Viruses, doi:10.3390/v13060989 (results 1/16), Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon, https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/6/989/htm. 104. Seet et al., International Journal of Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.035, Positive impact of oral hydroxychloroquine and povidone-iodine throat spray for COVID-19 prophylaxis: an open-label randomized trial, https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(21)00345-3/fulltext. 105. Shahbaznejad et al., Clinical Therapeutics, doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.04.007 (partial results available 1/19), Effect of ivermectin on COVID-19: A multicenter double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial, https://www.sciencedirect.com/scie../article/abs/pii/S0149291821002010. 106. Shouman et al., Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, doi:10.7860/JCDR/2020/46795.0000, Use of Ivermectin as a Potential Chemoprophylaxis for COVID-19 in Egypt: A Randomised Clinical Trial, https://www.jcdr.net/articles/PDF/..Sh)_PF1(SY_OM)_PFA_(OM)_PN(KM).pdf. 107. Soto-Becerra et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.10.06.20208066, Real-World Effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and ivermectin among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: Results of a target trial emulation using observational data from a nationwide Healthcare System in Peru, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.06.20208066v1. 108. Spoorthi et al., IAIM, 2020, 7:10, 177-182, Utility of Ivermectin and Doxycycline combination for the treatment of SARSCoV-2, http://iaimjournal.com/wp-content/..oads/2020/10/iaim_2020_0710_23.pdf. 109. Surnar et al., ACS Pharmacol. Transl. Sci., doi:10.1021/acsptsci.0c00179, Clinically Approved Antiviral Drug in an Orally Administrable Nanoparticle for COVID-19, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acsptsci.0c00179. 110. Sweeting et al., Statistics in Medicine, doi:10.1002/sim.1761, What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta‐analysis of sparse data, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.1761. 111. Szente Fonseca et al., Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, doi:10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101906, Risk of Hospitalization for Covid-19 Outpatients Treated with Various Drug Regimens in Brazil: Comparative Analysis, https://www.sciencedirect.com/scie../article/abs/pii/S1477893920304026. 112. Tanioka et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2021.03.26.21254377, Why COVID-19 is not so spread in Africa: How does Ivermectin affect it?, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254377v1. 113. Treanor et al., JAMA, 2000, 283:8, 1016-1024, doi:10.1001/jama.283.8.1016, Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Neuraminidase Inhibitor Oseltamivir in Treating Acute Influenza: A Randomized Controlled Trial, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/192425. 114. Udofia et al., Network Modeling Analysis in Health Informatics and Bioinformatics, doi:10.1007/s13721-021- 00299-2, In silico studies of selected multi-drug targeting against 3CLpro and nsp12 RNA-dependent RNA- polymerase proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13721-021- 00299-2. 115. Vallejos et al., Preliminary Results, Ivermectina en agentes de salud e IVERCOR COVID19, https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1365420061859717124. 116. Vallejos (B) et al., BMC Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5, Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral..rticles/10.1186/s12879-021-06348-5. 117. Vallejos (C) et al., Ivermectina en agentes de salud e ivercor COVID-19: resultados al 18 de feb 2021, https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1365420061859717124. 118. Wehbe et al., Front. Immunol., doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.663586, Repurposing Ivermectin for COVID-19: Molecular Aspects and Therapeutic Possibilities, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2021.663586/full. 119. WHO, Therapeutics and COVID-19: Living Guideline 31 March 2021, https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstrea..9-nCoV- therapeutics-2021.1-eng.pdf. 120. Wikipedia, Molnupiravir, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molnupiravir. 121. Yagisawa et al., The Japanese Journal of Antibiotics, 74-1, Mar 2021, Global trends in clinical studies of ivermectin in COVID-19, http://jja-contents.wdc-jp.com/pdf/JJA74/74-1-open/74-1_44-95.pdf. 122. Yesilbag et al., Virus Research, doi:10.1016/j.virusres.2021.198384, Ivermectin also inhibits the replication of bovine respiratory viruses (BRSV, BPIV-3, BoHV-1, BCoV and BVDV) in vitro, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168170221000915. 123. Yim, P., TrialSiteNews, Systemic unreported protocol violations in key ivermectin study, https://trialsitenews.com/systemic..iolations-in-key-ivermectin-study/. 124. Zaidi et al., The Journal of Antibiotics, doi:10.1038/s41429-021-00430-5, The mechanisms of action of Ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2: An evidence-based clinical review article, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5. 125. Zatloukal et al., News report on In Vitro results from the research institute of Prof. Zatloukal, https://www.servustv.com/videos/aa-27juub3a91w11/. 126. Zhang et al., JAMA, 80:19, 1690, doi:10.1001/jama.280.19.1690, What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/188182. 127. Alphabet 2018-2021 SEC filings.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.176.151.228 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)


 * TL:DR. I tell you what, I'll try to help. Of all those citations, tell us which of them are the best evidence to support your contention, whatever it is, bearing in mind WP:MEDRS, and I'm sure a few people will comment. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 21:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 July 2021
The entire statement "covid19 misinformation" section is factually inaccurate and intentionally misleading. The sources linked do not vindicate the header statement. The statement is opinion and libel. It best be removed in it's entirety. Additionally, NIH has changed the recommendations regarding Ivermectin.

1. https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/clinical-data/ JR (talk) 01:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. –– 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 ( talk ) 03:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Worth noting that the citeation here does not support the contention of the OP. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 06:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 July 2021 (2)
Second Paragraph of the COVID-19 Section

MISSING WORD. CHANGE: "...to guard against COVID-19 and that they not been vaccinated..." to "...to guard against COVID-19 and that they have not been vaccinated..." Sheepdog11 (talk) 19:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 August 2021
Change "Both Heying and Weinstein have said that they have taken ivermectin to guard against COVID-19 and that they have not been vaccinated because of their "fears" about COVID-19 vaccines."

to

"Both Heying and Weinstein have said that they have taken ivermectin to guard against COVID-19 and that they have not been vaccinated because of their fears about COVID-19 vaccines." Reporter277 (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. See previous request for the same change at . &#8209;&#8209; El Hef  ( Meep? ) 17:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Strongly support this suggested edit. The use of scare quotes does not befit the proper encyclopedic tone of Wikipedia.

2601:5C2:300:6D80:ADD4:E6C:5C1C:C895 (talk) 04:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 October 2021
The line stating “there is no good evidence supporting the use of Ivermectin in COVID-19. Firstly, “good” is a subjective term that misleads readers who may not come from a scientific background. This should be amended to reflect the true standard of evidence that exists in scientific literature. It is dangerous and incorrect to conflate a lack of consensus with total lack of evidence as this sentence states in its present iteration. Attached bellow you will find 3 peer reviewed studies which refute the statement on the page currently and at the very least should guide an amendment stating that there have been both studies in support of and not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/ 199.254.16.12 (talk) 16:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 November 2021
I request that it be acknowledged that there is debate in the scientific and medical community about Ivermectin as a Covid treatment. Organisations like the Front Line Covid Critcal Care Allience do believe it is effective. https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/ To state that there is no good evidence is not a representative statement, many believe there is good evidence and the split in opinion should be recognised instead of listing only the writers personal opinion. 90.249.245.98 (talk) 13:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * As this is not an edit request in the form Change A to B, no change will be made to the article. Worth noting that there really is no good evidence despite what this IP editor claims. Also note that no personal opinions have been used as sources, despite what the IP editor claims. Lastly, I've never heard of the Front Line Covid Critcal Care Allience, and their views certainly do not tally with the most reliable sources on the subject. -Roxy the sceptical dog . wooF 13:19, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Haha, now that I have read the link I see that they appear to be involved with Kory, so no, they are unreliable as a source. -Roxy the sceptical dog . wooF 13:21, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * See Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. Alexbrn (talk) 13:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

POV in "book review"
The "book review" in the "Post-Evergreen" section appears to be a polemic from the reviewer as a thinly veiled ad hominem attack on the subject (Above all, Heying and Weinstein are really annoying.). We need to remove this "review" and/or add other more genuine reviews for WP:BALANCE. Normchou  💬 21:56, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * NPOV means reflecting decent sources, not removing stuff editors don't like. If there are other RS reviews they may be useful. Alexbrn (talk) 02:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * NPOV also means relevancy and dueness. And for WP:BLP, the bar is high. BTW, it seems you do understand NPOV means not removing stuff editors don't like, though you've left me with a quite different impression regarding this point given your editing history. Normchou   💬 03:03, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe I'm correct in saying NPOV does not mean "removing stuff editors don't like", and not sure your reference to my excellent editing history is relevant. But I see you're edit-warring your drive-by tag in. Let's see what others think. Alexbrn (talk) 03:10, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * My apologies - perhaps "your history" or "the editing history associated with you" would be better wording. And I was actually trying to make improvements, unlike the edit-warring that you just did. Normchou   💬 03:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't be obtuse, and remember to WP:FOC. Has the book had other reviews in RS like The Guardian? Alexbrn (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2021 (UTC)