A lot of the "trends" that get pushed to the front page here are obviously done by bots, so I'm not sure if all of you are actually falling for this or not, BUT...
You do realize that the ivermectin push still accepts their evil premise that there even is a "pandemic", which there clearly isn't, because it's only ever been the common cold, right?
So we're just going to go from them requiring the vax to them requiring ivermectin? Probably less dangerous, but the concept is just as evil. Just stop playing their game already. Arguing about how masks don't work = accepting the premise. Just like arguing about the vax vs. ivermectin...
Come on people, stop being slaves...
EDIT: Dear God, you people...Ok, no one's forcing you to take Ivermectin? No one was forcing you to take the vax in the beginning either. Do you STILL not understand how this process works?
Also, I never said Ivermectin is "bad", did I...? Of course not, but the bots want to turn this discussion into that, predictably.
Stories about people rushing to vet clinics and pet store to buy Ivermectin to the point of them being out of stock? That's insane...what for? It's still "them" trying to get you to accept their premise that there even is a pandemic to go out and buy this for.
STOP GOING ALONG WITH THEIR RITUAL.
There is substantial evidence that there exists a virus called SARS-CoV-2 and that it causes a unique set of symptoms that can be fatal. The evidence suggests it has been created in a lab, and was in development for over twenty years. The evidence suggests it is an engineered bioweapon; a form of the original SARS with increased transmissibility.
The evidence also suggests it is not as harmful as it is purported to be, but it is still harmful. In many cases it causes a similar set of symptoms to the vaccine, which creates the same S-protein that interacts with the same ACE-2 receptor after being taken up by, and expressed on the surface of mobile cells (white blood cells or precursor red blood cells).
The attempts to paint it as not a real unique virus have no substantial evidence. There is the whole "koch's principles" argument, but that argument demands a standard of evidence for existence that is not the standard used in biology because it is not a practical test. You are welcome to argue that it should be. There is a legitimate debate to be had there, but in this case the amount of other evidence that supports the existence of a unique virus in circulation is substantial, and that one argument does not in any way refute the mountain of evidence of its existence.
If you wish to not take Ivermectin that is your right. You are a unique sovereign individual with inalienable rights. You are also free to believe anything you wish. You are also free to ignore any evidence you wish. You are even free to come here and declare you are ignoring all the evidence.
I, and all those others here who choose to use critical thinking are free to not ignore all the other evidence. We are free to look at ALL the evidence and be discerning, attempting to extract truth from all the lies. I believe, after having looked at the evidence in depth, that the koch's principle debate is controlled opposition. It allows those who would otherwise be looking at all the evidence to ignore it, because it is a catch all idea.
If you have looked at all the evidence and wish to debate it point by point I'm happy to engage in that endeavor, but based on your statements it appears to me you have chosen to ignore it. I recommend you not give medical advice based on your ignorance of all the evidence. It doesn't do anyone any good.
Ivermectin is considered to be one of the safest medicines known to man (at least it was prior to 2020). So even if you are right about SARS being not real, there is no harm in Ivermectin, and it will likely cure OTHER ills people didn't even know they had.
If you would like to know more about the benefits, both known and potential from Ivermectin, please do some research. If you have specific questions I am happy to answer them or point you in the right direction to find them yourself.
As for your, "Stop playing their game." that is a legitimate point, but the extent to which you push it, by ignoring the evidence of harm caused by the SARS virus is a supposition without evidence, that runs contrary to other evidence, and is thus potentially harmful. Try a different tact to present that point than starting with a potentially false premise. They are two separate discussions. You should separate them.