Got to hand it to Murray, he’s nothing if not persistent in his championing of Covid dead ends. I remember talking to a friend who works in cancer research. I asked about Ivermectin, given it looked promising in test tube studies. She scoffed “Plenty of things work at high doses in the test tube. The real question is, does it work in patients at a dose that won’t kill them?”

A few (mostly poor quality) studies suggested some benefits, but better double blind studies mostly showed no effect, see here for n example: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2797483?resultClick=1
Once the fraudulent Elgazzar and Raad studies were excluded the “effects” of Ivermectin on Covid largely disappeared in meta-analysis.

I think an enquiry into Covid would be a reasonable idea. But please, can we consign risible rubbish like this to the bin.

Even if I accept your argument that Ivermectin was ineffective, at least it didn't cause vaccine injury and death, and there is value in a placebo.

Anyway, you'll find that attaching the adjective "high quality" to a study doesn't make it so. The studies that show no effect tend to use too low a dose, or wait until after the person has had COVID for a while. They are designed to fail.

Graham if I were to choose a placebo it wouldn't be Ivermectin. There's plenty of evidence that Ivermectin has side effects, especially when used at high doses without proper medical supervision. These include "severe episodes of confusion, ataxia, seizures, and hypotension", that I think outweigh any placebo effect. https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMc2114907

The notion that Ivermectin works, but hasn't been tested properly, is the kind of idea that Borody et al are spreading. Borody promoted a "triple therapy" of Ivermectin, zinc and Doxycycline, which he'd conveniently patented. Then he could say "oh but you haven't tested it in combination with zinc and Doxycycline".

Where in my comment did I say "high quality"? I said "better double blind studies". I'd appreciate you not misquoting me.

An enquiry into Australia's responses to Covid would be a useful exercise. Border closures, quarantine arrangements, social distancing, masks and vaccine safety and efficacy should all be examined.

Arguing about Ivermectin distracts us from the real issues. Ivermectin hasn't been "demonized", it just doesn't work on Covid. Just let it go.

Well it worked with this little black duck.

52 hours from positive test to all symptoms cleared using my personally imported Indian Viverdo kit based on Ivermectin. Also worked on all 8 infected family & friends I have given them to.

Do tell us Johnj, do you work for one of the big Pharma vaccine profiteers, or the current government?

Well, I'm glad Ziverdo worked for you and yours Hasbeen, even if you couldn't spell it right. Not to mention you're using it off-label as it is recommended to "treat bacterial and parasitic infections".

"Do you work for one of the big Pharma vaccine profiteers, or the current government?" Attacking a person rather than their contentions is not much of an argument.

Why not dish out Ivermectin willy nilly ? It could possibly be an effective prevention of general stupidity ?
I mean with the gene pool as it is now anything is worth testing, it could be put into University water supplies & yuppie coffee shops !
COVID has clearly demonstrated that stupidity is the greatest pandemic facing humans !