Name:   phil - Subject:   The cows vaccine Date:   9/23/2021 8:38:27 AM (updated 9/23/2021 8:44:36 AM)

Gfy "I support anything that has been tested and helps in the battle against the virus. Unlike others who refuse the vaccine which has more extensive testing than the horse drug."

The fact that you still call it a horse drug just shows how ignorant you are of reality and science.    THe fact you consider 21 different studies nothing regarding a drug specifically for the treatment of Covid which has been used for 20+ years -  but a vaccine that is not quiet a year old is tried, tested and true without any long term side effects ( well none that we know of over 1 year yet ).  We get it you follow neither science nor reality - you are the textbook definition of demonrat.

this is from the same site listed above - but here is the link since you are are proving you are too ignorant to follow it and actually read it ( or understand it.) link

The supplementary search for the BEC identified 17 studies, of which 4 were retrieved in full. No full trial- or model-based economic evaluations (cost–utility analyses, cost–effectiveness analyses, or cost–benefit analyses) were identified.

Twenty-one trials in treatment and 2 trials in prophylaxis of COVID-19 met review inclusion. One further study47 reported separate treatment and prophylaxis components; we label this study “Elgazzar” under both questions. In effect, there were 22 trials in treatment and 3 in prophylaxis. All of these contributed data to at least one review outcome and meta-analysis. Fifteen trials contributed data for the primary outcome for ivermectin treatment (death); 3 studies reported the primary outcome for prophylaxis (COVID-19 infection). Characteristics of included studies are given in Table ?Table1.1. Seventeen studies47–63 were excluded as they were not RCTs and we identified 39 ongoing studies64–102 and 2 studies103,104 are awaiting classification.