Is the same not true for dexamethasone[1], which was the first successful finding from the RECOVERY trial[2]? That's how I've repeatedly seen it described[3] (FWIW, I was treated with dexamethasone for Covid-19 in October 2020).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexamethasone

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RECOVERY_Trial

[3] "A cheap and widely available drug can help save the lives[...]" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53061281

The same is NOT true for dexamethasone, well not exactly, since there was no directly competing drug. Dexamethasone, which you can probably confirm, is useful in the later stages of COVID where there's an inflammatory response. Since no other proposed medications were seeking an EUA as a "late stage" therapeutic, there's no chance the already approved Dexamethasone would have blocked the issuance of an EUA.

That's at least my understanding based on the proposed systemic problem in FDAs.

Conversely, in this proposed problem, it's said that ivermectin (and others) are only effective when used in the early stage or even prophylactic. Being already fully licensed medications, that could put the issuance of an EUA for vaccines or Remdesivir in jeopardy.

> Being already fully licensed medications, that could put the issuance of an EUA for vaccines or Remdesivir in jeopardy.

Remdesevir is fully approved in the US.

One could argue there's money to be lost if it displaces vaccines as a method of treatment (assuming it's affects are as lasting)

Vaccines are not a method of treatment.

Okay, will prevention do? But I'm sure you (and everyone else) knew what I meant

Yes and the UK discovered its benefit. The US has done nothing to investigate whether generic drugs will treat COVID19. The research is being conducted in the UK and EU where the financial incentives are different.

So is dexamethasone, and that's used world-wide for seriously ill Covid patients.

What's the explanation for why dexamethasone was allowed but ivermectin is being suppressed?

Basically it's been that there had been no studies to prove it works for covid. It's been used mostly in poorer countries that have had it on hand because it's relatively inexpensive. Doctors in those countries have been sharing info with each other and that's how it started being used a lot.

During that time gather data for this use was begun and it's taken this long to gather enough, over enough time, to prove its efficacy according to the standards required.

Studies have been done and show that it is effective: https://covid19criticalcare.com/

Maybe because you cannot use it as a prophylactic, so it doesn't threaten EUA for vaccines?

People down vote this - they gasp saying "no way could this be true" - yet they complain about big pharma right up until the "right" virus/disease/whatever science thing comes along and their tribe picks it up and runs with it - they're now the savior. The left/right don't realize they both have faith/religion of government. These politicians do not speak for you or me. Voting only leads to consequence without recourse.

> Why else would they stamp out all possible investigations of it just to ascertain truth?

Dozens of (mostly Phase 2 and 2/3 combined) ivermectin trials as a Covid therapeutic are ongoing, no one has stamped them out.