Because there's no evidence that it would work? Nobody has explained how it's supposed to act on COVID-19, when it's a nerve poison for invertebrates.

There's not infinite time and effort available for patiently trying every theory with no sound basis, and the worst thing is that there have been small trials with poor or inconclusive results which people ignore. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ivermectin-is-the-new-hydro...

That's quite a silly view. In silico evidence shows that ivermectin can bind to spike protein, main viral protease, and replication proteins:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7996102/

Calling ivermectin the same as HCQ is a strawman approach.

Actually, this is the perfect example, as the main compound in HCQ has been proven in several studies unrelated to COVID19, to specifically prevent the 'jelly-lungs' that people with severe critical-case COVID19 died from in high numbers.

Which is a very fitting observation in this thread on the continuing stupidification of societal debate.

Only perhaps not in the way you intended.

Preliminary Evidence demonstrates Ivermectin does improve outcomes with those infected with COVID-19.

Skepticism is exactly what makes democracy working. Blind trust is what allows bad actors to transform a democracy into a dictatorship.

You speak as if past dictators were not democratically elected or journalists never uncovered corruption in government and institutions.

there needs to be a middle of control and freedom without the bullshit.