More accurately: both Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have been tested. And in both cases, they suck at treating COVID19 (roughly equivalent to placebo and/or weaker than current standard of care).

I listed the ivermectin review in my post earlier. HCQ is reviewed here by the NIH: https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-...

The fact of the matter is: HCQ and IVM have been extensively studied. They've been fully rejected based off of evidence. When a treatment works (ex: cheap corticosteroids like dexamethasone), the NIH announces and the hospitals start using it immediately.

----------

Vaccines, dexamethasone, and monoclonal antibodies all work. So all hospitals are offering these services to any COVID19 patient.

IVM, HCQ and other "alternative treatments" are snake-oil bullshit.

Correct. HCQ only works in vitro with Vero cells that do not express TMPRSS2. It stops working once you start expressing the gene.

Why is Israel having such a hard time with the pandemic despite their relatively high vaccination rate?

https://www.newsweek.com/israel-world-leader-vaccine-booster...

Shouldn't we be seeing the exact opposite if the current crop of vaccines were the best solution?

They were the first to vaccinate, and because of the relatively first two shots being close together, a third booster is needed. They see good results from that. Studies show having the vaccines wider apart gives longer and stronger immune response.

I believe this effect is not exclusive to covid vaccines.

Israel has a moderately higher vaccination rate than the US and currently has close to 50% fewer deaths per capita from COVID.

I wish the US was doing as well a Israel right now! Hundreds and hundreds of Americans would not be dying every single day if we were.

From the article: because children are unvaccinated.

Rather than just posing an open ended conspiratorial hypothesis that has no evidence (it is trivial for anyone to get hold of a vial and sequence the mRNA to actually test your absurd hypothesis) do you have a proposed endgame for ‘custom mRNAs’ to what must be a vast conspiracy involving thousands of scientists?

In reply to your dead answer:

Your hypothesis is falsafiable, and has been falsified. It's conspiratorial thinking, plain and simple. [0], [1]

No, I do not think it is strange that Vit D and NAC are not under a 'huge push'.

The UK made Vit D supplementation available for free last year and the NICE guidelines concluded that there was insufficient evidence at present to support global supplementation [2]. On NAC, there have been a number of small studies but no widespread studies of high quality so neither has made it into regular protocols. That's not to say they won't have some effect, but that the level of evidence to support their widespread usage is not available at present.

Here's what I think is a better question: Why aim for something that either requires high compliance (regular Vit D supplementation, which motivated people can do for cents a day anyway) or pre-intubation Rx (NAC) when you can reduce the risk of hospitalisation (even against delta) or death by 80% with a free, widely available (in some countries), safe vaccine?

It's simply clutching at straws

[0] https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/scientists-revers...

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/30/university-sci...

[2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8...

There also would've been a concerted push for obese people to lose weight. My hot take is that the deaths in the US have been higher than in other countries due to obesity, and that many lives could've been saved if they weren't fat.

The obese tend to have have vitamin D deficiency and higher oxidative stress

Obviously the vaccines weren’t studied enough if we are only finding out now that certain age groups might be at more risk from vaccine side effects than from covid itself (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r...)

OPs Lancet article shows there is not a consensus on effectivity of boosters, but you will never hear that from the left media.

I understand science is a process, and things that we might think are true/false/undetermined now might change based on new evidence. My complaint isn’t that scientist aren’t magically getting everything right first try, but that there is clear bias in the media towards some narrative and while most people happily will take that for granted with right wing news sources, they think left wing news sources are somehow immune to spreading misinformation.