Ivermectin treatment for Covid is now supported by 113 studies, 73 of which have been peer reviewed. This includes 63 controlled trials with a total of 26,398 patients, and 31 Randomized Controlled Trials. Here is a direct link to 51 of them https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5 https://iv.iiarjournals.org/content/34/5/3023.long https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2020.592908/full https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/fvl-2020-0342 https://doi.org/10.2217/fvl-2020-0342 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167488911001145 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166354219307211?via%3Dihub https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00210-020-01902-5 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41429-020-0336-z https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011?via%3Dihub https://ascpt.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpt.1909 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-73308/v1 https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41579-020-00468-6 https://www.pnas.org/content/112/30/9436 https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffmicb.2020.592908 https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1093/emboj/16.23.7067 https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/222/5/734/5860442 https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41418-020-00633-7 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0168170 https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(20)30290-0 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00011-008-8007-8 https://doi.org/10.1038/sigtrans.2017.23 https://jeccr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13046-019-1251-7 https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1443 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(20)30234-6/fulltext https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.00827/full https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6504/718 https://ann-clinmicrob.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12941-020-00362-2 https://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/72/2/486 https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/JVI.01012-07 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41418-020-00633-7 https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fcancers11101527 https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/76/15/4457 https://rupress.org/jgp/article/123/3/281/33850/Mechanism-of-Ivermectin- Facilitation-of-Human -P2X4 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ fphar.2017.00291/full https://www.jimmunol.org/content/200/3/1159 https://molmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s10020-020-00172-4 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29511601/ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30293-0/fulltext https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1472-8206.2009.00684.x https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00011-011-0307-8 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(17)30376-6/fulltext https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7502160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7605516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27302166/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00210-020-01902-5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6826853/ https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3636557 https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/emmm.202114122
Ivermectin treatment for Covid is now supported by 113 studies, 73 of which have been peer reviewed. This includes 63 controlled trials with a total of 26,398 patients, and 31 Randomized Controlled Trials. Here is a direct link to 51 of them https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5 https://iv.iiarjournals.org/content/34/5/3023.long https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2020.592908/full https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/fvl-2020-0342 https://doi.org/10.2217/fvl-2020-0342 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167488911001145 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166354219307211?via%3Dihub https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00210-020-01902-5 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41429-020-0336-z https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011?via%3Dihub https://ascpt.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpt.1909 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-73308/v1 https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41579-020-00468-6 https://www.pnas.org/content/112/30/9436 https://doi.org/10.3389%2Ffmicb.2020.592908 https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1093/emboj/16.23.7067 https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/222/5/734/5860442 https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41418-020-00633-7 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0168170 https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(20)30290-0 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00011-008-8007-8 https://doi.org/10.1038/sigtrans.2017.23 https://jeccr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13046-019-1251-7 https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1443 https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(20)30234-6/fulltext https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.00827/full https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6504/718 https://ann-clinmicrob.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12941-020-00362-2 https://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/72/2/486 https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/JVI.01012-07 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41418-020-00633-7 https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fcancers11101527 https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/76/15/4457 https://rupress.org/jgp/article/123/3/281/33850/Mechanism-of-Ivermectin- Facilitation-of-Human -P2X4 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ fphar.2017.00291/full https://www.jimmunol.org/content/200/3/1159 https://molmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s10020-020-00172-4 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29511601/ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30293-0/fulltext https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1472-8206.2009.00684.x https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00011-011-0307-8 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(17)30376-6/fulltext https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7502160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7605516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27302166/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00210-020-01902-5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6826853/ https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3636557 https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/emmm.202114122 CoolTeeth 发表于 2021-11-23 10:06
回复 12楼的帖子 有些链接在剪贴的时候出了问题?，要不你自己去网上搜一下，一搜就能搜出来。 还有，FDA批准不批准另说，一堆副作用又不防传染的实验性疫苗FDA都能批但是直接禁了这药是为何？就因为此药也许无效所以就不让任何人使用即使人都快不行了也不让用？这药出来了半个世纪了比起辉瑞疫苗在副作用方面安全多了凭啥不让人用？这是什么道理？ 下边这个是NIH自己的链接你看看吧。 “Adults: The dose most commonly used in clinical trials is IVM 0.2–0.6 mg/kg PO given as a single dose or as a once-daily dose for up to 5 days.”，马药现在属于“Under Evaluation”，因为还有不少clinical trials正在进行中。 https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2e/ and
回复 12楼的帖子 有些链接在剪贴的时候出了问题?，要不你自己去网上搜一下，一搜就能搜出来。 还有，FDA批准不批准另说，一堆副作用又不防传染的实验性疫苗FDA都能批但是直接禁了这药是为何？就因为此药也许无效所以就不让任何人使用即使人都快不行了也不让用？这药出来了半个世纪了比起辉瑞疫苗在副作用方面安全多了凭啥不让人用？这是什么道理？ 下边这个是NIH自己的链接你看看吧。 “Adults: The dose most commonly used in clinical trials is IVM 0.2–0.6 mg/kg PO given as a single dose or as a once-daily dose for up to 5 days.”，马药现在属于“Under Evaluation”，因为还有不少clinical trials正在进行中。 https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2e/ and CoolTeeth 发表于 2021-11-24 12:24
你那是新闻报道。base 于下面这篇文章，结论是： Results Eighty-nine patients were eligible (47 in ivermectin and 42 in placebo arm). Their median age was 35 years. Females accounted for 21·6%, and 16·8% were asymptomatic at recruitment. Median time from symptom onset was 4 days. There were no statistical differences in these parameters between the two groups. On day 6, 34 out of 47 (72%) patients in the ivermectin arm reached the endpoint, compared to 21/ 42 (50%) in the placebo arm (OR 2·62; 95% CI: 1·09-6·31). In a multivariable logistic-regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1·06–6·45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13·0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48·2%) in the placebo group (p=0·008). Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1
回复 19楼的帖子 对呀，我那个楼里给了这个链接啊，你没看到？这个结论不够？ Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients.
回复 19楼的帖子 对呀，我那个楼里给了这个链接啊，你没看到？这个结论不够？ Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients. CoolTeeth 发表于 2021-11-24 19:00
回复 24楼的帖子 伊维菌素比瑞德西韦安全多了，你去看看当年瑞德西韦为伊波拉病毒的clinical trial 死了多少人，死亡率50%，当然了，那个研究说直接死于药物副作用的只有一人，50%死亡率主要是药物无效病人死于伊波拉。不管怎样这药从来没有被批准过，现在却被FDA批准给新冠病人吃，当然了，你可以说这药治疗伊波拉无用但是治疗新冠有用所以FDA批准了，至于这药可能致死的副作用，没人在乎了。 After results from the first 499 participants had been reviewed, the trial’s safety monitors recommended that two drugs—ZMapp and remdesivir—be dropped from the remainder of the trial. These two drugs were much less effective at preventing death. Overall, about 50% of people who received either Zmapp or remdesivir died during the trial. In contrast, only about 35% of people who received either Mab114 or REGN-EB3 died. Three participants died of side effects thought to be related to treatment—two in the ZMapp group and one in the remdesivir group.
回复 24楼的帖子 伊维菌素比瑞德西韦安全多了，你去看看当年瑞德西韦为伊波拉病毒的clinical trial 死了多少人，死亡率50%，当然了，那个研究说直接死于药物副作用的只有一人，50%死亡率主要是药物无效病人死于伊波拉。不管怎样这药从来没有被批准过，现在却被FDA批准给新冠病人吃，当然了，你可以说这药治疗伊波拉无用但是治疗新冠有用所以FDA批准了，至于这药可能致死的副作用，没人在乎了。 After results from the first 499 participants had been reviewed, the trial’s safety monitors recommended that two drugs—ZMapp and remdesivir—be dropped from the remainder of the trial. These two drugs were much less effective at preventing death. Overall, about 50% of people who received either Zmapp or remdesivir died during the trial. In contrast, only about 35% of people who received either Mab114 or REGN-EB3 died. Three participants died of side effects thought to be related to treatment—two in the ZMapp group and one in the remdesivir group.
回复 28楼的帖子 所以你的意思是只要药物有点效果FDA就可以批准，副作用再大无所谓对吧？目前看来FDA的确是这样干的，我之前发的关于辉瑞疫苗的数据帖子有这方面的信息。瑞德西韦被pull out of 伊波拉实验你以为只是因为这药治疗效果不好？这药副作用非常大，你可以自己去了解一下。至于瑞德希韦治疗新冠到底效果怎样你也可以自己去看看，那效果比起它的副作用反正我是不会想用这药的。 还有，FDA历史上批错了多少药害死害残过多少人recall过多少批准过的药物你也可以去了解一下，你这样盲目相信FDA不觉得很可笑吗？ 我东拉西扯？那是你理解能力有问题。我一直说的就是病人都快不行了啥办法都没有的情况下宁愿给病人上副作用极大效果也不好的瑞德希韦和呼吸机等死也不给病人尝试伊维菌素这种副作用极小的药，即使FDA说没有足够实验证明这药治疗新冠有效没批准用于新冠但是很多一线医生说此药有效且安全的情况下为何不给病人试试宁愿看着病人死？实验可以慢慢做病人可等不起。何况你得新冠时吃的泰诺什么的退烧药FDA有专门批准给新冠用吗？为何到了伊维菌素就非要FDA批准了，这药安全到在很多国家就是OTC的药，出来半个世纪吃这药出毛病的人比泰诺都少多了，结果现在病人要求医院给这药都要法院出面逼医院才行，你觉得这是正常的情况？你再听不懂我也没办法了。 最后你解释一下为啥非洲没有新冠灾情吧。
https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f
在非洲马药和羟氯喹是经常服用的药物，还是世卫免费发给他们防疟疾和治疗寄生虫的，羟氯喹更是每周都吃。当然了，巧合，这绝对是巧合，包括下边二楼的51篇说伊维菌素也许治疗新冠有效的学术文章都是伪科学。CDC和FDA说这俩药无效且危险那才是真科学。也许非洲逃过一劫只是因为非洲太热，新冠病毒存活不了，呵呵。
重点难道不应该是为何这个落后贫穷卫生环境很差的地方新冠不严重吗？你不想知道吗？我不关心这个地方但是我关心是什么原因让他们疫情不严重我们是否可以借鉴一下，毕竟其他国家到现在疫情还没有见好的势头，你不想疫情早日结束吗？
非洲工业不发达，污染少，所以病毒流行不起来，所以要大力卡美国能源。
第三世界人民抵抗力强，所以病毒流行不起来，所以要开放边界，让更多第三世界人民过来提高美国人民的免疫力。
马药和羟氯喹是毒药。吃了这么多毒药的非洲人民像星宿老怪一样百毒不侵，所以病毒流行不起来，所以以后要禁止马药和羟氯喹在全球的使用，不能让非洲人们被毒害。
身体这么差抵抗力肯定很低难道不会更容易感染病毒并且死亡？西方医疗系统这么发达都已经死了这么多人了没道理非洲还没尸横遍野大马路上都看不见死人啊。。。除非新冠真的只是富人病。。。
因为新冠可能并没有宣传的那么厉害。你在西方世界看到的也是数据而已，并没有看到街上的死人。还有一个很值得怀疑的点。武汉闹的最厉害的时候，大部分感染的人有肺部毛玻璃化，这也是为什么当时叫武汉肺炎。而到了后来这不是新冠的主要症状了，说明可能武汉的和现在的不是同一种病毒。太多怀疑的点了。
西方大街上看不到死人可以解释为社会体系完善发达大家都有时间机会条件去医院死在医院了，但是非洲那种条件，如果新冠真的很要命没人死在大街上是不正常的。
可能新冠病毒像zombie病毒。。。
我也一直这个怀疑，武汉的只是放出来吓人的，像那个什么导演死一家的，武汉以外基本就没见过。反正至少去年，老中们全被吓着了，买个东西各种消毒，现在基本不干了
随便试了5个link，3个都是404. 剩下一个根本就不是Phase 3 trial result。只是把药和病菌混混，实验室里试管看看的东西。还有一个在老鼠身上做的。就凭这些文章，你让FDA怎么批准？
能不能给一篇有结论性文章？别列一堆不沾边儿的东西。
有些链接在剪贴的时候出了问题?，要不你自己去网上搜一下，一搜就能搜出来。
还有，FDA批准不批准另说，一堆副作用又不防传染的实验性疫苗FDA都能批但是直接禁了这药是为何？就因为此药也许无效所以就不让任何人使用即使人都快不行了也不让用？这药出来了半个世纪了比起辉瑞疫苗在副作用方面安全多了凭啥不让人用？这是什么道理？
下边这个是NIH自己的链接你看看吧。
“Adults: The dose most commonly used in clinical trials is IVM 0.2–0.6 mg/kg PO given as a single dose or as a once-daily dose for up to 5 days.”，马药现在属于“Under Evaluation”，因为还有不少clinical trials正在进行中。
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2e/ and
首先FDA是在evaluation,什么时候直接禁止？FDA自己的网站也说under evaluation，你给的link也说under evaluation，在这种情况下，FDA当然不能批准，不知道你有啥抱怨的。你自己也找不出一篇证明此药有效的论文，那还吵吵啥？
到目前为止，你没有给出一篇文章说ivermectin 经过三期临床试验证明有效，没有给出一篇。更不用说什么peer review了。
你可以问问你的家庭医生如果你得了新冠他会不会给你开马药？或者你去你家附近的医院问问如果你重症医院会不会给你开马药，如果不给是为什么。我的家庭医生说不给因为我们州政府health department 禁止医生开这药治疗新冠，这不是禁止是什么？
我之前转过好几篇，下边这是我之前发过的一个贴之一，以色列伊维菌素（ivermectin）治疗新冠的双盲实验结果。我之前还转过一篇是服用伊维菌素后新冠病毒load 大幅下降的，我懒得帮你考古了。我不知道你要什么第三期试验，这又不是新药开发要什么第三期？双盲实验或者测病毒load降低就足够了，你到底懂不懂？我不提供给你文章就代表没有吗？你这逻辑也是够奇葩的。
https://m.huaren.us/showtopic.html?topicid=2715002
即使不是新药，如果该药用于新的疾病，任然要进行Phase 3 double blinded test，你连这都不知道？你发了一堆结果就是不发有双盲临床对比的文章？
既然你有文章，你拿出来呀？你以前就发了一个Jerusalem Post的新闻，这算啥？你把published的文章发上来吧。
所以我发的以色列那个双盲实验不算？你说了才算？而且为啥我要去帮你考古啊？你自己没手吗？还有，上边51篇你就只看了5篇就说都不是，你真是严谨啊。
你那是新闻报道。base 于下面这篇文章，结论是：
Results Eighty-nine patients were eligible (47 in ivermectin and 42 in placebo arm). Their median age was 35 years. Females accounted for 21·6%, and 16·8% were asymptomatic at recruitment. Median time from symptom onset was 4 days. There were no statistical differences in these parameters between the two groups.
On day 6, 34 out of 47 (72%) patients in the ivermectin arm reached the endpoint, compared to 21/ 42 (50%) in the placebo arm (OR 2·62; 95% CI: 1·09-6·31). In a multivariable logistic-regression model, the odds of a negative test at day 6 was 2.62 time higher in the ivermectin group (95% CI: 1·06–6·45). Cultures at days 2 to 6 were positive in 3/23 (13·0%) of ivermectin samples vs. 14/29 (48·2%) in the placebo group (p=0·008).
Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1
对呀，我那个楼里给了这个链接啊，你没看到？这个结论不够？
Conclusions There were significantly lower viral loads and viable cultures in the ivermectin group, which could lead to shortening isolation time in these patients.
你就给了一个新闻报道，在整个实验根本就没有说明药物的有效性。也就是减少关集中营的时间，连作者自己都没有说有效。连基本病人的metric都没有，比如体温，咳嗽，呼吸状况，。。。等等，等等。
网上随便搜一搜我就找到好几篇文章，你慢慢看，不过我估摸着你会说这些都不够好不算数
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ivermectin+lower+viral+load&t=iphone&ia=web
这算什么？药有效？既然是临床，起码有些临床的指标吧？
既然你认为FDA是骗人，你拿出证据，就凭这些你就不要出来害人了。人家remdesivir好赖有个住院天数可以比较，你这屁也没有就让指责FDA不批？
奇怪了，人得新冠都快不行了你还不让人吃药哪怕这药没用结果也不会更糟了，但是医院死活就是不给药宁愿看着病人死，你认为这样做是对的，到底是你在害人还是我在害人？我给你搜出来一堆文章你看都不看就说不行？你比福奇还厉害，啧啧。
嗯，人家啥指标都没有就发文章了，都是骗子行了吧？
伊维菌素比瑞德西韦安全多了，你去看看当年瑞德西韦为伊波拉病毒的clinical trial 死了多少人，死亡率50%，当然了，那个研究说直接死于药物副作用的只有一人，50%死亡率主要是药物无效病人死于伊波拉。不管怎样这药从来没有被批准过，现在却被FDA批准给新冠病人吃，当然了，你可以说这药治疗伊波拉无用但是治疗新冠有用所以FDA批准了，至于这药可能致死的副作用，没人在乎了。
After results from the first 499 participants had been reviewed, the trial’s safety monitors recommended that two drugs—ZMapp and remdesivir—be dropped from the remainder of the trial. These two drugs were much less effective at preventing death. Overall, about 50% of people who received either Zmapp or remdesivir died during the trial. In contrast, only about 35% of people who received either Mab114 or REGN-EB3 died. Three participants died of side effects thought to be related to treatment—two in the ZMapp group and one in the remdesivir group.
你东拉西拽的只能证明FDA的决定是基于事实。
1. FDA没有批准remdesivir用于Ebola，为什么？正如你说的临床数据没有支持Remdesivir对Ebola有效。 2. FDA批注Remdesivir用于Covid, 为什么？因为临床实验证明Remdesivir有一定效果。 3. FDA批准一个药物用于某种疾病，但不批准用于另一种疾病，这不仅仅是对于ivermectin，对于remdesvir也是一样。 4. 只要有三期双盲实验证明ivermectin有效，那怕有一定效果，FDA就会批准。可惜现在没有证据证明有效。 5. 你撤了半天，也没拿出证据说临床数据证明ivermectin有效，尽管列了一堆不相干的文章。
非洲没有城市？你以为非洲都还是一个一个的山寨子？即使如此，也没看见寨子里的人大部分倒下啊。
所以你的意思是只要药物有点效果FDA就可以批准，副作用再大无所谓对吧？目前看来FDA的确是这样干的，我之前发的关于辉瑞疫苗的数据帖子有这方面的信息。瑞德西韦被pull out of 伊波拉实验你以为只是因为这药治疗效果不好？这药副作用非常大，你可以自己去了解一下。至于瑞德希韦治疗新冠到底效果怎样你也可以自己去看看，那效果比起它的副作用反正我是不会想用这药的。
还有，FDA历史上批错了多少药害死害残过多少人recall过多少批准过的药物你也可以去了解一下，你这样盲目相信FDA不觉得很可笑吗？
我东拉西扯？那是你理解能力有问题。我一直说的就是病人都快不行了啥办法都没有的情况下宁愿给病人上副作用极大效果也不好的瑞德希韦和呼吸机等死也不给病人尝试伊维菌素这种副作用极小的药，即使FDA说没有足够实验证明这药治疗新冠有效没批准用于新冠但是很多一线医生说此药有效且安全的情况下为何不给病人试试宁愿看着病人死？实验可以慢慢做病人可等不起。何况你得新冠时吃的泰诺什么的退烧药FDA有专门批准给新冠用吗？为何到了伊维菌素就非要FDA批准了，这药安全到在很多国家就是OTC的药，出来半个世纪吃这药出毛病的人比泰诺都少多了，结果现在病人要求医院给这药都要法院出面逼医院才行，你觉得这是正常的情况？你再听不懂我也没办法了。
最后你解释一下为啥非洲没有新冠灾情吧。