Any allegations of the existence of any sort of scientific consensus with respect to COVID-19 at the present stage are outright absurd and ought to be taken with a great deal of skepticism, writes PJ Media columnist Stacey Lennox.

In her view, there is simply no way the scientific community could reach a consensus around any concept within a period of mere 18 months, i.e. in this particular case since the breakout of the COVID-19 pandemic.

And while part of the scientific community could technically put forth an institutional narrative that is self-reinforcing, such narratives are at great risk of having it wrong and then crashing and burning.


Deworming pets drug and Covid-19

Lennox points to the hypothesis that the coronavirus pandemic started out from a lab leak in the Chinese city of Wuhan – in the course of those 18 months it went from being little more than a conspiracy theory to becoming a subject of debate in the scientific mainstream.

The columnist then mentioned an article by Vice claiming that an “unproven treatment” for COVID-19 has “suddenly” become the hype inside the “intellectual dark web.”

The article discusses a drug called Ivermectin, and says that it is now deemed by some as a COVID-19 a “miracle cure.”

The story fallaciously claims it is used to deworm dogs.


The PJ Media columnist, however, sets the record straight by noting that the discovery of Ivermectin brought a Nobel Prize for medicine to its inventors, William Campbell and Omura Satoshi, back in 2015, and that the drug is not designed for “deworming dogs.”

Instead, after first being used in veterinary medicine in 1981, in 1987, it started to be applied in human medicine against a disease known as “river blindness” among impoverished populations in the tropics.

Later its use was expanded to the treatment of other “neglected tropical diseases.”

Subsequent research has found that Ivermectin has exhibited antiviral qualities against several RNA viruses: it acts by blockading nuclear trafficking of viral proteins.

The drug has also been discovered to have powerful antiviral effects against HIV-1 and dengue viruses.


Both viruses in question depend on importing protein superfamily for a number of key cellular processes.

Big Pharma and Covid-19

Lennox emphasizes that SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus and it also depends on importing proteins.

That has been shown in an October 2020 study on the effectiveness of Ivermectin against the coronavirus.

The columnist also notes how Iivermectin’s original patent holder put out a statement warning against its use in COVID-19 because of an NIH assessment that the drug could be dangerous but only when applied in coronavirus cases.

In another similar case, the NIH has been saying the same about hydroxychloroquine – which is highly questionable considering that those are drugs applied in billions of doses around the world every year, and their safety has been established.


Against that backdrop, another drug, Remdesivir, was granted an emergency use authorization for COVID-19.

That decision has been based on what appears to be a single rather flawed study – and that study didn’t demonstrate any reduction in mortality.

Lennox stresses that Merck is going to receive $1.2 billion for a new drug presently being developed for early treatment of COVID-19, Molnupiravir.

This one would work by tackling RNA replication through the targeting of RNA polymerase (RdRp) of the SARS-CoV-2 virus – basically the same effect Ivermectin was found to have in the October study.

The columnist is thus urging the readers to make their own conclusions.


She doesn’t assert that Ivermectin works for certain treatments but drives home the point that 18 months is by far not long enough to know everything we need to know.

Yet, she declares that an institutional narrative requiring lots of censorship to survive is already in place at this point.

That might have lots to do with the undeniable reality that pharmaceutical giants make gigantic amounts of money when their new medications are granted approval to use under a patent.

Against that backdrop, there is no wealth to be amassed from the repurposed use of a generic drug – thus potentially explaining a lot about COVID-19 medications.