Your science.org link is July 2021 My peer reviewed link, was published on 15/1/2022.
Peer reviews from two USA associations, and One from Ontario Canada, among others from Brazil.
So you are saying that those figures and conclusions were rubbish?
And you base that assumption, on an out of date article on the preprint reading, a link to NBC news(70% revenue from big Pharma), and the BMJ
That they were peer reviewed, and yet still found to be unethical(BMJ link)
Quote from the article "flawed research means that we still do not know if the drug is safe and effective" Been safe and effective since the 1980's, has it not? Since it's first use to prevent river blindness in humans,(not
horses)
As I said before, it was used as part of a protocol on early intervention.
Try looking up the results in Utter Pradesh, Indonesia, or Korea.
Compare the efficacy to the jab. Less than 1% Absolute risk reduction
