Last week, the American Council on Science and Health posted an article entitled, “Ivermectin Gets A Randomized Clinical Trial. The Results Are Not Promising.” The article focused on a JAMA paper, “Effect of Ivermectin on Time to Resolution of Symptoms Among Adults With Mild COVID-19A Randomized Clinical Trial.” The article noted the findings, made observations about other completed trials and the problems with them.
This is what ACSH does and has done for more than four decades. We report on the science. We try to be as accurate and encompassing all the facts that we know at the time of publication. A quote within the article said that the FDA did not recommend ivermectin for an oral treatment for humans. We now know that statement to be inaccurate.
As a result of that error, two scientists associated with ACSH received very vulgar and threatening telephone messages from a caller who masked his identity, too cowardly to put his name to his opinions.
Science is a search for truth. The truth we learn tomorrow may change what we know today. That is what science has been for the past 600 years. And it has led to great things: abundant food supplies, a cleaner environment, lifesaving vaccines, advanced medical procedures and diagnostics, and all manner of discoveries that have helped us live longer, more fulfilling lives. We thought that threats against scientists ended with the dissolution of the Inquisition, but apparently, it still rests in the twisted minds of some people. As a result, the author of our article deemed it necessary to remove the report from the website.
ACSH believes in debate and civil discourse. We allow comments about our articles, and we have an email where comments and questions are often sent. Our experts read and often comment in response. Both science and our writing are human endeavors, and our very human frailties may lead us to make errors or pursue dead ends. As responsible members of our community, we acknowledge our errors when we or others uncover them. Ad hominem attacks, vulgar language, and threatening behavior impede free, thought-provoking discussion.
“...civility doesn't require consensus or the suspension of criticism. It is simply the ability to disagree productively with others while respecting their sincerity and decency.”
― Ravi Iyer and Jonathan Haidt