I'm 50/50 on the lab leak theory. The fact that the first big outbreak occurred in Wuhan, where China's only P4 lab is, and where there was clearly GoF research being conducted is reason enough that such a theory should not be dismissed out-of-hand.
However, people who have studied pandemic of 1889/1890 (also called the "Russian flu") think there's a very good chance that it was also caused by a coronavirus, specifically OC43. The clinical manifestations and morality pattern were very much like the SARS-CoV2; it mostly killed older people. OC43 has also been sequenced and it looks like it split from a bovine coronavirus about 130 years go. Of course there was no viral GoF research happening back then, so I don't think we can completely dismiss the natural origin theory either.
In the end, we may never know for sure.
As for Ivermectin: Given its safety profile, I can think of no reasonable reason why it shouldn't be widely used. Worst case: It does nothing. Best case: It helps a lot. But I guess that would be bad for Pharma, who would rather sell Molunupavir or Paxlovid for $500+ per course than Ivermectin for $5 per course. Then there are the politicians. It has been said that "War is the health of the state", but I think this is is actually wrong and should be re-phrased: "Fear is the health of the state".
I'm 50/50 on the lab leak theory. The fact that the first big outbreak occurred in Wuhan, where China's only P4 lab is, and where there was clearly GoF research being conducted is reason enough that such a theory should not be dismissed out-of-hand.
However, people who have studied pandemic of 1889/1890 (also called the "Russian flu") think there's a very good chance that it was also caused by a coronavirus, specifically OC43. The clinical manifestations and morality pattern were very much like the SARS-CoV2; it mostly killed older people. OC43 has also been sequenced and it looks like it split from a bovine coronavirus about 130 years go. Of course there was no viral GoF research happening back then, so I don't think we can completely dismiss the natural origin theory either.
In the end, we may never know for sure.
As for Ivermectin: Given its safety profile, I can think of no reasonable reason why it shouldn't be widely used. Worst case: It does nothing. Best case: It helps a lot. But I guess that would be bad for Pharma, who would rather sell Molunupavir or Paxlovid for $500+ per course than Ivermectin for $5 per course. Then there are the politicians. It has been said that "War is the health of the state", but I think this is is actually wrong and should be re-phrased: "Fear is the health of the state".