> "It is yet to be proven" means, quite literally, anyone who looked into it never saw it work, ever. At all.
[yet].
There are studies ongoing. Not in the anti-vaxxer "I'm still doing research" sense, but in the sense that there are actual non-Facebook studies ongoing. Even that AP fact checker article mentions that.
When the context says there are studies ongoing and yet to be proven is mentioned, it means that the conclusion has not been drawn.
In isolation, when yet to be proven is written with no other context, it means what you interpreted: that nobody has ever seen it work, and we need a nice way to say that.
The fact checker and this conversation both accurately conveyed how different ivermectin is from what Pfizer is developing: the compounds are different, the molecules are different, everything is different. They don't say the result is different. Ivermectin - a completely different compound and molecule - has a hypothesis and limited result showing it functions as a protease inhibitor. It does omit where there are similarities being studied and what those hypothesis are.
This is actually new information to me and I found that looking for a response to you. This isn't about Ivermectin or laughing at Republicans turn their whole states blue from a lack of oxygen as well as the remaining population, its just about what is omitted from the fact checking article.
[yet].
There are studies ongoing. Not in the anti-vaxxer "I'm still doing research" sense, but in the sense that there are actual non-Facebook studies ongoing. Even that AP fact checker article mentions that.
When the context says there are studies ongoing and yet to be proven is mentioned, it means that the conclusion has not been drawn.
In isolation, when yet to be proven is written with no other context, it means what you interpreted: that nobody has ever seen it work, and we need a nice way to say that.
The fact checker and this conversation both accurately conveyed how different ivermectin is from what Pfizer is developing: the compounds are different, the molecules are different, everything is different. They don't say the result is different. Ivermectin - a completely different compound and molecule - has a hypothesis and limited result showing it functions as a protease inhibitor. It does omit where there are similarities being studied and what those hypothesis are.
This is actually new information to me and I found that looking for a response to you. This isn't about Ivermectin or laughing at Republicans turn their whole states blue from a lack of oxygen as well as the remaining population, its just about what is omitted from the fact checking article.