Don't miss the big stories. Like us on Facebook.  

To the Editor: I'd like to point out a problem with an article that appeared in Thursday's Reformer ("Controversial COVID drug difficult to get dispensed").

I won't insult the intelligence of the reader by restating the simple, well-established facts that the use of crackpot treatments for COVID such as ivermectin (along with its equally fraudulent siblings like hydroxychloroquine and bleach) is as irresponsible, dangerous, deadly, and amoral as are the actions of the charlatans, like those mentioned in the article, who help inflict them on the public.

Rather, my problem is with the headline of the article. "Controversial" implies that an issue is subject to actual debate. There is no serious debate about the worthless nature of ivermectin for the treatment for COVID. This is made clear by the other sources quoted (briefly) in the article (or by performing a few minutes research in any respectable medical source).

In short, referring to the use of ivermectin to prevent (or to treat) COVID-19 as being "Controversial" is no different from labelling the claims of "Flat Earth" proponents as a "Controversial Theory of Geography" or writing that searches for Bigfoot are based on "Controversial Biology."

We all understand that it is the role of media such as The Reformer to report on such issues in the community. This is as it should be. But a disservice is done to their readers and to their community when those sources indulge in this sort of sloppy usage of language.

Nichael Cramer

Guilford, Oct. 15