I think you should mention the possibility that Bitterman et al. describe, which is that some of the positive data is real, and ivermectin really does help, but only in populations with a lot of undiagnosed parasite infections. (It has be undiagnosed. I assume that if the condition is diagnosed, the patient would be given ivermectin with the doctor's knowledge, removing that patient from participation in a double-blind test.) Bitterman thinks that some of the positive studies are honest, and valid. I wouldn't know about that. But if that is the case, I can see that these studies were conducted in countries with a lot of parasitic infections.
The next logical step, that probably won't take place, would be to see if worms have a tendency to dampen symptoms. If they don't, back to ivermectin, right jed?