I tried to google to see if there is a study on garlic and covid-19, or about geographic correlations of garlic consumption and covid-19 outbreaks. Although there was a research paper or two suggesting the possibility of a theoretical benefit, and general states who who grows/eats the most garlic, most of the search results ended up being fact checks addressing certain claims involving garlic and other remedies (i.e. take a hot bath/shower); that there is no scientific evidence. If it is relatively harmless and routine human behavior being advanced as prevention, why go through all the effort to pad the results with the factchecking bulls___ preventing useful results. I Wasn't going going through all the google results, and I stopped after the first few pages. If there was a study performed, I really don't want to go to page 99992336478367863 of results to find it. I can increase the garlic in my diet without needing to confirm my suspicions, and if I am wrong about my suspicion then at least I'll be healthier from other viruses, mold, parasites, and bacteria.
Ironically when I googled how to treat covid-19 at home, some of these remedies they poopooed are suggested on university sites to treat the symptoms. So even if it failed to prevent the disease, it might at least treat the symptoms early and maybe help prevent the spread.
It is very disturbing that @hivewatchers is seeking to ban anti-vax ideas. Perhaps they should elaborate on what they think is dangerous disinformation, before I go on a 1024kb dissertation in 64kb of space, they could offer a defense to their misconduct and delusions of law. There is a covid outbreak at one of my relatives' college-Everyone was required to get a vax. The state CDC guy says that vaccines are safe and effective, but we observe all these breakthrough cases. I spoke with her the other day, she too though she was safe because she was vaxxed-because that is the official narrative. I had to break it to her that in the time has elapsed her protection is down to 20%, and she needs to to take less risks and protect herself from propaganda.
There are immortality complexes on both sides, and I would suspect the record covid-19 outbreaks in states and countries with the highest vaxxed rate is because the fact checkers are have eschewed so much false confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine it has created an immortality complex on a great scale among the vaccinated who have nearly lost the state of having any immunity. Those who had immortality complexes on the anti-vax side, probably already got it by now. There are also real dangers with the covid-19 vaccine, and there is just reason for people to do their own risk assessment. It is reflecting upon these risks that is important to the calculus of risk aversion.

Some people and countries have used ivermectin, and there are mixed reports on it's effectiveness. The daily rates of new cases in India has dropped to 11k after using an ivermectin protocol, supposedly that protocol is either no longer in use. For most people the risk of ivermectin might be Headache, dizziness, muscle pain, nausea, and/or diarrhea-relatively mild compared to the claims about it. Even if the benefit of ivermectin is statistically insignificant, the placebo effect might prove beneficial and who are we to deny them of it or literature about it's effectiveness? Perhaps there is something else going on to explain this phenomena in India-maybe it is the weather, maybe it is poor testing capabilities. Maybe it is because China and India have high levels of garlic in their diet. Just a hypothesis; science. But without being to assert those ideas because they aren't yet proven means these ideas may never be tested at a clinical level-Why? Because it is banned as misinformation,disinformation, dangerous, etc, etc. But yet at the same time, there aren't studies to reject a hypothesis that Garlic may be within a toolkit of lesser treatment options for covid-19 treatment and prevention. In another words, those demanding facts are not only anti-science but really don't want to consider the possibility there may be better ideas. Like a change in protocol will cause a media fact checker to break out into an autistic tantrum, because the real facts may take the fact checker out of his safe space of obsessional ideas and into a realm of great Post traumatic embitterment stress disorder of discomfort and attacks on others.

Suppose we recommend Orange juice for Vit C, a bowl of cereal to help get zinc, milk to get vit D. All missinformation and dangerous because it hasn't been proven. What many factcheckers would call dangerous, describes the stereotypical breakfast of many ordinary Americans.
So please hivewatchers tell me what is your stance on downvoting people who are anti-vax? Is a common and stereotypical American breakfast too dangerous for hive? Too many carbs perhaps? Would you prefer Bacon and eggs on the menu, or would the cholesterol be too dangerous? Would you prefer it if we do what the WEF advises and eat the maggots to save the earth?

And finally, the freedom of speech includes the right to have and express the wrong idea. The one who is confused about the freedom of speech is you hivewatchers.

To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think the speech impotent, as when a man says that he has squared the circle, or that you do not care wholeheartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out. That, at any rate, is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment.
-Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616,630 (1919)