The Nehor Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: I realize there are criticisms of some of these studies. They are not double blind, randomized controlled trials published in peer reviewed articles, etc. That doesn't mean they are not scientific. Doing these types of studies don't seem real ethical when the ones taking the placebo are dying.... That's a problem. The efficacy of ivermectin was found fairly late - the preferred type of studies take lots of time and money while in the mean time thousands millions are dying. Ivermectin was being used at a time when many didn't have ANYTHING to treat this disease. A fair number of the studies are epidemiological. When tens of thousands are being studied in meta studies, at what point do we say "that is not science? I'm not going to listen to it." That seems to be what the US is doing while dozens of other countries have been using it, and seem to be reversing covid spread. Just sayin'. Even if you take out a dozen of the studies, it still leaves dozens showing ivermectin has efficacy against covid. That is to say essentially ALL the science we have available to us shows that ivermectin has efficacy against covid. I have seen it first hand in my elderly mother. Well, if you want to pour over all the studies, here is a link: https://ivmmeta.com Personally, I have no trouble taking prescribed ivermectin if I get covid. I would probably rather take Paxlovid, but it is not available yet. As a cheap option, I strongly feel ivermectin is better than nothing, but that is not the point I was making in this thread. When we get Paxlovid, we seem to have a very efficacious treatment for this disease. I think that should lessen everyone's fear of this disease, and hopefully bring some of the overreaching policies to an end. I do not care to live with them. I feel they are being made to placate a population that is fearful - fear is a strong motivator. I refuse to live my life under the auspices of media-driven fear. I am trying to live my life as normally as possible, and just put covid in the rear view. This new antiviral is a great step in this direction - a return to normalcy. “I refuse to live in fear!” -scream heard from someone driving a car off a cliff I don’t think you realize what fear is for. It is designed to make us cautious and then the purpose is fulfilled so it is good not to live in that fear. If you discard the fear as inherently bad and rush off to die then you may not live in fear but you might die in agony.
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 6 hours ago, RevTestament said: That doesn't mean they are not scientific. What is at issue is what appears to be falsified data, duplicate entries, dates that can’t be true, etc. in the study that started it all and is referenced by many of the studies that came later. The articles are not that long. Please read them. 1
pogi Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, RevTestament said: I realize there are criticisms of some of these studies. They are not double blind, randomized controlled trials published in peer reviewed articles, etc. That doesn't mean they are not scientific. It just means they are weak and unreliable. They are not convincing for the general medical field. Lots of weak studies and conflicting results. 8 hours ago, RevTestament said: That is to say essentially ALL the science we have available to us shows that ivermectin has efficacy against covid. That simply is not true. There are also studies which show no efficacy. 8 hours ago, RevTestament said: Personally, I have no trouble taking prescribed ivermectin if I get covid... As a cheap option, I strongly feel ivermectin is better than nothing Unless you are taking the dangerous horse medicine it is not what I would call "cheap". It is about $100 for just 20 legitimately prescribed pills for human use. That is a lot of money for an unproven pill when there is an even more efficacious option that doesn't require strict timing within a very limited window when most people don't think to seek treatment...and it is free! Edited November 11, 2021 by pogi 3
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 6 hours ago, The Nehor said: “I refuse to live in fear!” -scream heard from someone driving a car off a cliff I don’t think you realize what fear is for. It is designed to make us cautious and then the purpose is fulfilled so it is good not to live in that fear. If you discard the fear as inherently bad and rush off to die then you may not live in fear but you might die in agony. Pulleeese. I am not rushing off to die. Did you not read that I took 2 vaccine doses? I am considered fully vaccinated... that is until the powers that be decide that I am not, and need another dose of this partially efficacious vaccine to be considered fully vaccinated. Your melodramatacism does not impress me. Why all the fuss? I am just saying if I get covid now, I don't feel I am at death's door. I have ivermectin, and soon will have Paxlovid... hopefully, and then acquire natural immunity as well.... so much the better it seems... although this government expresses no inclination that is so, and may still expect me to get jabbed again. Good luck with that. That is really not a rational policy...nor one based on science... but appears to be one based on fear. I will not comply to their fear driven media frenzy. If you wish to live in fear, go ahead. It is NOT good. It results in bad, irrational policies, and does have a negative impact on your physical body and mental health in such a chronic state. It tends to elevate cortisol, which in chronic doses is bad. So, I am treating covid pretty much like I treat the flu every year. I am over it, and refuse to live in the ongoing rat race. That is all. Enjoy your fear. -1
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, pogi said: It just means they are weak and unreliable. They are not convincing for the general medical field. Lots of weak studies and conflicting results. That simply is not true. Unless you are taking the dangerous horse medicine it is not what I would call "cheap". It is about $100 for just 20 legitimately prescribed pills for human use. That is a lot of money for an unproven pill when there is an even more efficacious option that doesn't require strict timing within a very limited window when most people don't think to seek treatment...and it is free! It is NOT free. We are all paying for it through inflation. My mother only needed about 10 days of ivermectin. It completely turned her covid around. My brother had already taken her to the ER... that's how the diagnosis was confirmed. So no, a little too late for the vaccine at that point. All they gave her was an antibiotic and a steroid(and an anti-nausea medicine) and sent her home to wait it out. She got worse, until I arranged the ivermectin for her. So this was NOT "early" in the course of her covid. At 88 years old, and 90 pounds she was at severe risk I'd say. She had stopped eating, and was fading fast on the phone. So, I intervened. Sorry. Americans don't like that. Well, many in her situation have died because of the American stance. I really don't understand it. I think it is sad, and preposterous. We were not only glad to pay the $100 for the ivermectin and the delivery to her apartment, but I was glad to pay the provider as well. Very small price to pay compared to a hospital trip and probable death, because that is where she was headed. She could barely talk to me by the time we got her the ivermectin. And literally the next day she was eating and talking again. And my point is now we should have something better... Paxlovid... It seems the most efficacious treatment we have so far... but no one seems to care. They are all wrapped up in the ongoing drama. That's what I am hoping will change. Maybe we can finally get on with life. "There are also studies which show no efficacy." Please provide them. Do they survive the double blind, randomized controlled trial standard that the FDA is demanding of ivermectin? What's good for the goose is good for the gander... The providers on the street see first hand that ivermectin is efficacious. That is why they keep prescribing it... at some risk to their licenses and medical standing. It just helps a lot of people. Paxlovid sounds like it will help more. Hopefully, they won't try to charge $700 like Merck was planning for their less efficacious med, Molnupiravir. P.S. Of course I cannot prove that ivermectin was the key factor for my mom. Maybe the ER prescribed meds just needed a little time to kick in...what do you think? I also ordered her an antiseptic mouthwash, 10,000 IU doses of vitamin D, and some other goodies. I was following the i-mask+ protocol. Edited November 11, 2021 by RevTestament
pogi Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, RevTestament said: It is NOT free. Ok, well we have already purchased it. No point in not using it and paying $100 extra for something else that may not even work. 1 hour ago, RevTestament said: My mother only needed about 10 days of it. It completely turned her covid around. My brother had already taken her to the ER... that's how the diagnosis was confirmed. So no, a little too late for the vaccine at that point. All they gave her was an antibiotic and a steroid(and an anti-nausea medicine) and sent her home to wait it out. She got worse, until I arranged the ivermectin for her. So this was NOT "early" in the course of her covid. At 88 years old, and 90 pounds she was at severe risk I'd say. She had stopped eating, and was fading fast on the phone. So, I intervened. Sorry. Americans don't like that. Well, many in her situation have died because of the American stance. I really don't understand it. I think it is sad, and preposterous. We were not only glad to pay the $100 for the ivermectin and the delivery to her apartment, but I was glad to pay the provider as well. I can understand why it might look to you like Ivermectin was responsible for your mothers recovery, but she was also taking other treatments. When taking steroids and other medicines, often people get worse before they get better. Medicines rarely have instant results at curbing and reducing symptoms, especially in a rapidly progressing disease. There are many other possible explanations too. How do you know she wouldn't have gotten better without the Ivermectin? You don't. If your mother was as severe as you describe in a state of progressed disease, there is no way Ivermectin would have had such an instant result, let alone any result at all. The fact is that all the studies that you site which suggest that Ivermectin works, they all agree that it has to be given early in treatment or it is not effective. Your own studies that you are using say that. We have to conclude that something else was at play here, based on all evidence. There is no evidence whatsoever from any study that late treatment in a more progressed disease can be effective. So, even if Ivermectin does have some positive effect when taken early (as the studies you site suggest), it is beyond clear from all data that the Ivermectin is not what helped your mother. The other fact that needs to be acknowledged, she almost certainly would have not ended up in an ER in the first place if she was previously vaccinated. 1 hour ago, RevTestament said: "There are also studies which show no efficacy." Please provide them. Do they survive the double blind, randomized controlled trial standard that the FDA is demanding of ivermectin? What's good for the goose is good for the gander... I think you are misunderstanding me. I am saying that there is no good evidence that it works. I don't need double blind studies to prove that. The absence of them proves it. The flawed studies prove it. The conflicting results prove it. There are more quality studies, while not double blind, which show that it had no effect. There are currently several double blind studies going on in the US to evaluate Ivermectin for treatment of Covid. Preliminary results are expected in December. This gives a good overview of the different studies and why the FDA, CDC, WHO don't recommend its use outside of clinical trials. You won't find one medical advisory board or medical association that recommends the use of Ivermectin for treatment of Covid. No, they are not all a part of some master conspiracy against Ivermectin. They clearly want more treatment options for Covid. We have 2 promising ones in development right now. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/scicheck-ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19/ Edited November 11, 2021 by pogi 2
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 22 minutes ago, pogi said: Ok, well it is already paid for then. No point in not using it and paying extra for something else that may not even work. I can understand why you think it might have been the Ivermectin that helped, but that is not how science works. She was also taking other treatments. When taking steroids and other medicines, often people get worse before they get better. Medicines rarely have instant results at curbing and reducing symptoms, especially in a rapidly progressing disease. There are many other possible explanations too. How do you know she wouldn't have gotten better without the Ivermectin? You don't. The fact is that all the studies that you site which suggest that Ivermectin works, they all agree that it has to be given early in treatment or it is not effective. Your own studies that you are using say that. There is no evidence whatsoever from any study that late treatment in a more progressed disease can be effective. So, even if Ivermectin does have some positive effect when taken early (as the studies you site suggest), it is beyond clear from all data that the Ivermectin is not what helped your mother. The other fact is that needs to be acknowledged, she almost certainly would have not ended up in an ER if she was previously vaccinated. I think you are misunderstanding me. I am saying that there is no good evidence that it works. I don't need double blind studies to prove that. The absence of them proves it. The flawed studies prove it. The conflicting results prove it. There are more quality studies, while not double blind, which show that it had no effect. There are currently several double blind studies going on in the US to evaluate Ivermectin for treatment of Covid. Preliminary results are expected in December. This gives a good overview of the different studies and why the FDA, CDC, WHO don't recommend its use outside of clinical trials. You won't find one medical advisory board or medical association that recommends the use of Ivermectin for treatment of Covid. No, they are not all a part of some master conspiracy against Ivermectin. They clearly want more treatment options for Covid. We have 2 promising ones in development right now. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/09/scicheck-ongoing-clinical-trials-will-decide-whether-or-not-ivermectin-is-safe-effective-for-covid-19/ It seems you are saying you need double blind studies to believe it does have efficacy, so when you say there are studies which "prove" it does not, it seems only fair to apply the same standard... Oops. You can't. That is my point. Providing equally "flawed" studies in the other direction, just doesn't work too well. When there are dozens of various kinds of studies showing it does. RCTs, epidemiological, etc. I am aware of two American studies currently being performed. Among the large U.S. nation-wide trials currently looking at ivermectin are the ACTIV-6 trial led by Duke University, which is enrolling 15,000 patients, and the 1,200-patient COVID-OUT trial led by Boulware and colleagues at the University of Minnesota. I believe there is a third, but my memory may be failing me. My point is given the dozens of international studies showing it has at least some efficacy, what is the harm in using it? Is it really some "dangerous" horse dewormer as CNN and the MSM are portraying it? NO. It has been approved as safe by the FDA, albeit obviously for a different use, and has been used in humans since its inception. It's not like I was taking some stupid risk on my mom's health. So why the resistance? Why the misinformation from the MSM? That doesn't bother you? Even if it wasn't efficacious, all I really did was waste my $190 and some change for vitamin D, etc. I would gladly do it again. It is apparent to me, that something made a complete turn around for my mom, and I wasn't going to wait another day watching her fade before "my eyes." (I wasn't there. I was arranging care for her from across the country.) Do you believe the providers that are prescribing ivermectin are nefarious and out to scalp the public? Is that your point? Do you believe there is no science to support what they are doing?
Raingirl Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 My brother was recently hospitalized for over two weeks with Covid. Two days after they gave him pizza for lunch, he was discharged. Pizza cures Covid! 3
pogi Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 16 minutes ago, RevTestament said: It seems you are saying you need double blind studies to believe it does have efficacy, so when you say there are studies which "prove" it does not, it seems only fair to apply the same standard... Oops. You are not reading me correctly. I never said there is proof that it doesn't work. I said that lack of reliable studies proves that there is no good evidence that it works. Look Rev, it is not just me, it is every major institution in the medical field. Unless you believe there is a major conspiracy, there is not enough evidence for the people that need it the most - the medical advisory boards. You can't blame this on CNN and the media. This is coming from the most trusted advisors in the medical field - all of them. Not just one institution. All of them. Currently, Ivermectin is not being recommended for use outside of clinical trials based on all available evidence. While the media may be reporting that, it is coming from the medical field. I don't need to prove that it doesn't work. That is not my intention. I hope it does. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to give the top advisory boards confidence in recommending its use. Based on the quality of the evidence so far, taking a sugar pill may be just as effective in the eyes of medicine. Edited November 11, 2021 by pogi 2
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 21 minutes ago, Raingirl said: My brother was recently hospitalized for over two weeks with Covid. Two days after they gave him pizza for lunch, he was discharged. Pizza cures Covid! Multiply that by tens of thousands of patients all around the world, and you might have something. I used ivermectin for my mom, because there are actual studies showing results when looking at tens of thousands of people. If I had not, she might be dead, and you cannot prove that was not the case, as much as I cannot prove it was, because isolated cases do not prove much. Some people just get better, and hospitalization gives their bodies a little more time to defeat the virus... probably not the case for my 88 years old, 90 pound mother.
pogi Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 10 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Multiply that by tens of thousands of patients all around the world, and you might have something. I used ivermectin for my mom, because there are actual studies showing results when looking at tens of thousands of people. If I had not, she might be dead, and you cannot prove that was not the case, as much as I cannot prove it was, because isolated cases do not prove much. Some people just get better, and hospitalization gives their bodies a little more time to defeat the virus... probably not the case for my 88 years old, 90 pound mother. "Might" is the key here. But when you have other studies showing it is not effective, you "might" not be on to something here too. When all the studies performed have severe limitations, it is a crap shoot at this point. Rev, show me one study which demonstrates efficacy of Ivermectin with late administration when the disease is more advanced, as is the case with your mother. Again, all of the studies you are talking about show it is ineffective with late treatment. You seem to be ignoring that fact in the case of your mother. How do you know it wasn't the other treatments in the hospital that helped? Again, if her disease was progressive, she would likely have gotten worse before getting better from her treatment. Even 90 year old people have moderate cases for only a week or two. Some are only sick for a few days. While elderly people have much higher risk of severe disease and death, odds are that most will live and be fine. You realize that your anecdote goes against your own evidence you are presenting, right? 2
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, RevTestament said: 59 minutes ago, Raingirl said: Multiply that by tens of thousands of patients all around the world, and you might have something There are probably more infected who recovered after eating pizza than who recovered after taking ivermectin given the frequency of pizza consumption world wide (for example, it is a popular dish in Korea if the tv dramas are to be believed, though some of them are more advertisements with a little plot, action, and romance in between. I always crack up when the lovebirds end up at Subway after overcoming seemingly insurmountable odds commenting to each other on how tasty their sandwiches are; product placement is a huge thing over there). Edited November 11, 2021 by Calm 1
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, pogi said: You are not reading me correctly. I never said there is proof that it doesn't work. I said that lack of reliable studies proves that there is no good evidence that it works. Look Rev, it is not just me, it is every major institution in the medical field. Unless you believe there is a major conspiracy, there is not enough evidence for the people that need it the most - the medical advisory boards. You can't blame this on CNN and the media. This is coming from the most trusted advisors in the medical field - all of them. Not just one institution. All of them. Currently, Ivermectin is not being recommended for use outside of clinical trials based on all available evidence. While the media may be reporting that, it is coming from the medical field. I don't need to prove that it doesn't work. That is not my intention. I hope it does. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to give the top advisory boards confidence in recommending its use. Based on the quality of the evidence so far, taking a sugar pill may be just as effective in the eyes of medicine. I can blame CNN for providing false and misleading information. It is verifiably false. When conservatives do this, they jump all over it. Why would they provide verifiably false information which seems designed to scare the viewer? Do you think it may be that big pharma, Merck who initially produced ivermectin, and Pfizer are making TONS of money off their vaccines, and now their new antivirals(probably), and don't want this cheap treatment as competition? Do you think that might have anything to do with it when Pfizer is sponsoring so many CNN "informercials?" Because that is what they are at this point. Their "news" is more like infomercials for Pfizer. Don't get me wrong. I am all for their coming out with better antivirals, and really a better vaccine. I think Novavax has a better one, but of course that hasn't been approved yet here... just "over there." As for the evidence, I realize that I wasn't relying on the "gold standard" of scientific studies on ivermectin. Because as of yet, there are none. We've been over this. Medicine usually believes it is not ethical to perform double blind studies when the placebo group is dying. It's a problem. So I have to go on what scientific studies there are, and there are actually quite a few. Do you honestly believe they were all part of a major conspiracy? I don't. I believe when a cheap drug surfaced which had some efficacy, big pharma saw it as a threat to their ongoing studies so steered the MSM away from it. Where else did this narrative come from that ivermectin is a "dangerous" drug used as a horse dewormer? Hell, even the horse dewormer version has less deaths than hand sanitizer in this country - which is exactly 0 compared to several for hand sanitizer. If the American studies on ivermectin do not appear biased, and are done well, I might change my opinion if they show no efficacy. Until then I have to go on the available science when faced with a need to treat loved ones. I would do it again. The fact that the US is almost blocking its use, may mean that thousands of deaths are on their hands. I hope they can live with that if further studies confirm all the international studies. My ongoing point is that given some at least semi-reliable evidence it is efficacious, with virtually no associated risk, what is the harm in using it? It is kinda like refusing to give the patient vitamin D. Neither are a "cure all" but it seems wise given the cost and risk profiles. I realize for some reason ivermectin hits a nerve - I believe it is because covid has become so politicized, but from a purely evidentiary standpoint, I would use it again given no other options, unless and until better evidence comes out. Isn't that what we are doing with the "vaccines?" We are living with an imperfect "solution" because that is what we have atm. And an intransigent administration that refuses to recognize the multiple studies showing natural immunity is better, and seem to still want to force you to keep getting "vaccinated." I am just putting my foot down, and demanding rationality, and an evidentiary-based policy. Edited November 11, 2021 by RevTestament
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 12 minutes ago, Calm said: There are probably more infected who recovered after eating pizza than who recovered after taking ivermectin given the frequency of pizza consumption world wide (for example, it is a popular dish in Korea if the tv dramas are to be believed, though some of them are more advertisements with a little plot, action, and romance in between. I always crack up when the lovebirds end up at Subway after overcoming seemingly insurmountable odds commenting to each other on how tasty their sandwiches are; product placement is a huge thing over there). LOL, that might be very well true, given that most people do recover from this disease. Right now we seem to running at about a 1/2 percent death rate. I'm sure lots of hospitals serve pizza. However, my mother was in the extreme health risk category, where many do not recover. I sincerely doubt pizza cured her... esp given her propensity to never eat it.... 😉
pogi Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: Do you think it may be that big pharma, Merck who initially produced ivermectin, and Pfizer are making TONS of money off their vaccines, and now their new antivirals(probably), and don't want this cheap treatment as competition? Do you think that might have anything to do with it when Pfizer is sponsoring so many CNN "informercials?" Because that is what they are at this point. Their "news" is more like infomercials for Pfizer. Don't get me wrong. I am all for their coming out with better antivirals, and really a better vaccine. I think Novavax has a better one, but of course that hasn't been approved yet here... just "over there." Well, that is one conspiracy theory. No, I don't think that is true when you consider the fact that it is not just the media saying this - it is the most trusted medical associations and top medical advisory boards in the nation all unitedly discouraging the use of Ivermectin outside of clinical trials (the CDC, FDA, WHO, AMA, APhA, ASHP, etc. etc.) https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-apha-ashp-statement-ending-use-ivermectin-treat-covid-19 https://www.msms.org/About-MSMS/News-Media/fdacdc-warn-against-use-of-ivermectin-to-prevent-and-treat-covid-19 Unless your conspiracy theory includes all of these distinct and most trusted institutions in the medical field all conspiring to make a couple pharm companies some extra money at the expense of the lives of countless American people, then you have no legs to stand on. Sorry, I don't buy it. You are not really that dystopian, are you? 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: So I have to go on what scientific studies there are, and there are actually quite a few. Do you honestly believe they were all part of a major conspiracy? I don't. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy to detect that the studies are conflicting (soothing you seem to ignore) and too unreliable to base medical recommendations on. 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: I believe when a cheap drug surfaced which had some efficacy, big pharma saw it as a threat to their ongoing studies so steered the MSM away from it. Where else did this narrative come from that ivermectin is a "dangerous" drug used as a horse dewormer? Hell, even the horse dewormer version has less deaths than hand sanitizer in this country - which is exactly 0 compared to several for hand sanitizer. If the American studies on ivermectin do not appear biased, and are done well, I might change my opinion if they show no efficacy. Until then I have to go on the available science when faced with a need to treat loved ones. I would do it again. The fact that the US is almost blocking its use, may mean that thousands of deaths are on their hands. I hope they can live with that if further studies confirm all the international studies. My ongoing point is that given some at least semi-reliable evidence it is efficacious, with virtually no associated risk, what is the harm in using it? It is kinda like refusing to give the patient vitamin D. Neither are a "cure all" but it seems wise given the cost and risk profiles. I realize for some reason ivermectin hits a nerve - I believe it is because covid has become so politicized, but from a purely evidentiary standpoint, I would use it again given no other options, unless and until better evidence comes out. Isn't that what we are doing with the "vaccines?" We are living with an imperfect "solution" because that is what we have atm. And an intransigent administration that refuses to recognize the multiple studies showing natural immunity is better, and seem to still want to force you to keep getting "vaccinated." I am just putting my foot down, and demanding rationality, and an evidentiary-based policy. Again, this is not just pharmaceutical companies and the media saying this. How far up does your conspiracy go? Do you honestly believe all of these institutions care more about making Merck and Pfizer more money than protecting the American people and giving medical providers the best possible tools in combating this virus? Do you realize how that sounds? I have more faith in these respected and trusted medical institutions than you. I don't have as much faith in the media and big pharma. If they were the only two birds chirping, I might think you were on to something. Edited November 11, 2021 by pogi 3
The Nehor Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 5 hours ago, RevTestament said: Pulleeese. I am not rushing off to die. Did you not read that I took 2 vaccine doses? I am considered fully vaccinated... that is until the powers that be decide that I am not, and need another dose of this partially efficacious vaccine to be considered fully vaccinated. Your melodramatacism does not impress me. Why all the fuss? I am just saying if I get covid now, I don't feel I am at death's door. I have ivermectin, and soon will have Paxlovid... hopefully, and then acquire natural immunity as well.... so much the better it seems... although this government expresses no inclination that is so, and may still expect me to get jabbed again. Good luck with that. That is really not a rational policy...nor one based on science... but appears to be one based on fear. I will not comply to their fear driven media frenzy. If you wish to live in fear, go ahead. It is NOT good. It results in bad, irrational policies, and does have a negative impact on your physical body and mental health in such a chronic state. It tends to elevate cortisol, which in chronic doses is bad. So, I am treating covid pretty much like I treat the flu every year. I am over it, and refuse to live in the ongoing rat race. That is all. Enjoy your fear. This makes it worse. You are spreading misinformation that suggests it is okay to not get the vaccine even though you have. You seem to think I am perpetually afraid. I am not. I am concerned and look at new data to see if I need to adjust. I am sorry that you find yourself incapable of living in any state except ‘over it’ and ‘blind panic’. I hope you can develop another way at some point. Also you seem incapable of defending Ivermectin except with claims that boil down to “lots of people are saying”. That is anti-science. It is also how many anti-Mormons operate. Throw everything at the wall. Sure, the apologists can disprove most of it but the person questioning things sees that there is so much stuff and assumes based on volume that some of it must be true. “Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right. I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin, and when I speak in Bayreuth, I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall. That is a matter of practice, not of theory. We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses. Propaganda should be popular, not intellectually pleasing. It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths.” - Joseph Goebbels 2
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: I'm sure lots of hospitals serve pizza. If not, family and friends should be smuggling it in rather than allowing their loves ones to suffer because the hospital is anti pizza Quote can blame CNN for providing false and misleading information. It is verifiably false What else is new. But don’t just go to some of other news source or trust word of mouth anecdotes if you can access the original studies and medical experts’ analyses of them. Edited November 11, 2021 by Calm
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: o you think it may be that big pharma, Merck who initially produced ivermectin, and Pfizer are making TONS of money off their vaccines, and now their new antivirals(probably), and don't want this cheap treatment as competition? Masks are pretty cheap, why do you think companies and governments, etc are pushing them if it is all about money?
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 11 hours ago, RevTestament said: Medicine usually believes it is not ethical to perform double blind studies when the placebo group is dying I don’t think you are really thinking this through. This happens all the time with cancer and other diseases that kill. New drugs that may prevent death still have to go through the same hoops for approval in almost every other case. It is when the new drug group is dying off or having too many side effects that they stop the study, not the reverse. Compassionate use is not the standard response when a new drug looks good, but hadn’t been tested. And if CNN and other news media are just shills for big Pharma, why does it seem like there are so many breakthrough cases even when the vaccination is at full strength being reported? If it was all about the money, they wouldn’t be reporting cases that could lead to a lack of confidence and thus more people questioning the need. A pandemic with the outlook of millions dying…To me that is reasonable that some few things are changed, but the meds are still going through the same standards of approval process for the long term. They just didn’t drop the testing as soon as it looked like more were surviving with rather than without with not too many problems. Only some adjustment that was viewed by experts as relatively safe was made to get them out quicker. And they are still being examined which is why protocols are in flux. Of course not having to wait to find enough candidates really sped up the process, big difference as having to go out and beg for people to sign up for studies and then find enough of those who qualify can take a long time unlike how people were calling in to volunteer en masse this time. Quote Do you honestly believe they were all part of a major conspiracy? Nope. I do believe that many were too eager to believe in the hope that was offered by what is likely a fraudulent paper (hard to see what else could be the cause of the combination of duplicate entries and out of date patients and likely plagiarism). Have you read the criticisms of the report of ivermectin as a possible Covid treatment, one of the reports that started it all? Quote It is kinda like refusing to give the patient vitamin D. Vitamin D is even cheaper than ivermectin, are you seeing any evidence that Big Pharma and others are pushing doctors to refuse giving the patient Vitamin D or that medical experts are saying “don’t take Vitamin D as it is dangerous”? Quote the multiple studies showing natural immunity is better, In the short term, say next three years…how many will be saved from dying or long term illness by natural immunity vs vaccine given that they need to get sick first for the first option to apply, therefore not only does natural immunity have to be more effective than vaccine, it has to be so effective it makes up for all those deaths that occurred while people were acquiring natural immunity. Edited November 12, 2021 by Calm
RevTestament Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, pogi said: If you are asking me if you are a conspiracy theorist...yes, I suppose you are. No I don't think that is true when you consider the fact that it is not just the media saying this - it is the most trusted medical associations and top medical advisory boards in the nation all unitedly discouraging the use of Ivermectin outside of clinical trials (the CDC, FDA, WHO, AMA, APhA, ASHP, etc. etc.) https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-apha-ashp-statement-ending-use-ivermectin-treat-covid-19 https://www.msms.org/About-MSMS/News-Media/fdacdc-warn-against-use-of-ivermectin-to-prevent-and-treat-covid-19 Unless your conspiracy theory includes all of these distinct and most trusted institutions in the medical field all conspiring to make a couple pharm companies some extra money at the expense of the lives of the American people, then you have no legs to stand on. Sorry, I don't buy it. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy to detect that the studies are unreliable to base medical recommendations on. Again, this is not just pharmaceutical companies and the media saying this. How far up does your conspiracy go? Do you honestly believe all of these institutions care more about making Merck and Pfizer more money than protecting the American people and giving medical providers the best possible tools in combating this virus? Do you realize how that sounds? I have more faith in these respected and trusted medical institutions than you. I don't have as much faith in the media and big pharma. If they were the only two birds chirping, I might think you were on to something. I never claimed a conspiracy - I don't really appreciate your attempts to paint me as a conspiracy theorist. Maybe there is some conspiracy between Pfizer and CNN, but I think not. I think CNN is just pandering to the money, and rehashing some sound bites. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I think our medical establishment is sometimes overly cautious about medications. I don't really see a need for that in this case. It is not like ivermectin is some unknown dangerous drug. That characterization does make me suspicious of ulterior motives when it is demonstrably false. Calling it a horse dewormer is in the same category. It is a false narrative formed by someone, and I have to question who, and why. I could understand the caution if ivermectin was actually dangerous and had substantial risks - but it does not(maybe if you are pregnant, etc). The link you gave to the AMAs new position again calls ivermectin "harmful" citing a 5 fold increase in calls to poison control centers. What they do not say is those calls are all from people taking stronger formulations of horse dewormer and other veterinary versions. Well, any drug can be abused. If they could get prescriptions, I'm sure people wouldn't be resorting to such ill-advised tactics. Vitamin D has no studies showing it is efficacious(or at least conflicting studies), but are we going to disallow it? It is about the same logic. At least ivermectin has many studies showing at least some efficacy. There are many practitioners dealing with their patients who feel it is efficacious. Your insistence that other equally questionable studies found no efficacy, and no medical organizations are willing to recommend ivermectin without double blind, randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed places is not persuasive to me. I don't claim some kind of "conspiracy." I think they are just demanding a quality of evidence that is not there yet. If anything, I'd say you are the conspiracy theorist since you believe all 64 studies are somehow ignoring or skewing the evidence. So, I'd say the burden is on you to show that - a handful of studies that showed no efficacy just aren't enough. Look, I posted on the thread with what I thought was really good news about paxlovid, and then I mentioned ivermectin, and it seems like I stirred up some hornets nest. I find the evidence persuasive enough to trust ivermectin. You don't. I have no problem with that. I do not believe there is some international conspiracy to skew the evidence. There are studies from Israel and many other countries. It seems covid rates have dramatically dropped wherever ivermectin's use has been widely implemented. I do not recommend people go take horse dewormer not knowing what dosage of this medicine they are going to get or even need. I didn't come to the thread to be some champion for ivermectin. It just seems to be one of the very few efficacious treatments for covid. I believe Paxlovid will end up being a much better covid treatment - probably the best so far. I see no reason to limit myself to partially efficacious vaccines - that do have risks. We are never going to reduce the risks to 0. I am just ready to move on, and I would rather our whole society do so, but obviously that is not in my power, so I can only do what I feel is right for me. I took the precautions. I used a mask. I got double vaccinated. I respected the elderly, and practiced social distancing. I will still do that around the elderly or compromised individuals, and even wear a mask if they want me to, but I feel its time to get on with our lives. I tell you what. When Novavax's vaccine is approved, message me, and I will consider taking it, but until then, I'm good. I resent the federal government ignoring its constitutional mandate (that it received from the states) and trying to force this partially efficacious vaccine down our throats. Their messaging to the public outright sucked, and was practically the opposite of what it should have been - but that is not surprising from this inept administration. I find the current policy to not only be offensive, but unconstitutional, irrational, and not even based on the available science. Thanks. Edited November 12, 2021 by RevTestament
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 50 minutes ago, The Nehor said: You seem to think I am perpetually afraid. I am not. I am much, much less afraid now I have the vaccine for myself and my friends and family who are also vaccinated. Not really afraid at all actually now I think about it, picturing them. The little butterflies of fear only get fluttering for family and friends who are both antivaxx and careless with their health and in high risk areas, just a few. I am concerned for those people and countries who are less able to get the vaccines and want them and fearful for those there who are ill, but it is pretty abstract unless I hear a personal story. I am a bit sorrowful for those who refuse to get the shots (unless there are past issues with similar circumstances or sound medical reasons to avoid) and can be somewhat fearful when I hear of exposure of loved ones and others who refused and who have no evidence of likely having natural immunity (such as happened with a family reunion of my brother’s family where half of the seven families who attended got infected), though it is often more because I am concerned about the effect their method of choosing will have in other areas of their life, like alienation from church or poor medical choices in other areas of their lives. I get even more fearful when I hear these have had to get admitted to the hospital. I am much less fearful when I hear of vaccinated individuals being admitted because I know their odds are relatively good. I also get fearful when I hear of friends and family (I don’t solely rely on news reports that such is happening as too familiar with how numbers can be inflated) having to put off needed surgeries being overwhelmed by ICUs being flooded. Again something that wouldn’t be happening if more were vaccinated. And it is breaking my heart that week after week I am hearing friends and family report of deaths, especially of younger parents. One week I think I heard of five cases. Very different from the first six months or so when we were asking each other “do you know anyone who got sick?” Now I could be asking “are you lucky enough not to know anyone who has died of covid?”, but it is too depressing to do.
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: I think CNN is just pandering to the money, If they know it is not true, but agree to because of the money, that is a conspiracy just as a hit man taking money to kill someone is a conspiracy or a regular waste disposal company taking money for dumping what they know is bio waste in a land fill or at sea is one. Edited November 12, 2021 by Calm 1
Calm Posted November 11, 2021 Author Posted November 11, 2021 (edited) 19 minutes ago, RevTestament said: What they do not say is those calls are all from people taking stronger formulations of horse dewormer and other veterinary versions. They certainly do in the reports I have read, self medicating by using such. They are not saying people are being poisoned by prescriptions given them by doctors. Thus the horse dewormer narrative. Edited November 11, 2021 by Calm 1
The Nehor Posted November 11, 2021 Posted November 11, 2021 28 minutes ago, RevTestament said: I never claimed a conspiracy - I don't really appreciate your attempts to paint me as a conspiracy theorist. Maybe there is some conspiracy between Pfizer and CNN, but I think not. I think CNN is just pandering to the money, and rehashing some sound bites. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I think our medical establishment is sometimes overly cautious about medications. I don't really see a need for that in this case. It is not like ivermectin is some unknown dangerous drug. That characterization does make me suspicious of ulterior motives when it is demonstrably false. Calling it a horse dewormer is in the same category. It is a false narrative formed by someone, and I have to question who, and why. I could understand the caution if ivermectin was actually dangerous and had substantial risks - but it does not(maybe if you are pregnant, etc). The link you gave to the AMAs new position again calls ivermectin "dangerous" citing a 5 fold increase in calls to poison control centers. What they do not say is those calls are all from people taking stronger formulations of horse dewormer and other veterinary versions. Well, any drug can be abused. If they could get prescriptions, I'm sure people wouldn't be resorting to such ill-advised tactics. Vitamin D has no studies showing it is efficacious(or at least conflicting studies), but are we going to disallow it? It is about the same logic. At least ivermectin has many studies showing at least some efficacy. There are many practitioners dealing with their patients who feel it is efficacious. Your insistence that other equally questionable studies found no efficacy, and no medical organizations are willing to recommend ivermectin without double blind, randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed places is not persuasive to me. I don't claim some kind of "conspiracy." I think they are just demanding a quality of evidence that is not there yet. If anything, I'd say you are the conspiracy theorist since you believe all 64 studies are somehow ignoring or skewing the evidence. So, I'd say the burden is on you to show that - a handful of studies that showed no efficacy just aren't enough. Look, I posted on the thread with what I thought was really good news about paxlovid, and then I mentioned ivermectin, and it seems like I stirred up some hornets nest. I find the evidence persuasive enough to trust ivermectin. You don't. I have no problem with that. I do not believe there is some international conspiracy to skew the evidence. There are studies from Israel and many other countries. It seems covid rates have dramatically dropped wherever ivermectin's use has been widely implemented. I do not recommend people go take horse dewormer not knowing what dosage of this medicine they are going to get or even need. I didn't come to the thread to be some champion for ivermectin. It just seems to be one of the very few efficacious treatments for covid. I believe Paxlovid will end up being a much better covid treatment - probably the best so far. I see no reason to limit myself to partially efficacious vaccines - that do have risks. We are never going to reduce the risks to 0. I am just ready to move on, and I would rather our whole society do so, but obviously that is not in my power, so I can only do what I feel is right for me. I took the precautions. I used a mask. I got double vaccinated. I respected the elderly, and practiced social distancing. I will still do that around the elderly or compromised individuals, and even wear a mask if they want me to, but I feel its time to get on with our lives. I tell you what. When Novavax's vaccine is approved, message me, and I will consider taking it, but until then, I'm good. I resent the federal government ignoring its constitutional mandate (that it received from the states) and trying to force this partially efficacious vaccine down our throats. Their messaging to the public outright sucked, and was practically the opposite of what it should have been - but that is not surprising from this inept administration. I find the current policy to not only be offensive, but unconstitutional, irrational, and not even based on the available science. Thanks. After debunking the Ivermectin studies again you are back with “many studies”. You are hopeless.
Recommended Posts