COVID gratuitous dumpster fire thread

[Ski]

Dr. Ozaki cited evidence from African nations that have utilized Ivermectin during the pandemic. He stated: “In Africa, if we compare countries distributing Ivermectin once a year with countries who do not give Ivermectin… they don’t give Ivermectin to prevent COVID but to prevent parasitic disease… if we look at COVID numbers in countries that give Ivermectin, the number of cases is 134.4/100,000 and the number of deaths is 2.2/100,000.”

The Tokyo Medical Association chairman compared statistics from African countries that did use Ivermectin yearly with those that did not: “Now African countries which do not distribute Ivermectin: 950.6 cases per 100,000 and 29.3 deaths per 100,000.”

In his opinion, he believes that this shows a clear difference between the illness and fatality rates amongst nations that use Ivermectin and those that do not: “I believe the difference is clear. Of course one cannot conclude that Ivermectin is effective only on the basis of these figures, but when we have all of these elements, we cannot say that Ivermectin is absolutely not effective, at least not me.”

He added that, given the situation, other studies can be done to “confirm its efficacy,” insinuating that it is worth using as a treatment, given that in his estimation, Japan is “in a crisis situation.”

He said, “I think we are in a situation where we can afford to give [patients] this treatment.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/b...ls-doctors-to-prescribe-ivermectin-for-covid/

 

[crablegs1]

View embedded media

Dr. Ozaki cited evidence from African nations that have utilized Ivermectin during the pandemic. He stated: “In Africa, if we compare countries distributing Ivermectin once a year with countries who do not give Ivermectin… they don’t give Ivermectin to prevent COVID but to prevent parasitic disease… if we look at COVID numbers in countries that give Ivermectin, the number of cases is 134.4/100,000 and the number of deaths is 2.2/100,000.”

The Tokyo Medical Association chairman compared statistics from African countries that did use Ivermectin yearly with those that did not: “Now African countries which do not distribute Ivermectin: 950.6 cases per 100,000 and 29.3 deaths per 100,000.”

In his opinion, he believes that this shows a clear difference between the illness and fatality rates amongst nations that use Ivermectin and those that do not: “I believe the difference is clear. Of course one cannot conclude that Ivermectin is effective only on the basis of these figures, but when we have all of these elements, we cannot say that Ivermectin is absolutely not effective, at least not me.”

He added that, given the situation, other studies can be done to “confirm its efficacy,” insinuating that it is worth using as a treatment, given that in his estimation, Japan is “in a crisis situation.”

He said, “I think we are in a situation where we can afford to give [patients] this treatment.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/b...ls-doctors-to-prescribe-ivermectin-for-covid/

This seems like an extremely flimsy basis for recommending a treatment. There is a reason we do double blind control trials. The number of confounding variables in this situation is nearly unlimited.

 

[Ski]

This seems like an extremely flimsy basis for recommending a treatment. There is a reason we do double blind control trials. The number of confounding variables in this situation is nearly unlimited.

Yet it can't really hurt since the drug has a long track record of being used safely. It is inexpensive, especially for a country like Japan. And, it may help. Seems like a good choice to try it, double-blinds be damned. With Covid, we threw scientific method out the window long ago in favor of political science.

 

[crablegs1]

Yet it can't really hurt since the drug has a long track record of being used safely. It is inexpensive, especially for a country like Japan. And, it may help. Seems like a good choice to try it, double-blinds be damned. With Covid, we threw scientific method out the window long ago in favor of political science.

While you can say it has been used safely, there are several possible serious side effects. The benefits often outweigh the risks of the side effects for something that the drug is proven to treat such as a parasite. However to say there is no risk, so what the heck let’s try it for something we have no idea if it works for is a recipe for disaster. Might as well take it for constipation or give it a try next time you have a headache.

 

[Ski]

While you can say it has been used safely, there are several possible serious side effects. The benefits often outweigh the risks of the side effects for something that the drug is proven to treat such as a parasite. However to say there is no risk, so what the heck let’s try it for something we have no idea if it works for is a recipe for disaster. Might as well take it for constipation or give it a try next time you have a headache.

If they had offered it to me when I had Covid, I would have taken it. As it was, 8 days in I got the monoclonal antibodies, which turned things around quickly for me. I am sorry, the track record with this drug is more than long enough to know it is safe at certain dosages. Christ, they give it out regularly to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people in many countries in Africa. You think a problem would have shown up by now if there were serious issues. Aspirin has potentially serious side effects. I take it.

 

[crablegs1]

If they had offered it to me when I had Covid, I would have taken it. As it was, 8 days in I got the monoclonal antibodies, which turned things around quickly for me. I am sorry, the track record with this drug is more than long enough to know it is safe at certain dosages. Christ, they give it out regularly to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people in many countries in Africa. You think a problem would have shown up by now if there were serious issues. Aspirin has potentially serious side effects. I take it.

Yes, you take aspirin for things that you know it works for. Do you take aspirin for diarrhea, or hair loss?

If they offered you chemo when you have covid would you take it? I mean tons of people go through chemo every year and it might just work.

 

[Ski]

Yes, you take aspirin for things that you know it works for. Do you take aspirin for diarrhea, or hair loss?

If they offered you chemo when you have covid would you take it? I mean tons of people go through chemo every year and it might just work.

The Japanese Medical Association has offered up its country to be the subjects of this experiment. I trust their doctors over your opinion. The beauty of it is we will have results from this that will give us a good answer and opinions won't matter - yours or mine. Do you think the Japanese doctors are crazy enough to offer up a drug with potentially serious side effects to their patients if the potential benefits didn't outweigh the potential risks? If a doctor explained the risks and benefits and the usage history to me and I felt the way I did when I had Covid, you are god damn right I would have taken it.

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective​

Since the inception of the Mectizan Donation Programme, Merck has donated well over 2.5 billion Mectizan® tablets for Onchocerciasis treatment, with in excess of 700 million treatments authorized. Currently, some 80–90 million people are taking the drug annually through MDA in Africa, Latin America and Yemen. A further 300 million total treatments have been approved for lymphatic filariasis, with around 90 million treatments being administered annually (Fig. (Fig.8 ).8 ). At present 33 countries are receiving ivermectin for Onchocerciasis and 15 for Lymphatic filariasis.

 

[crablegs1]

The Japanese Medical Association has offered up its country to be the subjects of this experiment. I trust their doctors over your opinion. The beauty of it is we will have results from this that will give us a good answer and opinions won't matter - yours or mine. Do you think the Japanese doctors are crazy enough to offer up a drug with potentially serious side effects to their patients if the potential benefits didn't outweigh the potential risks? If a doctor explained the risks and benefits and the usage history to me and I felt the way I did when I had Covid, you are god damn right I would have taken it.

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective​

Since the inception of the Mectizan Donation Programme, Merck has donated well over 2.5 billion Mectizan® tablets for Onchocerciasis treatment, with in excess of 700 million treatments authorized. Currently, some 80–90 million people are taking the drug annually through MDA in Africa, Latin America and Yemen. A further 300 million total treatments have been approved for lymphatic filariasis, with around 90 million treatments being administered annually (Fig. (Fig.8 ).8 ). At present 33 countries are receiving ivermectin for Onchocerciasis and 15 for Lymphatic filariasis.

No, Japan has not approved. This is just one dude. The country has not authorized this treatment.

Japan has safety and efficacy protocols similar to the FDA. Even under some kind of emergency authorization, they’d need some evidence.

 

[Ski]

I guess the takeaway for me is that when I took a vaccine in Feb 2021 under an Emergency Use Authorization that had no long term studies done on it, that was a good thing even though there was no guarantee that it would stop me from getting Covid (and it did not stop me from contracting Covid 10 days later). And, it was also good for me to take the 2nd vaccine dose under EUA even though I already had recovered from Covid. But, it would be foolish for me to experimentally use a drug to try to treat Covid that has been safely used by humans for 40 years for over 1 billion treatments worldwide. I see the difference now.

 

[pawrestlersintn]

While you can say it has been used safely, there are several possible serious side effects. The benefits often outweigh the risks of the side effects for something that the drug is proven to treat such as a parasite. However to say there is no risk, so what the heck let’s try it for something we have no idea if it works for is a recipe for disaster. Might as well take it for constipation or give it a try next time you have a headache.

There are serious side effects to lots of medications. Are you saying that the side effects might have been worse than killing 600,000 people?

 

[Lyons212]

This seems like an extremely flimsy basis for recommending a treatment. There is a reason we do double blind control trials. The number of confounding variables in this situation is nearly unlimited.

Please show me the double blind control trials for the various Covid vaccines and Remdesivir. There are none. Yet these are the treatments the FDA advises for Covid. There are studies that show Remdesivir has no effect on Covid. One study out of the University of Iowa shows that it actually results in a longer stay in the hospital. Studies also show that in results in kidney damage to about 10% of the people receiving it.

There are over 40 studies showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid, especially if given early. Many are random controlled trials. Just because the FDA has no interest in performing a study in the USA is no reason to not give Ivermectin for Covid treatment. There are plenty of doctors in the USA who do use it for Covid treatment and have had outstanding success. The use of Ivermectin around the world demonstrates that is safe. It was not given for Covid, but it was given as a phrophylaxis for parasites, which means that people with all kinds of medical issues were taking it without issue. We should be giving Ivermectin to people at high risk for Covid.

Right now the US government agencies advising on Covid treatment are a joke and worthless. The medical community is not much better. Test positive for Covid there advice is to go home and go to the hospital if you have difficulty breathing. No advice to possibly slow down the viral replication, the pulmonary inflammation that can occur of the blood clotting issues.

We know that obesity increases your risk of a bad Covid outcome by 30%, diabetes by another 25%. If you are Obese you most likely have diabetes. Vitamin D deficiency is another huge risk factor, if you are obese you are most likely vitamin D deficient. Where is the FDA and Fauci advising people to lose weight, exercise and take vitamin D? How many people would have been saved over the last 18 months with that simple recommendation, especially if they were serious about losing weight? Obesity is the number 1 public health problem in the USA today, yet our public health experts are silent about it because that would be fat shaming.

Since this is a wrestling board, most of us have plenty experience losing weight when we really wanted to in the past.

 

[crablegs1]

There are serious side effects to lots of medications. Are you saying that the side effects might have been worse than killing 600,000 people?

If the drug does not help, then the side effects are only negative. If the drug actually works, then no those side effects aren’t worse. But you just don’t start taking any drug to treat a specific disease and hope it works.

 

[crablegs1]

I guess the takeaway for me is that when I took a vaccine in Feb 2021 under an Emergency Use Authorization that had no long term studies done on it, that was a good thing even though there was no guarantee that it would stop me from getting Covid (and it did not stop me from contracting Covid 10 days later). And, it was also good for me to take the 2nd vaccine dose under EUA even though I already had recovered from Covid. But, it would be foolish for me to experimentally use a drug to try to treat Covid that has been safely used by humans for 40 years for over 1 billion treatments worldwide. I see the difference now.

The fact is that there was a blinded randomized control trial for the vaccine with tens of thousands of participants. Those trials showed that it actually worked for what it was supposed to.

Now, maybe there is similar data showing ivermextin’s effectiveness. If there is, I would agree that given the side effects the benefits would outweigh the risks. I haven’t seen the studies, nor do I really care to. I’m not arguing whether or not it is effective.

My only point is that the argument from the Japanese minister is bunk. It is an absolutely terrible way to evidence the effectiveness. If that is the evidence being presented, and not randomized control trial data, than I’m skeptical.

 

[Lyons212]

The fact is that there was a blinded randomized control trial for the vaccine with tens of thousands of participants. Those trials showed that it actually worked for what it was supposed to.

Now, maybe there is similar data showing ivermextin’s effectiveness. If there is, I would agree that given the side effects the benefits would outweigh the risks. I haven’t seen the studies, nor do I really care to. I’m not arguing whether or not it is effective.

My only point is that the argument from the Japanese minister is bunk. It is an absolutely terrible way to evidence the effectiveness. If that is the evidence being presented, and not randomized control trial data, than I’m skeptical.

You just stated your problem and why you are dishonest: " I haven't seen the studies, nor do I really care to."

There are numerous studies around the world showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid. Yet you and our medical establishment have no interest in the studies and then have the gall to say Ivermectin does not work. You have locked into a narrative and cannot deviate from it.

There are plenty of doctors in the USA treating Covid patients with Ivermectin.

You sound like my brother who is a doctor. When our father got Covid, I recommened Ivermectin. Brother disagreed and said there are no studies indicating that it worked. I sent a list of studies and doctors in the USA using it, saying otherwise and received no response. He also advised my father to get the Covid vaccine, I diagreed. Since then, my father has had 2 issues with his heart. Is it the result of Covid, the vaccine, or old age? We do not know. There are plenty of examples of the Covid vaccine causing heart problems. Now there are plenty of studies saying that if you recovered from Covid that the vaccine would not help you but could hurt you. Way to go brother.

Think about it, no doctor is going to recommend that we mass vaccinate the population with a chicken pox vaccine who had chicken pox as a kid. To think that a Covid vaccine that is based upon 18% of the Covid virus is better than natural immunity derived from the full Covid virus is ludicrous.

Admittedly I am not a doctor, but I am pretty smart (my father will tell you of his 3 kids, the doctor is the dumbest) and I can read studies. Right now, the medical establishment, particularly those with ties to corporate medicine have their head of their ass on treating covid. Proof, go home and call us if you have difficulty breathing. A huge factor in treating any medical condition is every treatment. We are currently doing the opposite.

 

[slaterun]

The fact is that there was a blinded randomized control trial for the vaccine with tens of thousands of participants. Those trials showed that it actually worked for what it was supposed to.

Now, maybe there is similar data showing ivermextin’s effectiveness. If there is, I would agree that given the side effects the benefits would outweigh the risks. I haven’t seen the studies, nor do I really care to. I’m not arguing whether or not it is effective.

My only point is that the argument from the Japanese minister is bunk. It is an absolutely terrible way to evidence the effectiveness. If that is the evidence being presented, and not randomized control trial data, than I’m skeptical.

Please show me the double blind control trials for the various Covid vaccines and Remdesivir. There are none. Yet these are the treatments the FDA advises for Covid. There are studies that show Remdesivir has no effect on Covid. One study out of the University of Iowa shows that it actually results in a longer stay in the hospital. Studies also show that in results in kidney damage to about 10% of the people receiving it.

There are over 40 studies showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid, especially if given early. Many are random controlled trials. Just because the FDA has no interest in performing a study in the USA is no reason to not give Ivermectin for Covid treatment. There are plenty of doctors in the USA who do use it for Covid treatment and have had outstanding success. The use of Ivermectin around the world demonstrates that is safe. It was not given for Covid, but it was given as a phrophylaxis for parasites, which means that people with all kinds of medical issues were taking it without issue. We should be giving Ivermectin to people at high risk for Covid.

Right now the US government agencies advising on Covid treatment are a joke and worthless. The medical community is not much better. Test positive for Covid there advice is to go home and go to the hospital if you have difficulty breathing. No advice to possibly slow down the viral replication, the pulmonary inflammation that can occur of the blood clotting issues.

We know that obesity increases your risk of a bad Covid outcome by 30%, diabetes by another 25%. If you are Obese you most likely have diabetes. Vitamin D deficiency is another huge risk factor, if you are obese you are most likely vitamin D deficient. Where is the FDA and Fauci advising people to lose weight, exercise and take vitamin D? How many people would have been saved over the last 18 months with that simple recommendation, especially if they were serious about losing weight? Obesity is the number 1 public health problem in the USA today, yet our public health experts are silent about it because that would be fat shaming.

Since this is a wrestling board, most of us have plenty experience losing weight when we really wanted to in the past.

Here is one such study published in New England Journal of Medicine on Dec. 10 2020. It's for the pfizer vaccine; Moderna and J and J ran similar studies. See figure 3 for vaccine efficacy - seems to kick in around day 11 or 12 based on the graph.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577

 

[crablegs1]

You just stated your problem and why you are dishonest: " I haven't seen the studies, nor do I really care to."

There are numerous studies around the world showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid. Yet you and our medical establishment have no interest in the studies and then have the gall to say Ivermectin does not work. You have locked into a narrative and cannot deviate from it.

There are plenty of doctors in the USA treating Covid patients with Ivermectin.

it’s not dishonest. I was never arguing the merits of ivermectin. I was pointing out the stupidity of the claim from Japan. Making a claim about the effectiveness of a drug based on population data like that is absolute nonsense.

Post the best study, I’ll read it.

 

[Pocky]

https://ivmmeta.com/

I think the jury is out on Ivermectin, but there are enough “studies” and anecdotal evidence to say it’s at least worth exploring. For the record I read a recent study that found no benefit, which I will try to find.

 

[86PSUPaul]

If the drug does not help, then the side effects are only negative. If the drug actually works, then no those side effects aren’t worse. But you just don’t start taking any drug to treat a specific disease and hope it works.

There are over 40 studies showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid, especially if given early. Many are random controlled trials. Just because the FDA has no interest in performing a study in the USA is no reason to not give Ivermectin for Covid treatment. There are plenty of doctors in the USA who do use it for Covid treatment and have had outstanding success.

 

[crablegs1]

There are over 40 studies showing the effectiveness of Ivermectin for treating Covid, especially if given early. Many are random controlled trials. Just because the FDA has no interest in performing a study in the USA is no reason to not give Ivermectin for Covid treatment. There are plenty of doctors in the USA who do use it for Covid treatment and have had outstanding success.

Post one of the random blind trials, please.

 

[Dogwelder]

The idea of a bunch of laymen latching onto a drug to champion and to argue about with fanboy passion is surreal. It is like, but more random and useless than, the PC-vs-Mac wars from the 1980s.

I mean, “PC versus Mac” is subjective, so it made some sense to argue. But with “hydroxychloroquine versus injecting bleach”, the scientists already know how to list pros and cons and weigh them on a statistical and scientific basis. The lay cheerleading adds nothing.

 

[Dogwelder]

…. The lay cheerleading adds nothing.

“I have always liked to lay cheerleaders” — Wildturk

 

[Dogwelder]

Please show me the double blind control trials for the various Covid vaccines and Remdesivir. There are none. …

There should be a penalty box for people who confidently assert that the Earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese. Accountability is important for protecting the audience’s brain cells.

Edit: tag accountability penalty box (APB)

 

[Dogwelder]

There should be a penalty box for people who confidently assert that the Earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese. Accountability is important for protecting the audience’s brain cells.

‘Joining “No-Protection Goggles” in the accountability penalty box (APB), wearing number 212, is “No-Double-Blind Lyons212”! ’

 

[crablegs1]

https://ivmmeta.com/

I think the jury is out on Ivermectin, but there are enough “studies” and anecdotal evidence to say it’s at least worth exploring. For the record I read a recent study that found no benefit, which I will try to find.

I found a couple randomized blind studies of decent sample sizes that showed no statistically significant difference between the control group and the treatment group.

Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial - PubMed

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529525 .

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Ivermectin doesn't speed recovery from mild COVID-19, study shows

www.cidrap.umn.edu

 

[crablegs1]

There should be a penalty box for people who confidently assert that the Earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese. Accountability is important for protecting the audience’s brain cells.

I don’t know about penalty box, but it sure would be nice if people would maybe update their priors when being proven so obviously wrong.

 

[Pocky]

I found a couple randomized blind studies of decent sample sizes that showed no statistically significant difference between the control group and the treatment group.

Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial - PubMed

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529525 .

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Ivermectin doesn't speed recovery from mild COVID-19, study shows

www.cidrap.umn.edu

I found a couple randomized blind studies of decent sample sizes that showed no statistically significant difference between the control group and the treatment group.

Ivermectin to prevent hospitalizations in patients with COVID-19 (IVERCOR-COVID19) a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial - PubMed

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04529525 .

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Ivermectin doesn't speed recovery from mild COVID-19, study shows

www.cidrap.umn.edu

A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness - PubMed

Ivermectin, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-parasitic agent, was found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to determine the rapidity of viral clearance and...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Israeli scientist says COVID-19 could be treated for under $1/day

Double-blind study shows ivermectin reduces disease’s duration and infectiousness • FDA and WHO caution against its use

m.jpost.com

And here are positive studies. I don’t want to do the back and forth thing. I’m not shilling for ivermectin.

I’d like us to have an effective therapeutic, we will need it.

 

[crablegs1]

A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness - PubMed

Ivermectin, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-parasitic agent, was found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to determine the rapidity of viral clearance and...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Israeli scientist says COVID-19 could be treated for under $1/day

Double-blind study shows ivermectin reduces disease’s duration and infectiousness • FDA and WHO caution against its use

m.jpost.com

And here are positive studies. I don’t want to do the back and forth thing. I’m not shilling for ivermectin.

I’d like us to have an effective therapeutic, we will need it.

Very good. I think it’s safe to say that the effectiveness is not proven at this point. More study is needed, and that appears to be what we’re doing.

If there is a therapeutic that works to stop serious implications from covid, that would be amazing. If it ends up being ivermectin, I’d be very happy.

In general, I think it is unwise to give treatments that we don’t have strong evidence to suggest they work. The evidence for ivermectin seems to be mixed at best.

 

[Ski]

The fact is that there was a blinded randomized control trial for the vaccine with tens of thousands of participants. Those trials showed that it actually worked for what it was supposed to.

Now, maybe there is similar data showing ivermextin’s effectiveness. If there is, I would agree that given the side effects the benefits would outweigh the risks. I haven’t seen the studies, nor do I really care to. I’m not arguing whether or not it is effective.

My only point is that the argument from the Japanese minister is bunk. It is an absolutely terrible way to evidence the effectiveness. If that is the evidence being presented, and not randomized control trial data, than I’m skeptical.

And that trial of the vaccine was not able to make a determination on the long term risks of taking the vaccine because there was not enough time to do any long term studies. You as the vaccine taker took all the risks with no long term study, but the manufacturer was off the hook if you had negative consequences.

I do not propose taking Ivermectin in place of other treatments for Covid. But until I received the monoclonal antibodies I had no treatment that attempted to attack the virus itself - only the symptoms. A steroid shot and an inhaler for my breathing and a cough medicine for my throat.

This was a novel virus in a pandemic. It was worth taking novel approaches that were in addition to other treatments and not in place of them. I am thankful for the antibody treatment, as it worked beautifully for me. I would have liked to been able to take something on day 1 that tried to attack the virus instead of having to wait for day 8 when I could no longer take in a breath without coughing and wheezing to get a treatment the went right to attacking the source of the problem.

 

[lookleft goright]

George Carlin - Germs, Immune System | Armstrong Economics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X29lF43mUlo

www.armstrongeconomics.com

A little something to maybe give you guys a laugh.

 

[1032004]

And that trial of the vaccine was not able to make a determination on the long term risks of taking the vaccine because there was not enough time to do any long term studies. You as the vaccine taker took all the risks with no long term study, but the manufacturer was off the hook if you had negative consequences.

I do not propose taking Ivermectin in place of other treatments for Covid. But until I received the monoclonal antibodies I had no treatment that attempted to attack the virus itself - only the symptoms. A steroid shot and an inhaler for my breathing and a cough medicine for my throat.

This was a novel virus in a pandemic. It was worth taking novel approaches that were in addition to other treatments and not in place of them. I am thankful for the antibody treatment, as it worked beautifully for me. I would have liked to been able to take something on day 1 that tried to attack the virus instead of having to wait for day 8 when I could no longer take in a breath without coughing and wheezing to get a treatment the went right to attacking the source of the problem.

Crablegs points out the concerns with comparing a bunch of different countries in Africa, so you...post a line chart showing the bunch of different countries in Africa?

Also, the link to the story about the Japan “recommendation” has been updated to reflect that it actually occurred in February. However, best I can tell to this day Japan has not approved Ivermectin for use against covid.

 

[Ski]

Crablegs points out the concerns with comparing a bunch of different countries in Africa, so you...post a line chart showing the bunch of different countries in Africa?

Also, the link to the story about the Japan “recommendation” has been updated to reflect that it actually occurred in February. However, best I can tell to this day Japan has not approved Ivermectin for use against covid.

And I pointed out concerns with no long term studies done for vaccines where the taker is totally on the hook for all of the risk and the manufacturer is on the hook for none of the risk. The risk of taking Ivermectin on day 1 of a Covid infection is less than the risk of me taking the vaccine. The risk of taking Ivermectin as a prophylactic is less than the risk of the vaccine. 1 Billion treatments worldwide over 40 years for a safe drug versus no long term studies for a vaccine that does not prevent the infection where I take all the risk. I want my doctor and I to have the choice. I wanted it in February when I took the first vaccine.

 

[crablegs1]

And I pointed out concerns with no long term studies done for vaccines where the taker is totally on the hook for all of the risk and the manufacturer is on the hook for none of the risk. The risk of taking Ivermectin on day 1 of a Covid infection is less than the risk of me taking the vaccine. The risk of taking Ivermectin as a prophylactic is less than the risk of the vaccine. 1 Billion treatments worldwide over 40 years for a safe drug versus no long term studies for a vaccine that does not prevent the infection where I take all the risk. I want my doctor and I to have the choice. I wanted it in February when I took the first vaccine.

Maybe there is some risk with the vaccine, also some with ivermectin. But you’re not considering the other side of the scale. There is a huge benefit to the vaccine, which far, far outweigh the risks. With ivermectin there is no proven benefit, so it is all risk.

So even if the vaccine is more risky, which I’m not saying is true, the benefits outweigh the risks. The same cannot be said for ivermectin. All you have is hope.

 

[Ski]

Maybe there is some risk with the vaccine, also some with ivermectin. But you’re not considering the other side of the scale. There is a huge benefit to the vaccine, which far, far outweigh the risks. With ivermectin there is no proven benefit, so it is all risk.

So even if the vaccine is more risky, which I’m not saying is true, the benefits outweigh the risks. The same cannot be said for ivermectin. All you have is hope.

And for 8 days when I had Covid, all I had was hope. I had no treatment that attacked the virus. I would have signed a waiver to be one of the ones to experiment with it. Then I would have more hope than I did. As it was, I had to get sick enough to go to the hospital after 8 days to finally get what I consider an effective treatment in the monoclonal antibodies which in the end cost me over $300 in copays for the stay and treatment. So, my choice on day 1 was take nothing and hope I don't get sicker or take a low risk drug that may or may not work, but most likely is not going to cause me any problems. I want my doctor and I to have that choice. Offer me another option other than doing nothing on day 1 and I will consider it after looking at the potential benefits, potential risks, and usage history of the drug and doing my own risk/benefit analysis.

I am not going to go round and round on this, so I am out.

The floor is yours.

 

[GogglesPaizano]

Masks vs no masks
Vaccines vs prophylaxis
Pro life vs pro abortion
Freedom vs control
Capitalism vs socialism
Free speach vs censorship
Dem vs Repub
Government mandates vs personal responsibility

Most of these topics generate a near 50/50 divide in our country, with at least half of those on each side dug in until death do us part.

Here is a fringe source granted, but it references dozens of real studies. Enjoy the references on both sides if you so choose, and take from it what you will.

Do Masks Work?

“Seriously people—STOP BUYING MASKS!” So tweeted then–surgeon general Jerome Adams on February 29, 2020, adding, “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus.” Two days later, Adams said, “Folks who don’t know how to wear them properly tend to touch their faces...

www.city-journal.org

Then if you really are willing to take a chance, a message for our times.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 13:14-15 - New International Version

In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: “‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their...

www.biblegateway.com

Just sayin!

 

[Hoosier Lion]

You anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers were a lot more fun when you were injecting or drinking bleach and shoving a light up your ass because an idiot thought it would kill the virus!😁

 

[98lberEating2Lunches]

All you have is hope.

all I had was hope

Shit 7 hours

in one hand, and hope in the other, then see which one fills up first.

 

[GogglesPaizano]

You anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers were a lot more fun when you were injecting or drinking bleach and shoving a light up your ass because an idiot thought it would kill the virus!😁

Now that is hilarious! Well done.

 

[crablegs1]

And for 8 days when I had Covid, all I had was hope. I had no treatment that attacked the virus. I would have signed a waiver to be one of the ones to experiment with it. Then I would have more hope than I did. As it was, I had to get sick enough to go to the hospital after 8 days to finally get what I consider an effective treatment in the monoclonal antibodies which in the end cost me over $300 in copays for the stay and treatment. So, my choice on day 1 was take nothing and hope I don't get sicker or take a low risk drug that may or may not work, but most likely is not going to cause me any problems. I want my doctor and I to have that choice. Offer me another option other than doing nothing on day 1 and I will consider it after looking at the potential benefits, potential risks, and usage history of the drug and doing my own risk/benefit analysis.

I am not going to go round and round on this, so I am out.

The floor is yours.

Other things you could have tried - 10 Hail Marys (20 if doctor approves), injecting bleach, Ayahuasca with a Shaman in Brazil, Hydroxychloroquine. All the same amount of benefit.

 

[Dogwelder]

Masks vs no masks
Vaccines vs prophylaxis
Pro life vs pro abortion
Freedom vs control
Capitalism vs socialism
Free speach vs censorship
Dem vs Repub
Government mandates vs personal responsibility
...

That is a rather oddball list with many false dichotomies and logical contradictions and nonsense.

Who the heck is debating vaccines against “prophylaxis”, when vaccines are a form of prophylaxis? How many people are really demanding full anarchy freedom or full “control”? How big a percentage of people are using the word socialism correctly and sincerely as opposed to insulting the other side with a straw man? And so on …

 

[GogglesPaizano]

That is a rather oddball list with many false dichotomies and logical contradictions and nonsense.

Who the heck is debating vaccines against “prophylaxis”, when vaccines are a form of prophylaxis? How many people are really demanding full anarchy freedom or full “control”? How big a percentage of people are using the word socialism correctly and sincerely as opposed to insulting the other side with a straw man? And so on …

If we were in a logical world, anyone this sloppy and imprecise with language would pay a reputation cost. (But our country is less logical than ever, and so our democracy is in big danger.)

DogW you like some of my stuff, that's cool.

I am an engineer by education. A's in math, science, economics, .... As for English, Spanish,.. you be the judge. I make no apologies for my linguistic skills or more acturately the lack thereof. Nor do I get too worked up about those who disagree with me. I prefer a free and diverse society.

If I seen a little testy, my bad, I am still getting over that little medical crisis with my wife it really gave us a scare. That and this shit pea soup we have been breathing all summer. Air quality was over 500 in Nearby Folsom earlier.

Scroll out and take a look at the whole state. Now this is another reason to wear masks.

Live Animated Air Quality Map (AQI, PM2.5...) | IQAir

Discover AirVisual Map, live world air pollution and air quality index (AQI) interactive 2D animated map combining PM2.5 data from public government, air quality stations, our community.

www.iqair.com