Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Corona virus

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Peerless
    replied
    Read through this article Hadez from sciencebasedmedicine.org (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ive...oquine-take-2/)

    It is a long read, but is well thought out summary and review regarding Ivermectin, Dr. Kory and his metanalysis)

    Leave a comment:


  • CanDB
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post
    The concept of my way or the highway....take the vaccine...we do not care what the rest of the world is saying...take this vaccine that we do not know what it will do to you in 2 years....

    Well that is a big reason people do not trust the Establishment Health System. Close minded. Not willing to listen to others.

    The ironic thing is 2 years ago I was on the other side of this argument. Not understanding why people were saying the things they did about the Establishment Health System.
    I still don't understand your views, although I have my theories. Can I ask, is this a conspiracy theory approach? I'm sure you will say it isn't but, what's with all the "junk" that floats around to counter pretty much proven results, example, the covid vaccines? What is out there that makes these vaccines so concerning. Hell, everyone I know jumped at the opportunity to get their "jabs". Most were even a bit excited, because they knew it was the game-changer. And so far it is. So why the issue? Big brother?? What is it that keeps these side stories lined up for air time?

    Are we looking for problems, or solving them?

    We can't talk politics, though it's very much part of this topic, but I'd love to chat about the relationship. Check out that Fauci survey I posted. No coincidence in the data we see.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Originally posted by Peerless View Post

    Some meta-analyses claim to find an overall significant effect (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1097/MJT.0000000000001402) while others do not find a significant effect (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab591).

    Clearly, we all look forward to seeing the results from more "gold standard" studies, like the Oxford one that is on-going. Many people stand to benefit from improvements in COVID treatment regardless of progress on the vaccine front.

    Ivermectin will remain an interest for treating and preventing COVID as further data is collected..... But there are questions which remain including important factors such as the best dose, how long ivermectin should be taken and when it should be given to people with COVID based on their stage of infection and illness.

    Until then, getting the vaccine will give you the best chance of avoiding severe COVID rather than waiting for a COVID treatment such as Ivermectin - which may or may not be shown to work.
    The link you quoted shows many people around the World saying it does work.

    The only people left saying it does not work or it "may or may not work" are the people trying to get everyone to take the vaccine. The My Way or the Highway people.

    That is called a Conflict of Interest.

    Your treatment can not work so take my treatment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    The concept of my way or the highway....take the vaccine...we do not care what the rest of the world is saying...take this vaccine that we do not know what it will do to you in 2 years....

    Well that is a big reason people do not trust the Establishment Health System. Close minded. Not willing to listen to others.

    The ironic thing is 2 years ago I was on the other side of this argument. Not understanding why people were saying the things they did about the Establishment Health System.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peerless
    replied
    Originally posted by JvDub95 View Post
    Clearly an unfortunate circumstance and clearly nobody wants to die...at least I would hope not. What is so wrong with waiting?? Why can't I see what happens to all the lab rats later down the road? This vaccine is different than all the other that came before it because it contains MRNA.....
    What is so wrong with waiting? How about contracting COVID and dying - just like the fella in the picture I posted above.


    Originally posted by JvDub95 View Post
    My hesitancy is directly related to MRNA. What do we know about it? What do we know about its long term affects of it? It's new In the vaccine world and i would bet over half of the population that took the vaccine know nothing about it. I'm not willing to put myself or my family at risk because it is a risk.

    So far according to "records" at least 11000 have died from just taking the Vax. https://clarion.causeaction.com/2021...ported-to-cdc/ I honestly believe it's more than that because I believe we've been lied to from the get go.

    We are almost 2 years in this mess now and I have yet to contract the virus. I've been in close contact with several who have had it (most with extremely mild symptoms, 1 had it rough but survived). If I haven't gotten it by now there is zero reason for me to jump right in line and comply. Heck....my 89 year old last remaining grandparent is telling me to stay away from it.
    Previously I posted here regarding mRNA data - but here's a re paste:

    Besides everything about previous mRNA vaccines being safe, and side effects usually showing up quickly, there isn’t really any biologic plausibility for mRNA to do any damage. While the "long term effects" for an individual vaccine isn't able to be studied before roll out (duh), our understanding of vaccination history and immunology generally fills in those gaps. It's the short-term reactions that we're most concerned with.

    To break it down even further:
    1. Unlike other vaccines, there isn’t any Covid (killed/attenuated) in this vaccine. All you have is mRNA data, which are instructions to make a protein. In this case, this is the spike protein. Normally mRNA is made in the nucleus and goes out to the ribosomes where proteins are made, and then the mRNA is degraded. Here we are just bringing the mRNA to the ribosome from outside. mRNA doesn’t have the capability of entering the nucleus and making changes to the DNA, where there would be potential to do damage.
    2. mRNA is super unstable and degrades really quickly (in a matter of hours). That’s why the Pfizer vaccine has to be held at such a low temperature, because otherwise the mRNA would degrade and be ineffective. That short time window + the lack of its ability to enter the nucleus really rules out any risk of significant side effects outside of allergic reactions.
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ines/mrna.html

    And I'm glad you have been free of getting COVID. But I'm still waiting for you to answer the the original question I had. When I bring up a point like: if you refuse to get the vaccine when you could have, and you get into a world of hurt with COVID with bad symptoms - you should live with your own consequences right? I mean - it was YOUR choice to forgo recommended guidelines from concrete research and data.

    Then you came out defensively with a statement about how it's a hospitals JOB to take care of whoever, regardless of what they choose to do. However - you fail to grasp that the hospitals job is to take care of issues - but also - it's the health care professionals and hospitals role to EDUCATE patients on measures to prevent health care issues, so you don't come to the hospital in the first place.


    Here's the next post that I replied that you seemed to have missed: https://forums.denverbroncos.com/for...58#post8363458
    Last edited by Peerless; 07-24-2021, 07:49 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peerless
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post

    My agenda is simple. Saving lives. Continuous improvement.

    What separates me from the establishment health system? I really do not care one bit who makes money and who does not make money. I do not care about power. I am open minded to any effective way of saving lives




    Honestly I can probably list 1 forum page of articles and another forum page of videos.

    Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19


    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/




    Best ivermectin meta analysis




    Ivermectin obliterates 97 percent of Delhi cases

    https://www.thedesertreview.com/news...2d2325a08.html


    The Indian Bar Association (IBA) sued WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan on May 25, accusing her in a 71-point brief of causing the deaths of Indian citizens by misleading them about Ivermectin.

    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/0...qWuw3Cu4d3lJSV m3CQupSSj7C8IzIJFc190KYZ7_LdXWc



    COVID Deaths Plunge After Mexico City Introduces Ivermectin

    https://principia-scientific.com/cov...es-ivermectin/







    Real-World Evidence: The Case of Peru

    https://trialsitenews.com/real-world...-case-of-peru/

    edit - moved Peru Real World Evidence charts to next post





    Many countries are already using ivermectin, but why not everywhere?

    https://principia-scientific.com/cov...es-ivermectin/



    (I wanted to edit out the vaccine part but left it, I did not make it orange it came like that when I pasted it)


    Zimbabwe approves use of ivermectin to treat Covid-19

    https://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/a...reat-covid-19/


    Miracle Cure For COVID-19: Scientists Say Anti-Parasitic Drug Ivermectin May Be The Key To Ending Pandemic

    https://www.thehealthsite.com/news/m...ndemic-812482/

    Some meta-analyses claim to find an overall significant effect (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1097/MJT.0000000000001402) while others do not find a significant effect (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciab591).

    Clearly, we all look forward to seeing the results from more "gold standard" studies, like the Oxford one that is on-going. Many people stand to benefit from improvements in COVID treatment regardless of progress on the vaccine front.

    Ivermectin will remain an interest for treating and preventing COVID as further data is collected..... But there are questions which remain including important factors such as the best dose, how long ivermectin should be taken and when it should be given to people with COVID based on their stage of infection and illness.

    Until then, getting the vaccine will give you the best chance of avoiding severe COVID rather than waiting for a COVID treatment such as Ivermectin - which may or may not be shown to work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    My opinion from what I have learned.

    It seems to me there been two paths of Covid19 treatment.

    One path set on the vaccine. The task of bringing vaccines out quicker than ever before was a HUGE task. It required focus, dedication and resources. People on this path have done everything they can to bring the vaccines out faster than we have ever seen before. Great job they did it!

    IMO the vaccine group have been slow to react to what front line care workers are discovering about the treatment of Covid19 as the vaccine people been focused on doing something never done before.

    Another path has been front line care workers who have been doing everything they can to save lives realizing we may not see vaccines for months....over a year. Some people may remember the early days of ventilators and other treatments where people just trying anything to save lives....it was scary. It has been the front line health workers who have developed many successful life saving treatments the last year as we learn more about Covid19. I am in a small way aware of how they gathered information and shared it with their peers around the world. I have seen them talk about how they pooled their knowledge together and discussed things with people around the world. It was very impressive.

    IMO the front line health workers have been our Avengers during this Pandemic. They been in the trenches and dealing with this in their face for over a year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    I want to post the Dec 8 Senate hearing on the evidence at the time of Ivermectin that was presented to Congress but it was full of political attacks. I do not think it is worth the risk. The MODS have enough to do.

    The Doctor who presented evidence is Dr Pierre Kory of the FLCCC. Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.

    Here is their website if people want to see what they say. They been recommending Ivermectin since Oct 2020.

    https://covid19criticalcare.com/

    I have seen Dr Kory speak in many videos. He appears to be concerned 100% about saving lives.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Real-World Evidence: The Case of Peru

    https://trialsitenews.com/real-world...-case-of-peru/

    Leave a comment:


  • Hadez
    replied
    Originally posted by CanDB View Post

    No offence, but you seem to have an agenda that I do not hear from my family/friends/neighbours/trusted news/etc. Sorry, but that large group of intelligent folks are not usually all incorrect. Not saying that we can't all be wrong at the same time, I suppose, but more specifically, I am not sure what is bothering you about the current leaders/experts.
    My agenda is simple. Saving lives. Continuous improvement.

    What separates me from the establishment health system? I really do not care one bit who makes money and who does not make money. I do not care about power. I am open minded to any effective way of saving lives


    Originally posted by Peerless View Post

    Are you talking about ivermectin? The drug had some low-quality (observational) studies that showed support as a COVID treatment. But observational studies cannot control other clinical factors that might influence how people respond to the virus such as other treatments and supportive care.

    A more robust study for ivermectin in COVID published recently in June found evidence which showed ivermectin didn’t work - and these were in high quality (randomised-controlled) trials. It involved more than 1,100 patients with COVID who were treated with ivermectin.

    That study is found here: https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance...iab591/6310839




    Sounds like there are further studies being done at Oxford University relating to ivermectin. But as of right now, based off the current research - it is not a viable option to treat COVID.
    Honestly I can probably list 1 forum page of articles and another forum page of videos.

    Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19


    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/

    Conclusions:


    Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.

    Best ivermectin meta analysis




    Ivermectin obliterates 97 percent of Delhi cases

    https://www.thedesertreview.com/news...2d2325a08.html


    The Indian Bar Association (IBA) sued WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan on May 25, accusing her in a 71-point brief of causing the deaths of Indian citizens by misleading them about Ivermectin.

    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/0...qWuw3Cu4d3lJSV m3CQupSSj7C8IzIJFc190KYZ7_LdXWc



    COVID Deaths Plunge After Mexico City Introduces Ivermectin

    https://principia-scientific.com/cov...es-ivermectin/

    The study tracked 200,000 people, dividing in two cohorts — those who received ivermectin and those who did not.

    Through a phone-call-based monitoring system and hospital data on admissions for COVID-19, the researchers found a reduction of between 52% and 76% in hospitalizations for those who took ivermectin compared to those who did not.

    The government’s findings were corroborated by Dr. Juan J. Chamie-Quintero, a senior data analyst at private Colombian university EAFIT.




    Real-World Evidence: The Case of Peru

    https://trialsitenews.com/real-world...-case-of-peru/

    edit - moved Peru Real World Evidence charts to next post

    Conclusion

    In these eight Peruvian State analyses, ivermectin distributions preceded sound reductions in deaths amount and infection fatality rate. The variation in the number of detected cases or the vulnerable population decrease can’t explain the mortality and lethality improvement. Likewise, other possible explanations, such as crossed immunity with dengue, or mere causality, have been discarded due to their lack of consistency or implausibility.

    The bottom line: treatment with Ivermectin is the most reasonable explanation for the decrease in the number of deaths and the fatality rate in Peru. Its implementation in public policies is a highly effective measure to reduce the mortality and lethality of COVID-19.


    Many countries are already using ivermectin, but why not everywhere?

    https://principia-scientific.com/cov...es-ivermectin/

    Study authors note that several regions globally now recognize this drug as both a powerful vaccine and treatment for COVID-19. The countries of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Mexico, and India have all approved ivermectin’s use during the pandemic, according to the team. Researchers add their findings show that immediate global distribution of ivermectin will likely lead to “rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality.”
    (I wanted to edit out the vaccine part but left it, I did not make it orange it came like that when I pasted it)


    Zimbabwe approves use of ivermectin to treat Covid-19

    https://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/a...reat-covid-19/


    Miracle Cure For COVID-19: Scientists Say Anti-Parasitic Drug Ivermectin May Be The Key To Ending Pandemic

    https://www.thehealthsite.com/news/m...ndemic-812482/


    Results based on 27 controlled trials

    According to the researchers, they did the work that the medical authorities failed to do. They conducted the most comprehensive review of the available data on ivermectin and applied the gold standard to qualify the data reviewed before concluding that ivermectin can end this pandemic. A focus of the manuscript was on the 27 controlled trials available in January 2021, 15 of which were randomised controlled trials (RCT's).

    Significant reduction in morbidity and mortality seen
    Last edited by Hadez; 07-24-2021, 07:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JvDub95
    replied
    Originally posted by Peerless View Post

    I'm still interested in hearing thoughts on this case, or cases similar to this.

    Folks not interested or refusing to take the vaccine.... this could be you. Is this, okay?
    Clearly an unfortunate circumstance and clearly nobody wants to die...at least I would hope not. What is so wrong with waiting?? Why can't I see what happens to all the lab rats later down the road? This vaccine is different than all the other that came before it because it contains MRNA.....

    My hesitancy is directly related to MRNA. What do we know about it? What do we know about its long term affects of it? It's new In the vaccine world and i would bet over half of the population that took the vaccine know nothing about it. I'm not willing to put myself or my family at risk because it is a risk.

    So far according to "records" at least 11000 have died from just taking the Vax. https://clarion.causeaction.com/2021...ported-to-cdc/ I honestly believe it's more than that because I believe we've been lied to from the get go.

    We are almost 2 years in this mess now and I have yet to contract the virus. I've been in close contact with several who have had it (most with extremely mild symptoms, 1 had it rough but survived). If I haven't gotten it by now there is zero reason for me to jump right in line and comply. Heck....my 89 year old last remaining grandparent is telling me to stay away from it.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnlimburg
    replied
    Originally posted by CanDB View Post

    I am contradicting myself if you think the world community of experts who support the vaccines have made a terrible blunder. I don't buy that. They have exceptional standards. And they are subject to exceptional liability. Then again, there has been research going far back in time that has aided in the vaccine development, so it's not so new overall that it's a big risk.

    It is getting late, and I might respond to the rest tomorrow.

    But overall I do not see a contradiction, unless you think that medicines are only good if they take many years to develop. See, I trust the experts, and the approvers, and the effort....to provide us with a cure for covid. I am amazed at them. But this was a collective approach, with a high priority. When you get a collaborated taskforce, you can move the yard sticks a little faster.

    As for government, I'll take government over personal choice, (assuming it's a reasonably good government) in a matter such as this. Covid affected almost every human being, and was a major threat to our economies and health. How does personal choice make this work? Say we have another world war, do we leave it to personal choice to fix? I know that's an exaggeration, but based on the severity of covid, and the possibility it is far from over, it needs to be managed at a higher level of some sort. Personal choice works better when you have a handle on things, not when you are in the middle of a catastrophe. I can give many more examples.

    I will say though that part of your debate approach leans towards critiquing the person you are debating with. Well, me anyway. You've done it before, and it's a bit old. Most of my issue is with the vaccine rejection, and if I am "obsessed" or "mocking" or "morally superior" (I may have missed some), it's because in this I am extremely confident....that getting vaccinated is the right thing to do. And I have little room to negotiate that point. It is almost "no brainer" stuff, and as I say, I do not like to use the phrase "no brainer". But if you do not see the importance of getting vaccinated, well now, I take issue. But calling me whatever does not make you correct either.

    Oh wait, The NFL. So you think it's ok to run a multi billion dollar business and hope the employees don't mess it up because they took the higher risk road, for whatever reason? Can you imagine the effort, logistics and cost to get through a season with covid, and when you get to a place where it seems to be contained (via vaccine), you have to to hope your employees respect the process?

    It's late.

    As I say, I might re-read and expand.
    Again, this has zero relevance to what I am saying, you enjoy doing that and alluding to other points when your one-sided takes are easily picked apart. I mentioned that people refusing to get the vaccine are not the ones shutting society down, which you had mentioned. I just simply pointed out the fact that it's actually government who is doing that, no matter what the facade being put up by them is. I acknowledged the fact that the cause and effect of the lockdowns can be debated, but the bottom line is, governments around the world are making the call to harshly lockdown society, regardless of what valid or invalid reason they are using to do it, that is a fact.

    On the point I made about your contradiction, again, you are going into other areas as you are just talking to talk. I said the contradiction existed in that you were saying Covid is a new infection and people are "silly" for the way they are responding. I simply pointed out that those "silly" people use that same logic and thought process from what I see as the reason they are not taking the vaccine. Again, your thoughts and strong beliefs you refer to here are irrelevant, the point made was that the same thought process is being applied to the other side of the argument, so maybe you can understand where they are coming from? Apparently not.

    On the government points you make and the insanely hyperbolic yet terrible comparison to a potential world war and personal choice, how about some discussion on the points I made instead? Do you have any thoughts on that or it's all lockdown, vaccinate, and everything else suffers as there is no reasonable measure to discuss or consider in trying to repair the damage to other areas of society caused by the harsh government response? Is that the only solution you support? You don't support any ideas or approaches to moving forward and out of lockdowns and the restricted society so many are now living in?

    The question then becomes, what if the vaccine isn't taken up to the point you want, and what the government wants, where do we go from there? Remain locked down?

    On the NFL point, what are you even arguing? I didn't say anything controversial, in disagreement with what you said, or even something that would resemble an opinion, I again started a couple of facts and pointed out the rights in the situation that both parties would have. You really seem to be struggling with the fact that people differ in opinion, have different points of view and perspective, and that people of all sides deserve to be heard out and respected no matter what you think of what they are saying.

    Look, I thought my post was pretty well written, considerate of both sides, and made some solid points in reference to lockdowns and government control. If you respond in more detail I am more than open to a reasonable discussion like I continue to show I am willing to do in this thread. If you want to make it as if I have personally attacked you, fine, but I think it is pretty clear in reading my responses that is not the case. You can pick a few out-of-context terms there and act like I am calling you names when you place them in isolattion, but again, I am clearly not and conversing quite reasonably.

    Leave a comment:


  • CanDB
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post

    Why are people who choose not to get vaccinated the only source of anger for taxing the health care system?

    Since April 2020 there has been a treatment shown in labs to work against Covid19. Since Aug 2020 parts of countries started using this treatment. Non-profit doctors suggested the treatment in Oct 2020. One of those front line doctors went to the Senate on Dec 8 to present data from around the world. Countries around the world are using this treatment to stop taxing their medical system because they have low access to vaccines.

    The winter of 2020-2021 was horrible on taxing our health care system but I do not see anyone wanting to hold establishment health leadership responsible for not using every treatment possible to help our taxed out medical system.

    Now you expect average people to do what the "smart doctors" that lead our health care system could not do in the Winter in 2020-2021? Take a leap of faith on something people have data on to help keep people out of the hospital?
    No offence, but you seem to have an agenda that I do not hear from my family/friends/neighbours/trusted news/etc. Sorry, but that large group of intelligent folks are not usually all incorrect. Not saying that we can't all be wrong at the same time, I suppose, but more specifically, I am not sure what is bothering you about the current leaders/experts.

    Leave a comment:


  • CanDB
    replied
    Originally posted by johnlimburg View Post

    I believe you contradict yourself in your strong stance on being an advocate of the vaccine, when you then refer to Covid as being a new disease, so just get vaccinated. I have made clear I am not really into the debate on the vaccine, my angle is more on lockdowns and being told what to do, and I will be getting the vaccine, but how can you use this argument then mock and parade as being morally superior to someone who uses that exact argument as a reason to not get the vaccine ? There argument is exactly this. That there is no long term research on the potentially negative effects of it, so they don't feel comfortable getting it. That is coming potentially from a place of fear, and you will then use the same argument when it suits ? I see contradiction there.

    Also, you can disagree all you want with my statement above, but the fact is the government makes the decision to shut things down, no one else. I am not saying it isn't a reactionary measure to what they believe is the right thing to do, but the decision to shut things down, that falls on the government, it isn't a matter of disagreeing. We can debate the cause and effect, we can debate the circumstances around the decision to shut things down, but again, the decision is made by those who can enforce stay at home orders, fine people for ignoring them, implement restrictions, etc. That is simply a fact, the government decides.

    As I stated, I understand the argument that opening things up right now could have negative consequences for the health care system, but what about the multitude of other systems and areas of society that are being effected by mass lockdowns ? I think focusing on just the negative consequences to the health care system is ignorant to the fact that so many other areas are being dragged through the ringer right now all over the world due to lockdowns. I won't even get into them, you know what they are, so why is the focus solely on the health care system ? I understand health is wealth and the most important aspect of life, but the vaccine is there, those who have chosen to get it have done a great thing, and more people will continue to as well, they should feel secure in returning to a functioning society as we once knew. I also think the understanding of the infection continues to increase day by day as qualified and knowledgeable people research and investigate all areas of it increasing understanding even further. We have also lived with Covid now for 18 months, taking the lumps, and we can now adequately prepare for outbreaks and more infection in the community better than ever before, the heath care system is better equipped and better prepared than ever before. Which with all that leads me to my point, I believe you start to limit restrictions and gradually return to normality. Will the health care system have challenges ahead ? Of course, but it's time to take the blinders off in my opinion and realise not everyone will conform, and this thing will not be going away, so it's time to get on with things.

    Onto your statement of ,"If not government then who ?" No one. Personal choice trumps all in every situation in my opinion unless it is breaking the law. I guess it comes down to how you see the role of government, and that is where despite us probably agreeing on most things like getting the vaccine, wearing masks, etc. we don't agree on the right of government to control society on mass scale like they are, guilting people into something, and that is being exhibited everywhere around the world right now, and we wont be agreeing on that anytime soon I don't think.

    Finally, I will get vaccinated, but your obsession with it and those who don't want it only fuels the divisiveness, how haven't people gotten that yet ? You are talking to people who have their back up already, are as Peerless described, probably stubborn and hard headed, so the approach needs to change. If you are a person who really wants everyone to see it like you do, to get everyone onboard with what you call 101 stuff, the current approach so many take just isn't working. Understanding perspectives of the other party would go a long way in a lot of these discussions in trying to get to the goal of what I think yours would be, to get everyone vaccinated, because right now stating things like, it's 101 stuff, get vaccinated and this thing goes away, doesn't convince a hostile maybe ill-informed person to change their mind, it does the exact opposite.



    Private business is well within their right. As an employee you opt into their policy, and if they decide to change it, then you have a decision to make. A union also has a right in that circumstance to defend the workforce and due process then followed. A business like the NFL also then takes the risk that potential contract breaches on their end could occur with this change in policy, and they may be made liable in that circumstance. The NFL also takes the risk that the consumer of their product may walk away due to the stance being taken, as certain segments of the market feel very strongly about this topic. These elements are all fair play. However, when you apply these same thought processes to government, you are not discussing the same thing as you are when discussing a private business.
    I am contradicting myself if you think the world community of experts who support the vaccines have made a terrible blunder. I don't buy that. They have exceptional standards. And they are subject to exceptional liability. Then again, there has been research going far back in time that has aided in the vaccine development, so it's not so new overall that it's a big risk.

    It is getting late, and I might respond to the rest tomorrow.

    But overall I do not see a contradiction, unless you think that medicines are only good if they take many years to develop. See, I trust the experts, and the approvers, and the effort....to provide us with a cure for covid. I am amazed at them. But this was a collective approach, with a high priority. When you get a collaborated taskforce, you can move the yard sticks a little faster.

    As for government, I'll take government over personal choice, (assuming it's a reasonably good government) in a matter such as this. Covid affected almost every human being, and was a major threat to our economies and health. How does personal choice make this work? Say we have another world war, do we leave it to personal choice to fix? I know that's an exaggeration, but based on the severity of covid, and the possibility it is far from over, it needs to be managed at a higher level of some sort. Personal choice works better when you have a handle on things, not when you are in the middle of a catastrophe. I can give many more examples.

    I will say though that part of your debate approach leans towards critiquing the person you are debating with. Well, me anyway. You've done it before, and it's a bit old. Most of my issue is with the vaccine rejection, and if I am "obsessed" or "mocking" or "morally superior" (I may have missed some), it's because in this I am extremely confident....that getting vaccinated is the right thing to do. And I have little room to negotiate that point. It is almost "no brainer" stuff, and as I say, I do not like to use the phrase "no brainer". But if you do not see the importance of getting vaccinated, well now, I take issue. But calling me whatever does not make you correct either.

    Oh wait, The NFL. So you think it's ok to run a multi billion dollar business and hope the employees don't mess it up because they took the higher risk road, for whatever reason? Can you imagine the effort, logistics and cost to get through a season with covid, and when you get to a place where it seems to be contained (via vaccine), you have to to hope your employees respect the process?

    It's late.

    As I say, I might re-read and expand.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peerless
    replied
    Originally posted by Hadez View Post
    Since April 2020 there has been a treatment shown in labs to work against Covid19. Since Aug 2020 parts of countries started using this treatment. Non-profit doctors suggested the treatment in Oct 2020. One of those front line doctors went to the Senate on Dec 8 to present data from around the world. Countries around the world are using this treatment to stop taxing their medical system because they have low access to vaccines.
    Are you talking about ivermectin? The drug had some low-quality (observational) studies that showed support as a COVID treatment. But observational studies cannot control other clinical factors that might influence how people respond to the virus such as other treatments and supportive care.

    A more robust study for ivermectin in COVID published recently in June found evidence which showed ivermectin didn’t work - and these were in high quality (randomised-controlled) trials. It involved more than 1,100 patients with COVID who were treated with ivermectin.

    That study is found here: https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance...iab591/6310839


    Background

    We systematically assessed benefits and harms of the use of ivermectin (IVM) in COVID-19 patients.

    Methods

    Published and preprint randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing IVM effects on COVID-19 adult patients were searched until March 22, 2021 in five engines. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, length of stay (LOS), and adverse events (AE). Secondary outcomes included viral clearance and severe AEs. Risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using Cochrane RoB 2·0 tool. Inverse variance random effect meta-analyses were performed. with quality of evidence (QoE) evaluated using GRADE methodology.

    Results

    Ten RCTs (n=1173) were included. Controls were standard of care [SOC] in five RCTs and placebo in five RCTs. COVID-19 disease severity was mild in 8 RCTs, moderate in one RCT, and mild and moderate in one RCT. IVM did not reduce all-cause mortality vs. controls (RR 0.37, 95%CI 0.12 to 1.13, very low QoE) or LOS vs. controls (MD 0.72 days, 95%CI −0.86 to 2.29, very low QoE). AEs, severe AE and viral clearance were similar between IVM and controls (all outcomes: low QoE). Subgroups by severity of COVID-19 or RoB were mostly consistent with main analyses; all-cause mortality in three RCTs at high RoB was reduced with IVM.

    Conclusions

    In comparison to SOC or placebo, IVM did not reduce all-cause mortality, length of stay or viral clearance in RCTs in COVID-19 patients with mostly mild disease. IVM did not have an effect on AEs or severe AEs. IVM is not a viable option to treat COVID-19 patients.

    Sounds like there are further studies being done at Oxford University relating to ivermectin. But as of right now, based off the current research - it is not a viable option to treat COVID.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X