Proprietary COVID-19 and Vaccine thread
- Thread starter FresnoGator
- Start date
Hmmm, i will consider it ...
Basically just a review of all the literature to date and an editorial summary. Man I want it to work I’m just afraid it’s fools gold. Still I don’t see the harm in trying it and some of these patients but it’s incredibly frowned upon by the conventional medical community. If you bring it up they look at you like you got three eyeballs.Another finding in support of ivermectin, in conjunction with vaccination:
"We believe that the evidence to date supports the worldwide extension of IVM treatments for COVID-19, complementary to immunizations"
Ivermectin: a multifaceted drug of Nobel prize-honoured distinction with indicated efficacy against a new global scourge, COVID-19 - PubMed
In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honoured the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world's most devastating tropical diseases. Since March 2020...pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Yep. I like that they didn't recommend IVM in lieu of vaccination, but instead in conjunction. I'm hopeful for it, but at the same time skeptical.
That's the look of a frustrated man who did just what the internet doctors told him to do, and he still ended up in a hospital bed.
Hope he recovers soon, wiser for it.
Thank God he was vaccinated. He probably be on life-support likely to die if he wasn’t.
I see vaccinated boxer Oscar De La Hoya had to cancel a show because he is in the hospital with Covid now. I wonder if he is even officially listed as vaccinated yet or is listed as unknown with the scam some places are pulling.
He listened to the internet doctors that told him get the shot and you will have much milder symptoms, if you get sick at all.
Instead, he got hospitalized, and when he asked the internet doctors what went wrong, they say 'be glad you got the shot, otherwise you would have died'. LOL
Well I see the thread on Hiden's mismanagement of covid got nuked cause it was seen as a 'covid' thread. Fine, we'll continue here then:
@Uniformed_ReRe you said this:
"The only thing Biden failed at was figuring out how to get overconfident hicks who think they know more than doctors to do the one thing that would have reduced COVID deaths."
Here's my reply:
That's as illogical as voting for Hiden. And you did both.
Last year we didn't have 70% of the country getting shots against covid.
You are claiming here that the 30% that haven't gotten the shots are the cause of all the cases and deaths.
So if that's true, how is 30% of the population creating 328% more cases and 50% more deaths than 100% of the population did a year ago?
This is some birdbrain stupid math, you see that, yes?
@Uniformed_ReRe you said this:
"The only thing Biden failed at was figuring out how to get overconfident hicks who think they know more than doctors to do the one thing that would have reduced COVID deaths."
Here's my reply:
That's as illogical as voting for Hiden. And you did both.
Last year we didn't have 70% of the country getting shots against covid.
You are claiming here that the 30% that haven't gotten the shots are the cause of all the cases and deaths.
So if that's true, how is 30% of the population creating 328% more cases and 50% more deaths than 100% of the population did a year ago?
This is some birdbrain stupid math, you see that, yes?
Yes, please continue here ...
Yep also watching these clowns trying to deny Invermectin works is pretty funny especially with people getting Judges to force hospitals to allow it and many of them coming off ventilators and heading home after making great strides right after getting it.
I’m Actually advocating for its availability at our hospital so the doctors can drive if they want to, but so far administration pharmacy is resisting. Just for what it’s worth. Remember there’s the meet at the beach you guys for fun and then there’s me the neck she takes care of patients.
What is driving this all out assault against it in the media? Big money pharma/hospital chains etc. not wanting it to mess with certain money flows? The tactics they are using are over the top.
🤷
Sincerely I don’t know. I don’t know if it works, but there’s no evidence that it doesn’t work and it’s fairly safe.
I think it should be available to try your families and a doctor wants to try it. It’s really no harm at the lower doses. But there’s a definite bias against it in the medical community that probably comes from multi factorial causes.
I was shocked how good it worked for me but my hard headed self waited until I was 2 weeks in and in a standstill battle with this mess having a foothold in my lungs and a 103 temp. It literally broke the 103 fever like 4 hours after taking it and I could feel something going on down in my lungs after that.
To me there is no reason not to use it on these people that are hospitalized. I wonder if they ever will back off the opposition.
Well you can make an argument for not using it to because of the potential risk but the risk are fairly minimal. Whether it is what got you better or not or whether you started it right before you were going to get better anyway is the real mystery about that medicine. We need the Cibo controlled trial to be done which they’re doing right now. But the American medical industry will look pretty silly having rejected this over and over again if that research study shows benefit.
I think results in parts of India and some other places are pretty compelling. Don't really trust our people to do a proper study when they are so hell bent against something.
It’ll never be used in this country much without an American, English or Canadian study I do trust a multi center trial to be pretty accurate.
I know internet doctor is doing a victory lap over this, but I honestly didn't view that thread as being about covid. It was about the hypocrisy of the left in how they thought covid cases and deaths under Trump meant the end of the world, but MORE cases and deaths under Hiden doesn't even raise their eyebrows.
Wasn't trying to pull a fast one, I really didn't see it as being about covid. But I'm fine with it being here too.
So let's put aside what your feelings are about covid and the shots. Let's focus solely on the messaging and dissemination of information.
First, the facts: Both HCQ and Ivermectin as listed by the WHO as 'essential medicines'.
According to Wikipedia, the list of essential medicines: "contains the medications considered to be most effective and safe to meet the most important needs in a health system"
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines - Wikipedia
Did we all read that 'safe' part?
With that in mind: Consider how BOTH essential medicines have been demonized in regards to being used as treatments for covid.
The media once said that Trump had to be stopped, because his promotion of HCQ as a potential covid treatment was going to GET PEOPLE KILLED.
And it wasn't a crackpot at CNN or MSNBC that said this, it was an anchor on FOX.
And look at how Ivermectin is being called 'horse dewormer' by the media and left.
Both medicines have been insanely effective in treating covid for the last year.
And yet....to hear the left and media tell it, using either will kill you faster than covid ever would.
Any rational, intelligent and objective adult can look at how the left and media is attempting to demonized two ESSENTIAL MEDICINES as treatment for covid, and tell that something is wrong. Something's not adding up.
Is the goal to save lives, or is the goal to get everyone to take the shot?
Reminder: If there is an accepted form of treatment for covid, none of the shots could have gotten EUA. Starting to see the demonizing of both ESSENTIAL MEDICINES in a new light?
Yep I think you may be right since this has continued post Trump. The attacks are over the top nonsense also.So let's put aside what your feelings are about covid and the shots. Let's focus solely on the messaging and dissemination of information.
First, the facts: Both HCQ and Ivermectin as listed by the WHO as 'essential medicines'.
According to Wikipedia, the list of essential medicines: "contains the medications considered to be most effective and safe to meet the most important needs in a health system"
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Did we all read that 'safe' part?
With that in mind: Consider how BOTH essential medicines have been demonized in regards to being used as treatments for covid.
The media once said that Trump had to be stopped, because his promotion of HCQ as a potential covid treatment was going to GET PEOPLE KILLED.
And it wasn't a crackpot at CNN or MSNBC that said this, it was an anchor on FOX.
And look at how Ivermectin is being called 'horse dewormer' by the media and left.
Both medicines have been insanely effective in treating covid for the last year.
And yet....to hear the left and media tell it, using either will kill you faster than covid ever would.
Any rational, intelligent and objective adult can look at how the left and media is attempting to demonized two ESSENTIAL MEDICINES as treatment for covid, and tell that something is wrong. Something's not adding up.
Is the goal to save lives, or is the goal to get everyone to take the shot?
Reminder: If there is an accepted form of treatment for covid, none of the shots could have gotten EUA. Starting to see the demonizing of both ESSENTIAL MEDICINES in a new light?
LSU just lost to UCLA. Nothing sells more tickets than shitting the bed in a road opener, then when the fans come back home, telling them they can't get in unless they've got the jab.
Karma U does not have an agenda.
Karma U does not have an agenda.
Nobody "wins" here. It fits nicely with the politicization of COVID and any implied or overt hypocrisy, so works in this thread ...
I mean it’s a simple rule, if it pertains to Covid in anyway, post it up here. I made the same mistake by thinking that a couple of joke Tick-tock videos about Covid might deserve a different thread and Fres made it very clear that it’s better for the board if everything goes up here and I’m cool with that.
To be fair though it does greatly display the different purposes people use this board for. Some people are here to “win” Some sort of Internet argument at all cost and some of us are mostly just here to let off some steam and spread some actual first hand Covid experience and knowledge/information.
To each their own I guess.
Like I said, I'm totally fine with adding the politicization element to this thread. It's a very interesting discussion, plus it will further marginalize the claims from certain posters, which I think is beneficial to all.
Now back on topic: @Uniformed_ReRe ignored my point, so let's revist:
During all of 2020, we were told by the dems here that covid cases and deaths spiking meant Trump had to go. All cases and deaths fell directly on his shoulders, and they used it as Exihibit A for why we had to bring in 'an adult' like Hiden to handle covid. Hiden himself said we needed to bring in him cause he had 'a plan' to handle covid.
In the last year, covid cases are up 328%.
Deaths are up 50%.
And as we see from this board, the dems like @Uniformed_ReRe apparently could care less.
Isn't that interesting? It suggests that the hand-wringing over covid from the dems was all political theater.
In fact, when pressed, @Uniformed_ReRe refused to place any blame for the spike in covid cases and deaths at Hiden's feet. He instead claimed that THOSE WHO HAVEN"T TAKEN THE SHOT are responsible for the spikes.
Let's again do the math: A year ago, we had no shots. So 0% of the population had taken the shots.
Today, we have the shots. Hiden's administration claims 70% of the population has taken the shot.
So how are cases and deaths spiking at the same time that the percentage of the population who has taken the shot is increasing at a much faster rate?
If @Uniformed_ReRe is right, how is 30% of the population responsible for MORE covid cases and deaths than 100% of the population was a year ago?
Of course, this is nonsensical to the absurd.
But it does raise some very elementary questions:
How are covid cases and deaths spiking as the percentage vaccinated does at the same time?
Doesn't that suggest that these shots aren't vaccines at all, and in fact that they don't work?
Of course it does.
So then if the shots don't work, why are they being pushed on us so hard?
In addition, why are promising treatments like HCQ and Ivermectin beng demonized at the same time?
It's clear that certain forces are desperate for us to take the shot. It's equally clear that the shots don't do what they are promised to do.
A lot of questions for the intelligent and impartial to ponder.
Can you summarize your key points here please? I am not personally interested in the politicization of COVID (no, I'm not denying it, but it is ultimately harmful and is a separate but related issue).
The efficacy of the vaccine, as it relates to serious vs mild COVID outcomes is empirically undeniable. Yes, statement will get nitpicked, but this nitpicking will involve red herrings (politics, conspiracies, and whataboutisms).
Agreed. In the scientific world or the statistical world there is no argument to be made against Vaccination. It is showing to be extremely safe and extremely effective in its primary goal, preventing you from dying from Covid. It was never designed to completely prevent you from getting it, though it certainly lowers your risk of getting it and lowers your risk of transmitting it.
This is all undeniable statistical and scientific fact based off the current numbers available.
So to deny that at this point is simply argument for the sake of argument and stubbornness without rational thought or objectivity. It’s a complete unwillingness to admit you’re wrong no matter how obvious it is that you are.
Last edited:
I fully agree. The evidence is overwhelming at this point. The only criticisms I see involve tribalism, conspiracies, and name-calling. I'm perfectly fine with having a substantive conversation about the merits and limitations of the vaccines and research. But to say that because something has a limitation (such as infection rate, reporting inaccuracies) that it must be wholly ineffective is disingenuous.
I don't expect you to, but I'm just asking you to articulate your key arguments in a succinct fashion so I can understand them without any further obfuscation. This helps un-muddy the waters and mitigates the goal-post moving that inevitably occurs when one's argument is countered.
Or we can simply go to the CDC's website:
"Definition of Terms
Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.
Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."
As we see, these shots don't meet the CDC's own criteria for what a vaccine is.
So these shots aren't covid vaccines, they are covid treatments.
Facts matter. You said we have to start with a group of agreed-upon facts. Well there is the CDC telling us these shots aren't vaccines because they don't give you immunity from covid. Which is required for a vaccine to do.
Let's agree to call the shots what they are, treatments. Then we can have an honest discussion about which treatment is more effective, be it the shots, or HCQ or Ivermectin, or something else. Or maybe a combination.
You mean you want him to stop being a lawyer and start being a scientist, good luck
This is an appeal to definition. I don't care if we call it a COVID treatment or vaccine. "Vaccine" is the universally used term even if it doesn't meet a strict definition. But what we call it doesn't have any impact on its efficacy. It's just a word.Or we can simply go to the CDC's website:
"Definition of Terms
Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.
Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."
As we see, these shots don't meet the CDC's own criteria for what a vaccine is.
So these shots aren't covid vaccines, they are covid treatments.
Facts matter. You said we have to start with a group of agreed-upon facts. Well there is the CDC telling us these shots aren't vaccines because they don't give you immunity from covid. Which is required for a vaccine to do.
Let's agree to call the shots what they are, treatments. Then we can have an honest discussion about which treatment is more effective, be it the shots, or HCQ or Ivermectin, or something else. Or maybe a combination.
We can agree that if we use the CDC's definition, then it doesn't meet that standard as is. I'm ok with that. Again, I'm most concerned with it's efficacy, not its title.
Edit to add: Is it your position that the definitional inconsistencies have a real-world impact? And if so, what is that impact?
Not that I particularly cared to engage you much because @SORT14 has done extremely effective job of exposing your MO, but you just actually prove the exact opposite of what you are saying you proved.Or we can simply go to the CDC's website:
"Definition of Terms
Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.
Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."
As we see, these shots don't meet the CDC's own criteria for what a vaccine is.
So these shots aren't covid vaccines, they are covid treatments.
Facts matter. You said we have to start with a group of agreed-upon facts. Well there is the CDC telling us these shots aren't vaccines because they don't give you immunity from covid. Which is required for a vaccine to do.
Let's agree to call the shots what they are, treatments. Then we can have an honest discussion about which treatment is more effective, be it the shots, or HCQ or Ivermectin, or something else. Or maybe a combination.
Everything you quoted from the CDC clearly states that vaccines are designed to protect you from certain diseases. It also clearly states that it can Prevent you from getting the disease but it never says that it guarantees you from getting the disease. No vaccine outside of the smallpox vaccine has ever been 100% effective in preventing everyone from getting the disease.
So using the definitions that you posted the Covid vaccine is extremely successful and fulfills all of those definitions perfectly because it greatly reduces your risk of dying from a particular infection there by affording you safe protection in most cases.
So basically you quoted multiple things that simply support what we are trying to tell you. And in so doing, by trying to twist the definitions to fit your argument, you were simply showing that both what sort and I are saying is correct. You’re here to argue for arguments sake, not for discussion. Which is why mostly you’re simply worth ignoring.
Ah yes, that old parlor trick of twisting the CDC's words by directly quoting them LOL You claimed the same thing when I directly quoted the CDC where they clearly stated that only 6% of covid victims died FROM covid.
Again, here's the definition:
"Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected."
So according to the CDC, these shots don't give you immunity. Because you CAN become infected with covid after getting the shot.
Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease."
So the CDC says protection=immunity. And these shots don't give immunity according to the above definition, so they aren't vaccines.
Again, facts matter.
The great irony in ALL this is, if you would just accept that and be honest about what these shots are, and what they are not, then you would actually get more posters here WILLING TO GET THE SHOTS.
But this seems to be more about you thinking you are 'right' for you.
Oh well.
Similar threads
