Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43

Thread: Largest study to date on Ivermectin and guess what...

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

  2. #2
    My personal belief is if people insist their doctor treat them via their way, the doctor can do it and should consider it, but the doctor no longer has any obligation for further treatment outside of what was insisted. Unfortunately that isn't how Western medicine works.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  3. #3
    Gold Don Perignom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Google Archipelago
    Posts
    433
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    By BRIAN NIEMIETZ | NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

    The largest study to date on the clinical benefits of ivermectin — the vaccine of choice for right-wing conspiracy theorists — indicates the deworming medication is not effective in treating COVID-19.
    Fixed it:

    By BRIAN NIEMIETZ he/him | NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

    The largest study to date on the clinical benefits of ivermectin — the vaccine of choice for right-wing conspiracy theorists — indicates the deworming medication is not effective in treating COVID-19.

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by Don Perignom View Post



    Fixed it:

    By BRIAN NIEMIETZ he/him | NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

    The largest study to date on the clinical benefits of ivermectin — the vaccine of choice for right-wing conspiracy theorists — indicates the deworming medication is not effective in treating COVID-19.
    oooookay ??
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  5. #5
    Gold Don Perignom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Google Archipelago
    Posts
    433
    I found an artist's depiction of Brian Niemietz:

    Name:  sh.jpg
Views: 413
Size:  30.2 KB

  6. #6
    Once again you miss the point.
    I don't give a shit if it works or doesn't work.
    I want the freedom to be able to buy it if I want to buy it.
    Heroin isn't legal but I can buy that shit right down the street.
    Ivermectin in human pill form shouldn't be harder to buy than illegal drugs.
    They hand out Opioids like they are candy in this country but are scared of Ivermectin... Fuck You!

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Once again you miss the point.
    I don't give a shit if it works or doesn't work.
    I want the freedom to be able to buy it if I want to buy it.
    Heroin isn't legal but I can buy that shit right down the street.
    Ivermectin in human pill form shouldn't be harder to buy than illegal drugs.
    They hand out Opioids like they are candy in this country but are scared of Ivermectin... Fuck You!
    I'm not sure what to tell you. I wonder if you ever got all twisted pre-Ivermectin because basically nothing has changed on this front except it is now harder than ever to get opioids, contrary to your nonsense sentence.

    My guess is you only care about this because your version of news has been telling you about how the doctors are keeping this medicine away blah blah blah.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  8. #8
    I dont believe what the media says on this topic.

  9. #9
    When an article starts by calling Ivermectin the "drug of choice by right wing conspiracy theorists" you know the rest of the article is complete bullshit written by left wing conspiracy theorists.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    When an article starts by calling Ivermectin the "drug of choice by right wing conspiracy theorists" you know the rest of the article is complete bullshit written by left wing conspiracy theorists.
    Well, they're not exactly wrong are they? (if you assume we're talking about COVID treatment)

    Anyway, while I don't particularly care for that verbiage in the article, I don't think that implies anything about the original study.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  11. #11
    Gold Don Perignom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Google Archipelago
    Posts
    433
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Well, they're not exactly wrong are they? (if you assume we're talking about COVID treatment)
    If you pinpoint it down to the specific issue of ivermectin efficacy against covid, I don't know. My impression is the evidence is mixed. Study results have gone both ways, and the latest one is preliminary afaik and has some possibly major limitations. But it stuns me that leftists can be so smug in the broader context of covid response. For two years, Dems have been the party of "If it saves just one life" ... we have to destroy society.

    The ivermectin controversy is more largely about medical tyranny. The left thirsts for government monopolization of health care -- not because they particularly care about poor people, but because they want to shut out their political enemies from basic functions of life. You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it a spoiler alert.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Don Perignom View Post
    If you pinpoint it down to the specific issue of ivermectin efficacy against covid, I don't know. My impression is the evidence is mixed. Study results have gone both ways, and the latest one is preliminary afaik and has some possibly major limitations. But it stuns me that leftists can be so smug in the broader context of covid response. For two years, Dems have been the party of "If it saves just one life" ... we have to destroy society.

    The ivermectin controversy is more largely about medical tyranny. The left thirsts for government monopolization of health care -- not because they particularly care about poor people, but because they want to shut out their political enemies from basic functions of life. You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it a spoiler alert.
    Good Post.
    Someone talking sense around here.
    Nicely Done.

  13. #13
    Gold Don Perignom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Google Archipelago
    Posts
    433
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Good Post.
    Thanks! I doubt my 1-in-20 rate is sustainable long-term, but I'll enjoy it while it lasts.

    I'm not as well-read on the topic as some here, but I try to understand basics of how reality works. It's often asserted that Fauci must be a good guy because of his long tenure serving both political parties. This tells me he's a swamp creature.

    Here's the question. Some conspiracy theorists have alleged that treatments were suppressed to protect the vaccine emergency use authorization. What's the evidence against the theory? If ivermectin is blacklisted by the covid regime, then researchers are likely to steer clear of reporting positive results.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Don Perignom View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Well, they're not exactly wrong are they? (if you assume we're talking about COVID treatment)
    If you pinpoint it down to the specific issue of ivermectin efficacy against covid, I don't know. My impression is the evidence is mixed. Study results have gone both ways, and the latest one is preliminary afaik and has some possibly major limitations. But it stuns me that leftists can be so smug in the broader context of covid response. For two years, Dems have been the party of "If it saves just one life" ... we have to destroy society.

    The ivermectin controversy is more largely about medical tyranny. The left thirsts for government monopolization of health care -- not because they particularly care about poor people, but because they want to shut out their political enemies from basic functions of life. You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it a spoiler alert.
    I don't think there is much controversy in terms of Ivermectin's prophylactic capabilities against Covid (and not that you wrote that there was) - but for treatment of an existing infection by itself and not as part of a compound therapy, drawing the conclusion that it doesn't work by itself would be foolhardy, and it amazes me that the left-leaning are shutting the door on it.

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by Don Perignom View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Well, they're not exactly wrong are they? (if you assume we're talking about COVID treatment)
    If you pinpoint it down to the specific issue of ivermectin efficacy against covid, I don't know. My impression is the evidence is mixed. Study results have gone both ways, and the latest one is preliminary afaik and has some possibly major limitations. But it stuns me that leftists can be so smug in the broader context of covid response. For two years, Dems have been the party of "If it saves just one life" ... we have to destroy society.

    The ivermectin controversy is more largely about medical tyranny. The left thirsts for government monopolization of health care -- not because they particularly care about poor people, but because they want to shut out their political enemies from basic functions of life. You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it a spoiler alert.
    I don't think there is much controversy in terms of Ivermectin's prophylactic capabilities against Covid (and not that you wrote that there was) - but for treatment of an existing infection by itself and not as part of a compound therapy, drawing the conclusion that it doesn't work by itself would be foolhardy, and it amazes me that the left-leaning are shutting the door on it.

    The main problem with the two Ivermectin studies that demonstrate negligible effect is that both studies used Ivermectin precisely as advocates would say to NOT use it. They used Ivermectin after people were ill enough to seek medical treatment, and they were charted going forward. Ivermectin advocates would say it should be used (1) as a prophylactic and (2) immediately after presumed exposure, NOT after acquiring serious symptoms. So the two studies were, in effect, non sequiturs to the question of whether Ivermectin "works."

    I address the differential media treatments of Covid topics in my Propaganda Files series. Here's one regarding an Ivermectin study and a vaccine side effect study.

    https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...o-studies.html

    I'll have the follow-up to this posted in the next 48 hours.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    When an article starts by calling Ivermectin the "drug of choice by right wing conspiracy theorists" you know the rest of the article is complete bullshit written by left wing conspiracy theorists.
    Nailed it 1000%.

  17. #17
    Sure, it's the same as Ted Cruz arguing with the black USSC nominee about critical race theory: hello, hatchet job.

    It seems that searching for the truth has been replaced with searching for vindication.
    What, Me Worry?

  18. #18
    The prophylactic value of Ivermectin alone (The Mcmaster study only speaks to Ivermectin as a treatment not as a prophylactic) makes it a worthwhile component in the weapons against Covid-19 even if the studies that John Campbell presented on his Youtube channel are wrong about its effectiveness as a Covid-19 treatment and the other several ongoing studies turn out to show that it is ineffective as a treatment.

  19. #19
    Just noticed that the Cleveland Indians are now the Cleveland Guardians... RIP.

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Just noticed that the Cleveland Indians are now the Cleveland Guardians... RIP.
    On one of my routes from Montana to New Mexico there is an Indian School called Red Mesa on Highway 160 in northeastern Arizona with a big sign out front that says "Home of the Red Mesa Redskins."
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. MWP won’t like this hydroxychloroquine study
    By Ex-AP in forum Coronavirus
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-10-2020, 04:40 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-01-2020, 05:29 PM
  3. Lancet RETRACTS Study about Hydroxychloroquine
    By Ex-AP in forum Coronavirus
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-04-2020, 03:32 PM
  4. Revealing study on slot players
    By Vegas Vic in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-29-2012, 08:28 PM
  5. 7 Stars Question (I guess intended for Alan)
    By JamieV in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-19-2012, 09:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •