|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,837
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
#27478402 - 09/22/21 03:02 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I'm sure the French have some other parasite
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 43 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: ballsalsa]
#27478409 - 09/22/21 03:05 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, but that's because of their extracurricular activities, not because they cannot afford basic plumbing.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 43 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: ballsalsa]
#27478546 - 09/22/21 05:34 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: What's next for the anti vax morons after ivermectin? Fenbendazole maybe? Praziquantel? You can get them from aquarium supply places and they're antiparasitics. They love that combo.
Nasal lavage with iodine
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
feevers


Registered: 12/28/10
Posts: 8,546
Loc:
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
#27478570 - 09/22/21 05:44 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
No need, Ivermectin is “something like 100% effective” according to Brett Weinstein https://streamable.com/yqmgx9
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 17 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: feevers]
#27478769 - 09/22/21 08:39 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Death is 100% effective. Why are we even trying?
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Byrain

Registered: 01/07/10
Posts: 9,664
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: psi]
#27479360 - 09/23/21 11:05 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psi said: I figure medical science is going to gravitate towards the treatments that work anyway, and if that happens to coincide with whatever drug the pundits are plugging these days it will be pure dumb luck.
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree. It would also be relatively easy and cheap for a large pharmaceutical company to do comprehensive studies that could settle any doubt in either direction. I am sure a bunch of anti-vaxxers would sign up to be guinea pigs...
The most inane thing is that there is so much hesitation towards doing the research neccesary to settle this, there are two possibilities.
A) It does not work, you can reduce a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
B) It does work, you can save even more lives.
What is there to lose?
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,456
Loc: 613
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Byrain]
#27479375 - 09/23/21 11:15 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree.
I'd say the "MAY work to SOME degree" part is a necessary condition for a drug to get the endorsement of these right-wing pundits as a Covid treatment. With a treatment that everyone can agree does work, they can't claim to have the inside scoop on something, and there is nothing to feed the persecution narrative ("My doctor doesn't want to prescribe me this but I know better" kind of thing.)
|
feevers


Registered: 12/28/10
Posts: 8,546
Loc:
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Byrain] 1
#27479386 - 09/23/21 11:26 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Byrain said:
Quote:
psi said: I figure medical science is going to gravitate towards the treatments that work anyway, and if that happens to coincide with whatever drug the pundits are plugging these days it will be pure dumb luck.
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree. It would also be relatively easy and cheap for a large pharmaceutical company to do comprehensive studies that could settle any doubt in either direction. I am sure a bunch of anti-vaxxers would sign up to be guinea pigs...
The most inane thing is that there is so much hesitation towards doing the research neccesary to settle this, there are two possibilities.
A) It does not work, you can reduce a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
B) It does work, you can save even more lives.
What is there to lose?
Where is the hesitation? There have been dozens of studies of all over the world, meta-analysis shows inconclusive results meaning at the very least it is certainly not a miracle drug like it's frequently touted as. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full. The meta analysis that showed a positive effect got pulled after one of the biggest studies in it was found to be one of several miraculous ivermectin studies with fraudulent data... when that study was removed the results were reversed.
Oxford and others are currently running clinical trials as well.
|
Byrain

Registered: 01/07/10
Posts: 9,664
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: psi]
#27479428 - 09/23/21 12:14 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
feevers said:
Quote:
Byrain said:
Quote:
psi said: I figure medical science is going to gravitate towards the treatments that work anyway, and if that happens to coincide with whatever drug the pundits are plugging these days it will be pure dumb luck.
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree. It would also be relatively easy and cheap for a large pharmaceutical company to do comprehensive studies that could settle any doubt in either direction. I am sure a bunch of anti-vaxxers would sign up to be guinea pigs...
The most inane thing is that there is so much hesitation towards doing the research neccesary to settle this, there are two possibilities.
A) It does not work, you can reduce a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
B) It does work, you can save even more lives.
What is there to lose?
Where is the hesitation? There have been dozens of studies of all over the world, meta-analysis shows inconclusive results meaning at the very least it is certainly not a miracle drug like it's frequently touted as. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full. The meta analysis that showed a positive effect got pulled after one of the biggest studies in it was found to be one of several miraculous ivermectin studies with fraudulent data... when that study was removed the results were reversed.
Oxford and others are currently running clinical trials as well.
Most of the studies show promising results, not inconsistent results. What I have not seen yet are comprehensive and large scale studies.
https://ivmmeta.com/
Just look at what the media has printed and the replies in the pub. Some people (Not necessarily you) are entirely unwilling to consider it beyond prematurely dismissing it as a horse dewormer that doesn't work. I hope Oxford and the other studies you are referencing can finally make this more clear.
Quote:
psi said:
Quote:
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree.
I'd say the "MAY work to SOME degree" part is a necessary condition for a drug to get the endorsement of these right-wing pundits as a Covid treatment. With a treatment that everyone can agree does work, they can't claim to have the inside scoop on something, and there is nothing to feed the persecution narrative ("My doctor doesn't want to prescribe me this but I know better" kind of thing.)
I'm not a right wing pundit and I am not saying it absolutely works, just that there are promising results so far and it deserves further investigation. Its not something that should be a political point or part of media smear campaigns and investigating any even remote chance to combat C19 really should be common sense...
Additionally there are many questions left regarding how well the vaccines work, how consistently they work, how long they last, which ones work the best and what are the risks of complications especially in younger people. Large pharmaceutical companies are under no obligation to publish studies that they find unfavorable and they have a very large financial conflict of interest to push vaccines as broadly and quickly as possible. Is it really so horrible to say we should have more transparency and oversight on this process?
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,456
Loc: 613
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Byrain]
#27479436 - 09/23/21 12:18 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
There must be plenty of drugs that show some degree of promise as treatments though. Ivermectin (and HCQ before it) are the ones that caught the attention of the pundits though, and that seems to be the main reason we've heard about them so much.
|
chopstick
nobody



Registered: 07/26/08
Posts: 5,079
Loc: Chin's Wok
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: psi] 1
#27479446 - 09/23/21 12:30 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Ivermectin gets a lot of attention because of the fact that it is both highly effective and because a lot of countries are making it widely available to their citizens. It's also cheap to manufacture. It has made a huge difference in India, Mexico, Japan, and other countries that haven't turned it into a political issue.
The US is retarded because it politicizes every fucking thing into a left vs. right debate. Which is sad. It needs to stop. It is costing people their lives.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 43 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Byrain]
#27479464 - 09/23/21 12:38 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Byrain said:
Quote:
psi said: I figure medical science is going to gravitate towards the treatments that work anyway, and if that happens to coincide with whatever drug the pundits are plugging these days it will be pure dumb luck.
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree. It would also be relatively easy and cheap for a large pharmaceutical company to do comprehensive studies that could settle any doubt in either direction. I am sure a bunch of anti-vaxxers would sign up to be guinea pigs...
The most inane thing is that there is so much hesitation towards doing the research neccesary to settle this, there are two possibilities.
A) It does not work, you can reduce a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
B) It does work, you can save even more lives.
What is there to lose?
There have been tons of studies. That’s how we know it doesn’t work
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 11 hours, 8 minutes
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: chopstick]
#27479478 - 09/23/21 12:48 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ivermectin gets a lot of attention because of the fact that it is both highly effective and because a lot of countries are making it widely available to their citizens. It's also cheap to manufacture. It has made a huge difference in India, Mexico, Japan, and other countries that haven't turned it into a political issue.
The US is retarded because it politicizes every fucking thing into a left vs. right debate. Which is sad. It needs to stop. It is costing people their lives.
I don't think it turned into a media spectacle because people were rushing to their doctor asking for Ivermectin prescriptions and curing themselves , they were rushing to the feed store and horse owners were like WTFs wrong with y'all ?
https://www.newschannel5.com/news/national/coronavirus/las-vegas-feed-store-says-its-sold-out-of-horse-de-wormer-as-people-seek-unproven-covid-19-treatment
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/19/ivermectin-horse-dewormer-owners-covid/
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 43 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Psilynut2] 1
#27479505 - 09/23/21 01:07 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It’s really amazing how the movie “contagion” predicted all of this ten years ago. Ivermectin is Forsythia. Ivermectin is a grift.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 11 hours, 8 minutes
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: koods]
#27479527 - 09/23/21 01:40 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Last weekend my mother told me she had to ghost her neighbor because he doesn't believe in doing anything for COVID , not even horse drugs, he said if god wants to take him to heaven then that's what's going to happen . I'm not sure if that's the approach he takes with every medical issue but I guess if he gets it and gives it to someone else and they die , that's god . Religion provides unending convenience to assholes .
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 43 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Byrain] 1
#27479677 - 09/23/21 03:57 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Byrain said:
Quote:
psi said: I figure medical science is going to gravitate towards the treatments that work anyway, and if that happens to coincide with whatever drug the pundits are plugging these days it will be pure dumb luck.
It would not be pure dumb luck in this case, there is a lot of suggestive evidence that it MAY work to SOME degree. It would also be relatively easy and cheap for a large pharmaceutical company to do comprehensive studies that could settle any doubt in either direction. I am sure a bunch of anti-vaxxers would sign up to be guinea pigs...
The most inane thing is that there is so much hesitation towards doing the research neccesary to settle this, there are two possibilities.
A) It does not work, you can reduce a lot of vaccine hesitancy.
B) It does work, you can save even more lives.
What is there to lose?
You cannot definitely prove that ivermectin (or anything, really) doesn't help for ethical reasons. You can't just decide to sacrifice certain people without treatment, and you certainly cannot intentionally infect people. As a result, there is no way to definitively prove that ivermectin doesn't help.
All we know is it very likely does nothing.
However, that leaves enough wiggle room for right wing grifters to make some money selling marked up horse meds.
Which, by the way, is the primary source of income for most right wing pundits. Unregulated supplements. Alex Jones runs a supplement company. Ben Shapiro runs a supplement company. IIRC Rush Limbaugh ran a supplement company before the cancer did us all a solid.
Even then, science isn't 100% definitive. We can come up with theories, but 100% proof is extremely difficult. This is why the existence of gravity is still only a theory.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 5 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
#27479753 - 09/23/21 05:21 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It's not extremely difficult. It's impossible. It's basically outlawed by the scientific method.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 43 minutes, 25 seconds
|
|
If it is entirely within the realm of mathematics, it can be definitively proven.
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,456
Loc: 613
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
#27479781 - 09/23/21 05:46 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
In math it helps that you get to start from axioms that don't need to be proven.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 43 seconds
|
Re: Coronavirus Chat [Re: Kryptos]
#27479782 - 09/23/21 05:46 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
There was one study that showed ivermectin treated patients cleared the virus faster. 9 days vs 12. You’re probably already fucked if it takes 9 days and there isn’t much correlation between time to clear vs and severity of illness. We’ve known for a long time that asymptomatic patients take longer to clear the virus than symptomatic patients, for example.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
|