Covid 19 conspiracies dump

[LadyForCamus]

Also, I don’t believe there’s any data on how long natural immunity lasts, or how effective it is compared to a vaccine. We actually have data on the effectiveness of the vaccine/s. Also, that Invermectin won a Nobel prize is completely irrelevant because it hasn’t been demonstrated to prevent or reduce the severity of COVID. You know what has? The goddamned vaccine. Please explain to me this line of reasoning:

“I’m not going to take the thing that has tons of data supporting its safety and efficacy behind it because I’m worried there isn’t enough data on its safety and efficacy, so instead I’m going to take these other things that have less data behind them, and/or data showing it’s not effective and potentially  harmful.”

https://brisbanenationalreview.com/healt...weinstein/

Ivermectin is extremely safe, and even if it doesn't work, no harm done. It's certainly reasonable to say that Ivermectin is probably much safer than the vax.

So, you trust the data on the safety of Ivermectin (not veterinary grade, obviously) but not the data on the safety of the COVID vaccine? Why? Also, Ivermectin has not been shown to be effective at treating COVID, so why should anyone take it for COVID, regardless of how harmless it is, when we have a vaccine that actually helps with COVID? Do you hear yourself? And please provide an evidence-based case for your claim that the vaccine is less safe than Invermectin.