Covid 19 conspiracies dump

[The Architect Of Fate]

Oh going back to Joe Rogan for a second it's totally on him that he received backlash because he wasn't clear on what version of ivermectin he was using, And I suggest people look up the "doctors" who told him to take it. There an "interesting" group.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-evidence/

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opini...tion-68505

[Rev. Rye]

Remain rare but possible. From the article linked by Naysayer. Sorry, the colour of the words was red and didn't show up for some reason.

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.

Plus, it turns out that research suggests that a combination of natural antibodies from getting infected and antibodies from the vaccine acts as belt-and-braces reinforcement of immunity for COVID. Of course, nobody's proven it, but it's possible, and at any rate, the CDC says you should do it anyway even if you had it, because either way, the evidence leans more towards vaccines providing more protection than just getting it.

[Irreligious Atheist]

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.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronaviru...-1.5451579

I trusted the vaccine enough to take it. My country, Canada, and I assume other countries literally have covid vaccine injury compensation programs. Many people have had adverse reactions to the vaccines so far, although it's still rare, and absolutely nothing is known about long term side effects of the vaccines at this point in time. Ivermectin is completely safe. Show me the danger in Ivermectin outside of some idiots buying horse paste and not sensible people like me who ask for it from a doctor.

[brewer]

[Irreligious Atheist]

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. Personally, I took the vax, but still wanted to have Ivermectin on hand in case I contracted covid.

No harm done if it doesn't work and it may clear up those nasty worms and parasites.  So win-win, right?

People are taking Ivermectin that is processed for use in large animals...not the people kind.

Good for them. They get the Darwin award. And the story about others being turned away from the ER because so many people were taking horse pills, was a hoax. Fake news.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/po...d-1220608/

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

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.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronaviru...-1.5451579

I trusted the vaccine enough to take it. My country, Canada, and I assume other countries literally have covid vaccine injury compensation programs. Many people have had adverse reactions to the vaccines so far, although it's still rare, and absolutely nothing is known about long term side effects of the vaccines at this point in time. Ivermectin is completely safe. Show me the danger in Ivermectin outside of some idiots buying horse paste and not sensible people like me who ask for it from a doctor.

The LD50 for ivermectin is 2.02mg/kg. The LD50 for arsenic is 15mg/kg. In no sense is ivermectin completely safe.

Furthermore, unless you’ve also got river blindness, why would you take a parasiticide to treat a virus? 

Boru

[arewethereyet]

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.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronaviru...-1.5451579

I trusted the vaccine enough to take it. My country, Canada, and I assume other countries literally have covid vaccine injury compensation programs. Many people have had adverse reactions to the vaccines so far, although it's still rare, and absolutely nothing is known about long term side effects of the vaccines at this point in time. Ivermectin is completely safe. Show me the danger in Ivermectin outside of some idiots buying horse paste and not sensible people like me who ask for it from a doctor.

It's so wonderful to have you unable to post this crap anywhere else.

Dump is the right name for what you post.

[The Architect Of Fate]

And debunking time 

1. Horse Dewormer has been widely used so it's not fake news
https://globalnews.ca/news/8160269/peopl...-supplier/

https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2021/09/1...continues/

https://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/res.../15400.pdf

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus...ol-centers

https://www.wibw.com/2021/09/01/calls-po...vermectin/


2. The existence of vaccine injury sites in no way proves vaccine was the cause of the injury. There has been no credible evidence of "many" suffering ill effects.

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-...are-tactic

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/vaers-and-vaccine-safety

https://theconversation.com/unverified-r...ncy-166401

https://www.consumerreports.org/misinfor...167679946/


3. There has not needed to be a long-term study because we already know vaccines are safe. Ivermectin has side effects which is why you need to ask a doctor for it. And it's totally not effective that in itself is a danger because idiots think it's protecting them when it isn't. 

https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/blog/covid...de-effects


I know you're just mindlessly repeating what Bret Weinstein and his minions are spewing. But they're wrong and so are you.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^Ba-bam!

Boru

[HappySkeptic]

This is an interesting article about the history of Hydroxychloroquine trials vs. Covid-19.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10....84940/full

Basically, it goes from a bunch of non-scientific clinical results of "hey, it looks like this works", to a few large randomized trials that say "no, this definitely does not work".

As I said before, it is the quality of research that counts, not the number of papers, or the number of online fans.

I have been exposed to lots of health scam stuff, and they follow a similar pattern.  They take bits of known and correct information, combine it with tons of speculation and a bit of bad science, and then market it as stuff that "the pharma companies don't want you to know".

In the case of Covid-19, there are number of potential antivirals.  These include Zinc, Hydroxychloroquine, Invermectin, and antiviral drugs.  If one doesn't work, what about in combination?  Why not take unscientific clinical results and claim that it "proves" they work, and that the drug companies and Fauci are suppressing the results for monetary and political reasons.  What if only the right-wing bloggers know the truth!

The reality is that medicine is hard.  Drugs that work in-vitro may not work in the body, or their effects may be counteracted by other factors, or they may have side effects that make things worse.  Medical scientists want to find cures -- they don't suppress anything.  It gets their names in lights, as well as helping humanity (presumably why they went into medicine).  If anything, some doctors are too quick to promote things as cures, not the opposite. Only doing the work of large-size high-quality trials reveals the truth.