Who is getting the COVID-19 Vaccine?

[jutes]

/thread.

[littledan]

I don't understand why everyone is jumping on born2cars over the potential that Ivermectin is a valid treatment for Covid. If I caught covid, I would damn sure want to investigate any potential treatment and the potential benefits. I recall hearing about Ivermectin from multiple legitimate doctors (ok they were Youtube docs) such as the following:
https://www.youtube.com/user/Campbellteaching
https://www.youtube.com/user/MEDCRAMvideos

But regardless, I don't understand this hesitancy to at least discuss the topic without grouping someone into the 'conspiracy nut', 'anti-vax', or 'orange-man good' camps. Can I not be a conservative and also support gay rights and a woman's right to have an abortion? Can I not be a liberal and a gun-owner? This whole tribal, polarized, no-free speech unless it agrees with me climate that we are living in is downright weird.

[SKR]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't understand this hesitancy to at least discuss the topic

I'll discuss it with doctors. I have no desire to discuss it with housewives because they don't have the ability to understand what they're trying to argue. It wasn't that long ago that people thought vaccines cause autism because housewives spread it around on Facebook.

Yes, there is a chance that through pure shithouse luck a medicine that was invented decades ago for a variety of ailments in a variety of species is somehow better at treating a virus than a vaccine that was specifically designed for it. That's as much as I'm willing to give - that in the entirety of possibilities in the universe, the chance that ivermectin is the superior treatment might not be exactly zero.

When my actual doctor, that I can see in person and trust with every other medical concern, recommends I go down to the vet and get a jug of Ivomec, then maybe I'll consider it.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't understand why everyone is jumping on born2cars over the potential that Ivermectin is a valid treatment for Covid. If I caught covid, I would damn sure want to investigate any potential treatment and the potential benefits. I recall hearing about Ivermectin from multiple legitimate doctors (ok they were Youtube docs) such as the following:
https://www.youtube.com/user/Campbellteaching
https://www.youtube.com/user/MEDCRAMvideos

But regardless, I don't understand this hesitancy to at least discuss the topic without grouping someone into the 'conspiracy nut', 'anti-vax', or 'orange-man good' camps. Can I not be a conservative and also support gay rights and a woman's right to have an abortion? Can I not be a liberal and a gun-owner? This whole tribal, polarized, no-free speech unless it agrees with me climate that we are living in is downright weird.

No discussion necessary.

Just post a well designed clinical trial and the results.

Done.

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No discussion necessary.

Just post a well designed clinical trial and the results.

Done.

Is this adequate?

https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-c...t_of.98040.pdf

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is this adequate?

https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-c...t_of.98040.pdf

No

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

See, this is what bothers me. Where did I say that the side effects/long term effects of vaccines are conclusive? Just because I said Ivermectin was not conclusive doesn't mean I said vaccines were conclusive. That is not what I said at all.

OK, that's a fair point to make, but you can easily see the conclusions drawn from this statement:

It is so mind boggling that some people may be worried about mRNA vaccines and its long term effects on us, yet be totally ok taking something that is so inconclusive... Yikes...

What is so mind boggling? The facts are:

1. These vaccines would not be authorized for public use under normal circumstances. The only reason they're available is the EUA.
2. There's a growing number of side effects coming to light indicating the vaccines are not as safe as originally hoped
3. The vaccines don't appear to prevent infection with the Delta variant, rather they help prevent admission to the ICU by reducing the severity of illness
4. Long term side effects of the vaccines are unknown. There is an on-going debate about spike protein being cytotoxic, and it was a surprise to the medical community that it spread outside the injection site to many other organs in the body
5. There's reasonable conjecture that financial motivators have and will continue to play a role in the vaccine rollout

As for being totally OK with taking something so inconclusive - Ivermectin has been around for almost 50 years. Its safety is well studied, billions of doses have been administered over the past decades and its universally understood to be a safe drug. It's readily available, has little to no side effects, and has no financial motivator behind it. I don't really see the argument here. You're surprised that some people are skeptical about a brand new vaccine that has not met the standards required for use outside of an EUA? Seems like a reasonable thing to question.

That is totally fine, and your stance on censorship is valid. I already mentioned in my first post that I acknowledge there is a lot of unknowns out there, whether it is with current vaccines or other proposed meds. So I'm open to hear all thoughts, as long as it's not stupid. Verbatim.

The issue here is the way you are articulating your thoughts. You start with

You already lost the battle saying shit like that when you should have spoke about censorship and how Ivermectin may be promising once more trials are done and there is more substantial evidence of its effectiveness. Instead, you side with Ivermectin over vaccines and you definitely are going to have an uphill battle on this.

But I don't side with Ivermectin OVER vaccines. I initiated discussion about the efficacy of Ivermectin, and made the point that should Ivermectin gain the widespread acceptance and administration, this would terminate the EUA available for the current vaccines. I still suggested that anyone who wants a vaccine should be allowed to get one.

I get the whole concept of "group think" and all that, but it's clear we can only go off of whatever information is out there right now. If someone who isn't an expert is saying "looks like Ivermectin is the magic bullet to defeating Covid" based on all the stuff out there right now available to us, then that is very poor due diligence on research.

Well, that comment is based on the clinical expertise expressed by a growing number of doctors who see the results on the front line - and I'm quoting verbatim here:

"Paul Marik, MD, FCCM, FCCP, founder of the alliance and a professor and chief of the division of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School, said that ivermectin “is a safe drug that is exceedingly cheap.”
Numerous studies have provided evidence supporting the use of ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19, according to the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.
He added that “what is truly remarkable — this was a gift to us — ivermectin has high activity against COVID-19.”

So yes, I stand by my comment that this could end up being a magic bullet. If you disagree with the allusion I used, fair enough, but the data appears to reinforce that notion. It stands to reason that you have insufficiently researched this topic, and are operating at an emotional level in the argument. I've presented quite a bit of valid, compelling data that has been met predominantly with trolling and ridicule - yet I'm not seeing any evidence that negates the claims which say Ivermectin is effective in the prevention and treatment of COVID.

[Buster]

Stick to fixing cars. Leave the smart stuff to the smart people

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No

Can you summarize the conclusions presented in the article and why you disagree?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Stick to fixing cars. Leave the smart stuff to the smart people

A group of which you surely aren't a member? Otherwise I'd expect some competent level of discussion - I was hoping, based on your post history, that you'd be able to achieve a level above killramos' cringeworthy vernacular...

I get it, you're trying to degrade me based on assumptions of my profession. Kind of a weak avenue to pursue.

Edit:

Why did you edit out 'Leave the smart stuff to the smart people' and then edit it back in, lol? I'm sure you're not concerned about hurting feelings

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can you summarize the conclusions presented in the article and why you disagree?

Do you know why what you posted is considered inadequate?

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you know why what you posted is considered inadequate?

I could speculate on why the medical community would like further exploration and analysis performed. But you aren't a doctor, so I'm asking why it's inadequate for you?

[2Legit2Quit]

I'm going to need my top medical resource to weigh in on Ivermectin before I say yay or nay to it.

I'll find out tomorrow morning around 4am when SportEL is online

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I could speculate on why the medical community would like further exploration and analysis performed. But you aren't a doctor, so I'm asking why it's inadequate for you?

My opinion is irrelevant.

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

they don't have the ability to understand what they're trying to argue

You'll want to request a prescription intended for humans, which you'd ask for - if you had researched and understood the topic.

You'd also know that Ivermectin wasn't invented, it was discovered in Japan and derived from it's parent drug, Avermectin.

"These naturally occurring compounds are generated as fermentation products by Streptomyces avermitilis, a soil actinomycete. Eight different avermectins were isolated in four pairs of homologue compounds, with a major (a-component) and minor (b-component) component usually in ratios of 80:20 to 90:10.[2] Other anthelmintics derived from the avermectins include ivermectin, selamectin, doramectin, eprinomectin, and abamectin."



Here's a brief abstract if you're interested in educating yourself further:

"Abstract
Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably beneficial impact in improving the lives and welfare of billions of people throughout the world. Originally introduced as a veterinary drug, it kills a wide range of internal and external parasites in commercial livestock and companion animals. It was quickly discovered to be ideal in combating two of the world’s most devastating and disfiguring diseases which have plagued the world’s poor throughout the tropics for centuries. It is now being used free-of-charge as the sole tool in campaigns to eliminate both diseases globally. It has also been used to successfully overcome several other human diseases and new uses for it are continually being found. This paper looks in depth at the events surrounding ivermectin’s passage from being a huge success in Animal Health into its widespread use in humans, a development which has led many to describe it as a “wonder” drug."

Source:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm going to need my top medical resource to weigh in on Ivermectin before I say yay or nay to it.

I'll find out tomorrow morning around 4am when SportEL is online

OK - I genuinely laughed at this.

[NoSup4U]

Anyway

40% fully vaxxed by C-Day is looking pretty promising for Calgary

Does that mean we can build a wall?

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The idea of vaginal worms gives me all sort of ED. So that makes sense

Nothing wrong with a little extra traction.

[SKR]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You'll want to request a prescription intended for humans, which you'd ask for - if you had researched and understood the topic.

You'd also know that Ivermectin wasn't invented, it was discovered in Japan and derived from it's parent drug, Avermectin.

"These naturally occurring compounds are generated as fermentation products by Streptomyces avermitilis, a soil actinomycete. Eight different avermectins were isolated in four pairs of homologue compounds, with a major (a-component) and minor (b-component) component usually in ratios of 80:20 to 90:10.[2] Other anthelmintics derived from the avermectins include ivermectin, selamectin, doramectin, eprinomectin, and abamectin."

Here's a brief abstract if you're interested in educating yourself further:

"Abstract
Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably beneficial impact in improving the lives and welfare of billions of people throughout the world. Originally introduced as a veterinary drug, it kills a wide range of internal and external parasites in commercial livestock and companion animals. It was quickly discovered to be ideal in combating two of the world’s most devastating and disfiguring diseases which have plagued the world’s poor throughout the tropics for centuries. It is now being used free-of-charge as the sole tool in campaigns to eliminate both diseases globally. It has also been used to successfully overcome several other human diseases and new uses for it are continually being found. This paper looks in depth at the events surrounding ivermectin’s passage from being a huge success in Animal Health into its widespread use in humans, a development which has led many to describe it as a “wonder” drug."

Source:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043740/

Out of everything I wrote, those are the things you take issue with? You're pretty delicate about this hey?

Anyway, between the two of us, one has been doing housewife research, and the other one has used gallons of ivermectin. Which one do you think would be more familiar with it? "Interested in educating yourself." Classic.

Find a double blind placebo test that gives conclusive evidence that ivermectin is the most effective drug (the "magic bullet", as you called it). I'll give you a head start - here's one that says that it's no better than a placebo.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...310v1.full.pdf

I'd love a magic bullet. I haven't caught the virus, as far as I know, but so far it's cost me a job, and because of that a house and two vehicles. I'd like for it to be over now. But I'm not about to start acting like things that aren't real science are science, and things that are real science are actually a conspiracy. Get these doctors to do their jobs and conduct a real study that proves that ivermectin is the magic bullet. Once that happens, I'm off to the vet to get a jug and I'll pour it on my Alpha Bits.

[danno]

got my second jab on monday, i believe my lymph nodes are swollen under my left arm now. i looked it up and it looks to be a sign of fighting off a viral infections and is a symptom of the vaccine.
also have strep throat running through my house 3 of 5 have it, me and daughter are the lucky 2 that don't have it yet or have already beat it as we were both negative.

[born2workoncars]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Out of everything I wrote, those are the things you take issue with? You're pretty delicate about this hey?

Anyway, between the two of us, one has been doing housewife research, and the other one has used gallons of ivermectin. Which one do you think would be more familiar with it? "Interested in educating yourself." Classic.

Find a double blind placebo test that gives conclusive evidence that ivermectin is the most effective drug (the "magic bullet", as you called it). I'll give you a head start - here's one that says that it's no better than a placebo.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...310v1.full.pdf

I'd love a magic bullet. I haven't caught the virus, as far as I know, but so far it's cost me a job, and because of that a house and two vehicles. I'd like for it to be over now. But I'm not about to start acting like things that aren't real science are science, and things that are real science are actually a conspiracy. Get these doctors to do their jobs and conduct a real study that proves that ivermectin is the magic bullet. Once that happens, I'm off to the vet to get a jug and I'll pour it on my Alpha Bits.

You reinforce that you don't have an understanding of the subject, especially when there's statistically significant evidence in the link YOU posted that shows outcomes with treatment by ivermectin reduced mortality in that small, poorly structured trial. Did you carefully read it? Not to mention we know a lot more now than we did back in January.

What isn't real science about the links I posted? Where have I relayed any pseudo science? Based on your reply, it seems that you're the fragile one, which is understandable given the hardship you've experienced.

Finally, using misogyny to try and make your point is ineffective, and just makes you sound incompetent. You can do better.