Who is getting the COVID-19 Vaccine?

[Buster]

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

You may have missed the post:



You can deduce from that post that evidence suggests vaccines are effective at reducing severe illness when infected with a covid variant. Nowhere has drug superiority been implied.

In what manner would you like to discuss vaccines vs ivermectin? It's likely that a multi-pronged approach will be the most effective solution to ending the pandemic.

Safety data for Ivermectin is storied (4bil+ doses spanning decades, tolerated well even at high doses) and well understood, which combined with frontline experience demonstrating high levels of efficacy, low cost of production and high availability makes it an excellent choice for prophylactic and early stage treatment. These are the experiences of frontline doctors - I'm relaying their data and opinions.

Safety data for vaccines is not as extensive, lacks long term data and has not undergone sufficient testing to be used in the general public without an EUA. The manufacturers of the vaccines are immune from liability in the event of negative outcomes, which can cause a certain level of hesitancy. This is a consideration for an educated individual choosing to be vaccinated.

I don't think it's a contest to declare a winner, but should Ivermectin continue to see positive results and gain official recognition and administration as a repurposed drug from governing bodies, we would expect to see the EUA pulled. This is based on the conditions required for an EUA in the first place - whether or not that would actually happen is a different story.

I think you're trying to infer I have a narrative - that is incorrect. I'm simply interested in gathering, interpreting and discussing all available data regarding COVID treatment in an apolitical fashion.

you should educate yourself on the very basic concepts of analyzing data before you talk about analyzing data.

[Xtrema]

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

Ruh roh

Sinovac didn't make it either.

[killramos]

Double Pfizer back to elite status!

[Tik-Tok]

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

https://science.thewire.in/health/eu...ot-covishield/

Covishield - the version of AZ we got - did not make it on EU Green Pass.

Only because they didn't apply. Similar reason we can't go see "The Boss", not that anyone really wants to.

[born2workoncars]

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

you should educate yourself on the very basic concepts of analyzing data before you talk about analyzing data.

Buster, most of the posts you make can be repurposed and directed back at you. If you decide you want to engage in a balanced analysis of all current data on the subject, your efforts could contribute to an improvement of the thread.

If your position is that you don't care, or simply want to talk shit, then you're making it clear your goal is to antagonize - which is fine, we all know the internet breeds trolls, but I would hope you would apply your intelligence in a manner that moves the discussion forward.

[killramos]

It’s hard to take anyone seriously when they call the counterparty buster

[Buster]

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

Buster, most of the posts you make can be repurposed and directed back at you. If you decide you want to engage in a balanced analysis of all current data on the subject, your efforts could contribute to an improvement of the thread.

If your position is that you don't care, or simply want to talk shit, then you're making it clear your goal is to antagonize - which is fine, we all know the internet breeds trolls, but I would hope you would apply your intelligence in a manner that moves the discussion forward.

Post a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized trial with sufficient power to make conclusions.

[redline]

We got 1.3 mil shots in hopper in Alberta .. hairdo is winning don’t let him… book your dp

[JRSC00LUDE]

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

Only because they didn't apply. Similar reason we can't go see "The Boss", not that anyone really wants to.

If you don't like Bruce Springsteen you hate America. Terrorist.

[JohnnyHockey13]

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

If you don't like Bruce Springsteen you hate America. Terrorist.

Damn man, Springsteen? Didn't know you were that old.

[SportEL]

Really Really Sad for the Parents and the 12 Year Old Who Had the Whole World Ahead of Her.

So..About that 2nd Dose?? Guess there's still time to think about things before taking it.

[ThePenIsMightier]

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

You may have missed the post:



You can deduce from that post that evidence suggests vaccines are effective at reducing severe illness when infected with a covid variant. Nowhere has drug superiority been implied.

In what manner would you like to discuss vaccines vs ivermectin? It's likely that a multi-pronged approach will be the most effective solution to ending the pandemic.

Safety data for Ivermectin is storied (4bil+ doses spanning decades, tolerated well even at high doses) and well understood, which combined with frontline experience demonstrating high levels of efficacy, low cost of production and high availability makes it an excellent choice for prophylactic and early stage treatment. These are the experiences of frontline doctors - I'm relaying their data and opinions.

Safety data for vaccines is not as extensive, lacks long term data and has not undergone sufficient testing to be used in the general public without an EUA. The manufacturers of the vaccines are immune from liability in the event of negative outcomes, which can cause a certain level of hesitancy. This is a consideration for an educated individual choosing to be vaccinated.

I don't think it's a contest to declare a winner, but should Ivermectin continue to see positive results and gain official recognition and administration as a repurposed drug from governing bodies, we would expect to see the EUA pulled. This is based on the conditions required for an EUA in the first place - whether or not that would actually happen is a different story.

I think you're trying to infer I have a narrative - that is incorrect. I'm simply interested in gathering, interpreting and discussing all available data regarding COVID treatment in an apolitical fashion.

Did your computer's thesaurus hang itself with its own power cord after being worked over that hard?

[born2workoncars]

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

Post a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized trial with sufficient power to make conclusions.

Your standard of proof isn't necessary to make a determination that a drug is effective. Sure, DBRCT's are nice but an unrealistic expectation short of a billion dollar company investing time in them. And why would they? Merck's patent on Ivermectin expired in 1997. Why would they pursue a drug they won't make money on?

You can also argue the ethics of giving someone with COVID a placebo. If you're seeing first hand that it works on a large scale, how ethical is it to let infected patients suffer so that we can convince the Busters of the world?

If this amount of proof is sufficient for a growing body of doctors and medical professionals, I don't think it matters whether we are meeting your standards of proof. I'm going to listen to the opinions of Doctors, Medical experts and Frontline Workers who have real experience and knowledge on the subject.

Here's what we know (this is from the smart people smarting):

https://journals.lww.com/americanthe..._of.98040.aspx

https://journals.lww.com/americanthe...ing_the.4.aspx
https://journals.lww.com/americanthe..._of.98040.aspx
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33983065/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00430-5
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....31.21258081v1
https://c19ivermectin.com/

(link posted in tweet https://t.co/1R0arRGjBe?amp=1)


Referencing the censorship issue - it's obvious for whoever cares to investigate this issue that Big Tech is censoring discussions from experts when they involve Ivermectin. This isn't some random youtuber, these are experts in their field, and I think we can trust that allowing them to have an open discourse is in our best interest.

At what point in history has censorship ever led to the betterment of society? This is big issue worth discussing:



If you think this is bullshit, the issue has already been addressed a few years back by the UCS:

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/dis...ation-playbook


Op-Ed on Medical Censorship
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ic_145376.html

If you're trying to discredit what could be estimated at thousands of doctors who know first hand the results of this drug by saying there's 'insufficient evidence' - your opinion ultimately doesn't hold up.




TL;DR - Dr. John Campbell does a good job of summarizing evidence (June 24.2021) - hopefully this video doesn't get taken down:

Rewind to the start for a summary if you don't feel like watching the whole video:



Link to Pierre Kory on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/PierreKory

[pheoxs]

^ TL;DR.

You should go out for Canada Day though, beautiful day to be wasting it on beyond.

[Buster]

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

Your standard of proof isn't necessary to make a determination that a drug is effective.

[FraserB]

Trudeau has changed the goalposts yet again. 75% fully vaccinated is now not good enough; according to him, we need to be in the 80% range fully vaccinated to ease the border closure.

[killramos]

Vote Liberal

[mr2mike]

Keep the Pandemic going... Liberal platform.

[kertejud2]

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

Trudeau has changed the goalposts yet again. 75% fully vaccinated is now not good enough; according to him, we need to be in the 80% range fully vaccinated to ease the border closure.

Government releases confirm the 75% number, but it’s unclear if it’s eligible population or total population (which would require 86% of eligible people). So something fun to not have clarified heading into a weekend news cycle.

[Darkane]

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

Government releases confirm the 75% number, but it’s unclear if it’s eligible population or total population (which would require 86% of eligible people). So something fun to not have clarified heading into a weekend news cycle.

86% eligible isn’t likely even with punishment of imprisonment.