See the vax numbers for yourselves in the highest vaxed countries, these mandates are far beyond criminal.

[pknopp]

Was that before or after you had the injection?

Before. There wasn't one when I got it last January.

 

[colfax_m]

Works as well or better than the mRNA shots which provide no immunity, do not stop spread, do not prevent one from being hospitalized.

Here's how well the mRNA shots work.

They work very well. Not perfect, but very well. Ivermectin doesn't work at all.

 

[colfax_m]

Stop it colfax. I’ve posted the 60 plus studies. It worked for SARS COV 1 which is 80% similar. I guess utter pradish and Japan are just lying about their numbers now

80% similar isn't that similar. Humans are 60% similar to a banana. A study on SARS-COV1 is meaningless.

I've seen the studies for Ivermectin. They're either poorly designed, observation or have been retracted. The best studies do not show any benefit.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Here's how well the mRNA shots work.

View attachment 565316


They work very well. Not perfect, but very well. Ivermectin doesn't work at all.

We don't know that. Its thought that they may prevent one from becoming deathly ill but thats about it. They don't stop spread, prevent immunity, or prevent one from becoming hospitalized.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

80% similar isn't that similar. Humans are 60% similar to a banana. A study on SARS-COV1 is meaningless.

I've seen the studies for Ivermectin. They're either poorly designed, observation or have been retracted. The best studies do not show any benefit.

I've seen a few also. They're not perfect but just as good as or better than the mRNA experimental drugs.

 

[colfax_m]

We don't know that. Its thought that they may prevent one from becoming deathly ill but thats about it. They don't stop spread, prevent immunity, or prevent one from becoming hospitalized.

Data from Washington.

Sure looks like a HUGE difference in hospitalizations to me.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Data from Washington.
View attachment 565331

Sure looks like a HUGE difference in hospitalizations to me.

From all the doctors and nurses I have talked to, it's around a 50 50 mix.

 

[colfax_m]

From all the doctors and nurses I have talked to, it's around a 50 50 mix.

Ha! I’m a doctor. It’s not even close to 50/50. The only severe COVID I saw last week who was vaccinated was a transplant patient.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Ha! I’m a doctor. It’s not even close to 50/50. The only severe COVID I saw last week who was vaccinated was a transplant patient.

Yes it is. I've spoken to several who are there. You're probably more of an outlier. I do believe you though.

 

[colfax_m]

Yes it is. I've spoken to several who are there. You're probably more of an outlier. I do believe you though.

Statistics show that I’m not the outlier.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Statistics show that I’m not the outlier.

Four months ago, stats were saying that 99 percent unvaccinated were hospitalized. Now, stats are 60-70 percent. The shots aren't virtually non effective after 6 months. To claim that they are is not being truthful when faced with direct fact. Now they're desperate and pushing boosters which, essentially, are a sugar high, then crash. I've seen blood panels before and after the injection. They tell the real tale. You should know that.

 

[colfax_m]

Four months ago, stats were saying that 99 percent unvaccinated were hospitalized. Now, stats are 60-70 percent. The shots aren't virtually non effective after 6 months. To claim that they are is not being truthful when faced with direct fact. Now they're desperate and pushing boosters which, essentially, are a sugar high, then crash. I've seen blood panels before and after the injection. They tell the real tale. You should know that.

I'm not seeing any facts out of you, but you are gently walking things back.

Even if the stat that 60-70% of hospitalizations are unvaccinated, that still demonstrates a significant effect since our vaccination rate is in the ballpark of 60-70%. Further, you need to consider that those most likely to be vaccinated are ALSO those most likely to be hospitalized. If you evaluate people at equivalent risk of hospitalization, the benefit of vaccination is magnified dramatically.

My state data shows that 94% of ICU admissions are in unvaccinated. Those who are vaccinated and severely ill usually have a clear reason for not responding to the vaccine such as significant immune suppression as a transplant or cancer patient.

The vaccine is beneficial. Maybe not as beneficial as we wanted, but it's clear that people with the vaccine are FAR better off and in places with surging cases, hospital systems would be spared the stress of the severely ill if there were more people vaccinated.

Now, any more bullshit propaganda you wish to spread?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I'm not seeing any facts out of you, but you are gently walking things back.

Even if the stat that 60-70% of hospitalizations are unvaccinated, that still demonstrates a significant effect since our vaccination rate is in the ballpark of 60-70%. Further, you need to consider that those most likely to be vaccinated are ALSO those most likely to be hospitalized. If you evaluate people at equivalent risk of hospitalization, the benefit of vaccination is magnified dramatically.

My state data shows that 94% of ICU admissions are in unvaccinated. Those who are vaccinated and severely ill usually have a clear reason for not responding to the vaccine such as significant immune suppression as a transplant or cancer patient.

The vaccine is beneficial. Maybe not as beneficial as we wanted, but it's clear that people with the vaccine are FAR better off and in places with surging cases, hospital systems would be spared the stress of the severely ill if there were more people vaccinated.

Now, any more bullshit propaganda you wish to spread?

The 60-70 percent demonstrates a decent effect but nothing great and it only lasts for 6 months. Nothing impressive there. Your data is skewed heavily. I haven't seen anything at 94 percent now. Again, speaking with several across the country, its closer to a 50 50 mix. I can tell that you're reaching into the media narrative now.

 

[colfax_m]

The 60-70 percent demonstrates a decent effect but nothing great and it only lasts for 6 months. Nothing impressive there. Your data is skewed heavily. I haven't seen anything at 94 percent now. Again, speaking with several across the country, its closer to a 50 50 mix. I can tell that you're reaching into the media narrative now.

The 60-70%, if it were true and I don't think it is and you haven't provided data for it, demonstrates at bare minimum a chance of hospitalization that is 50% reduced.

Im sure you'll get around to providing actual data instead of just pulling numbers out of your rear end. Especially funny you claim national data of 50-50 when your source is anecdotal.

Or you'll just keep saying whatever you want because the data isn't important, it's just whatever you want to believe. You don't realize you're going off a media narrative as well, just it's not the mainstream media, it's the alternate reality right wing media.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The 60-70%, if it were true and I don't think it is and you haven't provided data for it, demonstrates at bare minimum a chance of hospitalization that is 50% reduced.

Im sure you'll get around to providing actual data instead of just pulling numbers out of your rear end. Especially funny you claim national data of 50-50 when your source is anecdotal.

Or you'll just keep saying whatever you want because the data isn't important, it's just whatever you want to believe. You don't realize you're going off a media narrative as well, just it's not the mainstream media, it's the alternate reality right wing media.

No, mainly from what I hear from friends who are in medicine. I'll take that over a media narrative anyday. Alt right? Lol, is that some fantasy for liberal media?

 

[colfax_m]

No, mainly from what I hear from friends who are in medicine. I'll take that over a media narrative anyday. Alt right? Lol, is that some fantasy for liberal media?

So where do you get claiming anything about the "national" rate? There's a reason no one would seriously use a few "friends" as a surrogate for national data. There's so much bias in doing so, whether it's implicit bias, reporting bias or your own recall bias.

You want to believe something so you're only going to believe the sources that tell you what you want to hear.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I can find studies all day long, going back decades. I know a couple of people who took the tablet form a couple of months ago and their symptoms went away in three days.

A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness - PubMed

Ivermectin, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-parasitic agent, was found to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication in vitro. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to determine the rapidity of viral clearance and...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

If you can find the peer-reviewed studies all day long displaying the efficacy of Ivermectin as a viable Rx to conquer Covid going back decades then do it rather than just beating your chest about it without presenting any bloody proof of your bogus claims!

I will agree that Ivermectin WAS efficacious in controlling worms in my cattle and sheep back in the day, but both my wife and I knew that livestock med was for critters and NOT PEOPLE for Covid-19!

The FDA has approved a treatment regime for humans of Ivermectin for Strongyloidiasis, an infection of roundworm in humans. But then roundworms are not Covid-19, nor any sort of virus!!!! Now, are you willing to share and cite all this evidence you claim exists or will you continue to piss into the wind?

 

[sakinago]

80% similar isn't that similar. Humans are 60% similar to a banana. A study on SARS-COV1 is meaningless.

I've seen the studies for Ivermectin. They're either poorly designed, observation or have been retracted. The best studies do not show any benefit.

That’s a lie. 100%. And you know it.The RCT studies, especially when used at the onset of symptoms, show great efficacy. RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS. The gold standard. In late stages it’s a mixed bag, but so would anything else. The damage is already done. There’s still efficacy though. Plenty of drugs passed wirh less efficacy.

It’s not just ivermectin. Nitazoximide might be even better. Another anti parasitic with many off label antiviral applications. Fluvoxomine is another great one, especially for preventing long covid symptoms since it crosses the blood brain barrier.

I don’t know how many more lies you need to see before you realize it’s a hit job on these cheap but effective treatments. I mean, the fucking FDA was trying to characterize it as horse dewormer. We all know that’s a fucking lie.

 

[SweetSue92]

What? I don’t understand the question. I think your missing where the blaring red klaxon is. The one thing we know still holds up against covid is naturally acquired immunity. We measure that in a stat called seroprevalence. Seroprevalence has doubled since this time last year. So, with seroprevalence doubled from last year, and with vaccination rates damn near 100% in these countries, how on earth is it remotely possible that they are now having a bigger problem with covid than they were last year? Was all of our collective pre-covid knowledge on immunity wrong?

Or...maybe we’re seeing what heir fauci himself warned us about in April 2020

Fauci said it will take 12 to 18 months to get a coronavirus vaccine in the US. Experts say a quick approval could be risky.

As many as 40 coronavirus vaccines are under development. Some have started human trials, but an approved product is a long way off.

www.businessinsider.com

We are suffering here in Michigan, I can tell you that. I personally know seven adults who have had Covid in the last couple of weeks, SIX of whom are fully vaccinated.

Here are the recent MI numbers, and note this is from early Oct, when Delta wasn't surging as much, to early Nov. I bet it's a lot worse now.

In the last 30 days of complete data (Oct 7 – Nov 5), 28,842 (27%) of 105,043 cases, 404 (28%) of 1,423 hospitalizations, and 149 (24%) of 622 deaths were among fully vaccinated individuals

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/coronavirus/20211116_Data_and_modeling_update_vMEDIA_741480_7.pdf

If the vaccines are not an abject failure they are very close. I feel like because it became a religious belief, it's unspeakable to say "um hey how are we here again? How are we talking about closing schools? What about the vaccines?"

 

[SweetSue92]

You clearly don’t understand the flu, vaccines, or immunity actually works. The amount of strains of flu are basically innumerable. How the flu shots work is scientist try to guess which strains, usually strains popping up in SE Asia where most originate, will be prevalent a year from now. They pick their top 3 or so best guesses and immunize against them. They are wrong MOST of the time. Which is understandable because predicting that far out, especially with how fast viruses mutate, is very very hard. Occasionally they get one right. Though even that’s debatable, did the vaccine actually work, or did Muller Ratchet (law of virology that we unintentionally evolutionarily select for less virulent but more contagious strains) play out before the vaccine was even rolled out.

And I’m not saying natural immunity is all we need. I’m all for vaccines that actually work. I would rather have vaccine immunity than naturally acquired. This one does not work. In fact, it actually uses the very same spike protein that sets covid apart from your standard flu. The spike protein is what causes the scary inflammation and clotting associated with the nasty covid cases. That spike protein, these vaccines work by telling you body to replicate it hundreds of millions times. This is why the adverse events from the vaccines look an awful lot like covid.

Behold. Common sense. And medical sense. Wow. So rare these days.