Question on Ivermectin

terp said:

Furthermore, we are finding that natural immunity is vastly superior to what these vaccines offer.  This means a couple of things.  If you've had Covid, these vaccines probably don't offer much value.  

 

your are so FOS it's not funny

terp said:

It's interesting.  I remember a time when people used to RIP Fox News and its followers because an inordinate percentage thought Saddam had WMDs, for good reason.  But now, progressives seem to not understand the risks of this disease.  

There are quite a few data sets that have similar information.   Here's one.

 you're actually Whataboutting with WMDs - I didn't see that one coming.  Congrats!

Are you saying that we should not bother with vaccines?  Yes or no?  I honestly don't understand your primary argument.  

Terp - what's the #1 test I can do right now to see if I have natural immunity - maybe everyone should start taking that so that people could know their level of vulnerability.

terp said:

It's interesting.  I remember a time when people used to RIP Fox News and its followers because an inordinate percentage thought Saddam had WMDs, for good reason.  But now, progressives seem to not understand the risks of this disease.  

 

The risks of the disease are that hundreds of thousands have died from it, and many hospitals are being driven to their knees because of it. 

Did I get it right?

jamie said:

terp said:

It's interesting.  I remember a time when people used to RIP Fox News and its followers because an inordinate percentage thought Saddam had WMDs, for good reason.  But now, progressives seem to not understand the risks of this disease.  

There are quite a few data sets that have similar information.   Here's one.

 you're actually Whataboutting with WMDs - I didn't see that one coming.  Congrats!

Are you saying that we should not bother with vaccines?  Yes or no?  I honestly don't understand your primary argument.  

 I wasn't whatabouting anything.  I'm just pointing out the tendency of people like yourself to be willfully ignorant on this topic.  

Is this anti vax argument that if you're not in a high risk group for death you shouldn't care if your unvaccinated **** passes the virus on to someone who is high risk?

what am I saying that is ignorant?  I believe vaccines are helping.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/covid-19-hospitalizations-nonvaccinated

drummerboy said:

terp said:

Furthermore, we are finding that natural immunity is vastly superior to what these vaccines offer.  This means a couple of things.  If you've had Covid, these vaccines probably don't offer much value.  

 

your are so FOS it's not funny

 I mean I think its obvious but there is a study.

ml1 said:

Is this anti vax argument that if you're not in a high risk group for death you shouldn't care if your unvaccinated **** passes the virus on to someone who is high risk?

 First, I'm not sure you understand how the virus spreads.  It spreads from a completely different part of your anatomy. 

Second, I'm not saying that at all.  However, we have been learning that the vaccines are not very effective at preventing infection and transmission.  If this is true, and it lowers symptoms in the vaccinated it could increase the spread as someone could think they have a case of the sniffles and goes around shedding the virus.  

jamie said:

what am I saying that is ignorant?  I believe vaccines are helping.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/covid-19-hospitalizations-nonvaccinated

 GTFO with this BS stat.  Its propoganda.  The vaccines help with hospitalization but that is a straight up propoganda statistic. 

Between Jan. 1 and Aug. 30, about 99 percent of hospital admissions were among those who hadn’t been fully inoculated, which is defined by the CDC as two weeks after the second dose of a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine or two weeks after Johnson & Johnson’s single-dose jab.

terp said:

 First, I'm not sure you understand how the virus spreads.  It spreads from a completely different part of your anatomy. 

Second, I'm not saying that at all.  However, we have been learning that the vaccines are not very effective at preventing infection and transmission.  If this is true, and it lowers symptoms in the vaccinated it could increase the spread as someone could think they have a case of the sniffles and goes around shedding the virus.  

 if this is true, why do areas of the country with higher vaccination rates generally have lower rates of infection?

ml1 said:

terp said:

 First, I'm not sure you understand how the virus spreads.  It spreads from a completely different part of your anatomy. 

Second, I'm not saying that at all.  However, we have been learning that the vaccines are not very effective at preventing infection and transmission.  If this is true, and it lowers symptoms in the vaccinated it could increase the spread as someone could think they have a case of the sniffles and goes around shedding the virus.  

 if this is true, why do areas of the country with higher vaccination rates generally have lower rates of infection?

 coincidence

terp said:

drummerboy said:

terp said:

Furthermore, we are finding that natural immunity is vastly superior to what these vaccines offer.  This means a couple of things.  If you've had Covid, these vaccines probably don't offer much value.  

 

your are so FOS it's not funny

 I mean I think its obvious but there is a study.

 Did you not read to the end of that click-bait-headlined Daily Mail article you posted? The very last line is:

"Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."

terp said:

 First, I'm not sure you understand how the virus spreads. 

 Through ignorance.

sprout said:

terp said:

I mean I think its obvious but there is a study.

Did you not read to the end of that click-bait-headlined Daily Mail article you posted? The very last line is:

"Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant."

I mean there is a study.

There is this study, too, which people cited to argue that vaccination doesn’t boost the immunity of Covid survivors, but which also found no significant difference between the immunity from infection and from vaccines.

I mean there are lots of studies.

terp said:

sprout said:

Terp -- Are you still into ivermectin even after it was revealed that the often-cited study showing effectiveness was actually a big lie?

https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/big-ivermectin-study-withdrawn-appears-to-be-fraudulent?page=next&limit=0#discussion-replies-3551601

I don't know.  There have definitely been problematic studies that were meant to support it.  At the same time there has been a concerted propoganda effort to discredit it.  This article has a pretty good rundown.  They even tried to smear Joe Rogan with this nonsense.

The introduction of a regimen that included ivermectin in regions of India coincided with a significant drop of cases.  Correlation doesn't equal causation, but if it was vaccines that were introduced in the same scenario I doubt it would stop many from giving the vaccines all the credit.  Anyway, I do think India is ensuring they have a supply of that drug.

So, I'm not sure.  I do think there is a signal that it helps.  Even Eric Topol agrees with that and he's not exactly what you'd call anti-vaxx.   

Thanks for the Desert Review article link with the rundown. I followed that article's links to the meta-analysis it cited to support ivermectin. 

https://c19early.com/

That real-time meta-analysis is fascinating, and for ivermectin some positives still appear even after removing the fraudulent article. 

However, that meta-analysis site analyzes data for many potential medications, and other approaches appear even better performing than ivermectin -- including vitamin D in early treatment improvement:

And despite the early treatment positives in improvement, Ivermectin then performs poorly at mortality rate... which is a pretty big downside. What surprises me is the convalescent plasma's poor performance as an early treatment, and that it has only been examined by a small numbers of studies.

There seems to be a trend for the buzz-word medications to get the most studies performed... even though other approaches/medications appear to show more promise.

Talk about burying the lede in that, anyone notice this statement ("Treatments do not replace vaccines and other measures.") at the top of that chart?

Steve said:

Talk about burying the lede in that, anyone notice this statement ("Treatments do not replace vaccines and other measures.") at the top of that chart?

 that's a point I've made repeatedly.  Even IF ivermectin was a wonder treatment for COVID, why would that be a rational reason for refusing to be vaccinated.  Who wouldn't prefer not to get sick in the first place over getting a symptomatic case that requires treatment?  The whole ivermectin sideshow allows anti-vaxxers to misdirect the argument away from getting vaccinated.  If we're arguing the efficacy of ivermectin, they don't have to defend their anti-vax position. Which of course they don't want to do because for the vast majority of refusers, there isn't a strong argument for their refusal.

ml1 said:

 The whole ivermectin sideshow allows anti-vaxxers to misdirect the argument away from getting vaccinated.  If we're arguing the efficacy of ivermectin, they don't have to defend their anti-vax position. Which of course they don't want to do because for the vast majority of refusers, there isn't a strong argument for their refusal.

 It pretty much blows up the "but it's a novel treatment!" argument. Someone who is consistently opposed to modern medicine in general who then claims they are also opposed to the covid vaccine is believable. Someone who claims that their concern with the covid vaccines is that they're too new and we don't fully know the possible side effects, but then goes and touts hydroxycholroquine or ivermectin or some other drug as a covid treatment instantly loses all credibility, as the usage of those drugs for covid is also a novel treatment with little study for which we don't fully know the side effects. If anything, there's even less known about ivermectin and friends in this context, as there's been far less intensive study, whereas with the vaccines we've got millions of people throughout the world as a dataset.

ml1 said:

 that's a point I've made repeatedly.  Even IF ivermectin was a wonder treatment for COVID, why would that be a rational reason for refusing to be vaccinated.  Who wouldn't prefer not to get sick in the first place over getting a symptomatic case that requires treatment?  The whole ivermectin sideshow allows anti-vaxxers to misdirect the argument away from getting vaccinated.  If we're arguing the efficacy of ivermectin, they don't have to defend their anti-vax position. Which of course they don't want to do because for the vast majority of refusers, there isn't a strong argument for their refusal.

Absolutely.  My point was that those relying on the meta-analysis for the proposition that Ivermectin is some sort of wonder drug to treat COVID-19 and therefore there is no need for vaccination (or, to mock those who choose to get vaccinated as "sheep") really need to read a little more carefully.

FWIW: From the meta-analysis studies, Ivermectin appears to have the best outcomes when used prophylactically, than as an early treatment. It does not perform very well as a late-stage treatment.  

https://ivmmeta.com/#results

This may be the study from India that Terp was trying to refer to -- it shows some good prophylactic results.  

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247163

However, see the last line of the article: 

Conclusion

We conclude that two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg body weight with a gap of 72 hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs in the following one month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic. This is an intervention worth replicating at other centers until a vaccine is widely available.

In 1986 the President of the United States said:

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help. "

Frankly I think much of the opposition to the vaccines arise from that idea. (Aside from those who were hard-core anti-vaxxers from before COVID).The Government says to take the vaccines and not ivermectin therefore many conclude that the opposite is correct. the other arguments about the vaccine not being sufficiently tested, etc. are just rationalizations. 

Scientific "studies":

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/low-tar-cigarettes/481116/

I have been drinking two ounces of Mercury three times a week for the last month.  No covid yet.    

Pretty impressive in preventing it.   

sbenois said:

I have been drinking two ounces of Mercury three times a week for the last month.  No covid yet.    

Pretty impressive in preventing it.   

 Yeah, red wine for me. No Covid!

jimmurphy said:

sbenois said:

I have been drinking two ounces of Mercury three times a week for the last month.  No covid yet.    

Pretty impressive in preventing it.   

 Yeah, red wine for me. No Covid!

 Red wine works? ****! I’ve been running with a combo of The Secret and getting punched in the face by Jim Bakker every other Sunday! Touch wood (I’ve also been touching a LOT of wood) that will suffice, but I’m always happy to follow Hank Zona’s doctoral advice.

jimmurphy said:

sbenois said:

I have been drinking two ounces of Mercury three times a week for the last month.  No covid yet.    

Pretty impressive in preventing it.   

 Yeah, red wine for me. No Covid!

FYI, i had a bit of the sniffles yesterday morning and got concerned that the Mercury may be wearing off so I tried a new antidote that seems to be working today:  1 teaspoon of Selsun Blue shampoo, 1/4 cup of peanut butter (chunky, organic), 4 ounces of Dr. Brown's diet cream soda and a liberal sprinking of asphalt all tossed into a Vitamix.  Let it blend for 30 seconds and then put in a saucepan and boil for 3 minutes.  

Drink while hot.  Of course.

The boiling activates the oils in the asphalt that apparently serve as a barrier to the covid molecules while the shampoo bubbles them out of your system. The peanut butter is apparently a protein boost that helps the shampoo do its thing.   The diet cream just tastes really good.  Especially with pastrami.

So far I feel GREAT!   I will keep you updated in the next few days.

sbenois said:

FYI, i had a bit of the sniffles yesterday morning and got concerned that the Mercury may be wearing off so I tried a new antidote that seems to be working today:  1 teaspoon of Selsun Blue shampoo, 1/4 cup of peanut butter (chunky, organic), 4 ounces of Dr. Brown's diet cream soda and a liberal sprinking of asphalt all tossed into a Vitamix.  Let it blend for 30 seconds and then put in a saucepan and boil for 3 minutes.  

Drink while hot.  Of course.

The boiling activates the oils in the asphalt that apparently serve as a barrier to the covid molecules while the shampoo bubbles them out of your system. The peanut butter is apparently a protein boost that helps the shampoo do its thing.   The diet cream just tastes really good.  Especially with pastrami.

So far I feel GREAT!   I will keep you updated in the next few days.

 no Yoo Hoo?

Can I borrow someone's horse?

I heard on the news earlier this week that people are arguing and drinking strong antiseptics such as betadine as another bogus covid preventative.  I think betadine is poisonous to drink.