For the Ags taking ivermectin as a Covid preventative:

[Reckless75]

I’ve waited a couple of days to post this. Had a childhood friend from Amarillo who was anti-vax. He died last week after spending a couple of weeks in ICU. He was late 40’s, in good health and shape.

His wife is begging people who were just like them to open their eyes and go get vaccinated immediately.

This is his hospital bed 2 days before he passed from COVID.

Sorry for your loss.

 

[Big Bobby B]

What messaging and mission statement are you are looking for?

One that doesn’t change like the wind

 

[Dean Mortimer]

Ivermectin was approved for human use in 1987. Whether or not it truly helps prevent or treat Covid, I personally would require more data to see it proven. However, no harm in taking it if in the form for which it was approved for human consumption (ie not available at Tractor Supply). Well, potentially some harm if using it instead of a vaccine and if later proven wrong about which one is or is not effective.

 

[Tom_100]

One that doesn’t change like the wind

What if the message changes because more information is available or the situation changes?

 

[Tom_100]

@catorano
https://scitechdaily.com/most-common-covid-masks-only-filter-about-10-of-exhaled-aerosol-droplets/

 

[jeffmc]

I’ve waited a couple of days to post this. Had a childhood friend from Amarillo who was anti-vax. He died last week after spending a couple of weeks in ICU. He was late 40’s, in good health and shape.

His wife is begging people who were just like them to open their eyes and go get vaccinated immediately.

This is his hospital bed 2 days before he passed from COVID.

Sorry for your loss.

 

[Mac1014]

Use it or don't but the idea that ivermectin has only ever been used as a de-wormer on horses, dogs, etc. is absurd. Ivermectin has been medically used in humans since 1981 after discovery/invention in 1975 and its antiviral properties have been widely known for those 46 years.

There are large-scale studies underway on its efficacy in humans vs. covid in RCT human trials. But the initial results are promising.

The FDA-approved drug ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro

Abstract​

Although several clinical trials are now underway to test possible therapies, the worldwide response to the COVID-19 outbreak has been largely limited to monitoring/containment. We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2), with a single addition to Vero-hSLAM cells 2 h post infection with SARS-CoV-2 able to effect ~5000-fold reduction in viral RNA at 48 h. Ivermectin therefore warrants further investigation for possible benefits in humans.

Ivermectin: an award-winning drug with expected antiviral activity against COVID-19

Abstract​

Ivermectin is an FDA-approved broad-spectrum antiparasitic agent with demonstrated antiviral activity against a number of DNA and RNA viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite this promise, the antiviral activity of ivermectin has not been consistently proven in vivo. While ivermectin's activity against SARS-CoV-2 is currently under investigation in patients, insufficient emphasis has been placed on formulation challenges. Here, we discuss challenges surrounding the use of ivermectin in the context of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) and how novel formulations employing micro- and nanotechnologies may address these concerns.

Antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin in adults with COVID-19: A proof-of-concept randomized trial

Abstract​

Background​

There are limited antiviral options for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone with a wide anti-parasitary spectrum, has shown potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. This study aimed at assessing the antiviral effect of IVM on viral load of respiratory secretions and its relationship with drug concentrations in plasma.

Methods​

Proof-of-concept, pilot, randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor blinded trial to evaluate antiviral activity of high-dose IVM in 45 COVID-19 hospitalized patients randomized in a 2:1 ratio to standard of care plus oral IVM at 0·6 mg/kg/day for 5 days versus standard of care in 4 hospitals in Argentina. Eligible patients were adults with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 5 days of symptoms onset. The primary endpoint was the difference in viral load in respiratory secretions between baseline and day-5, by quantitative RT-PCR. Concentrations of IVM in plasma were measured. Study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04381884.

For the antiviral part, when I thought I had covid and was waiting to get in to be tested, my doc told me to take a pepcid twice a day and drink tonic water.
Seemed weird but whatever.

 

[superag1000]

Wow...that is some awesome stuff right there. It is always good to question science and verify the assumptions being made.

 

[slgilmore]

There is a difference between causation and correlation. I haven’t caught Covid yet and I drink coffee every morning…

I have no idea if this stuff works or not, but saying you took it and got better does not show causation.

Well no shit

 

[Dean Mortimer]

Wow...that is some awesome stuff right there. It is always good to question science and verify the assumptions being made.

Just to confirm, you feel those cigarette company advertisements represent science?

 

[RogueAggie]

Just to confirm, you feel those cigarette company advertisements represent science?

Of course, they were paying for the science...

 

[tsip despiser]

Wow...that is some awesome stuff right there. It is always good to question science and verify the assumptions being made.

Ahhhh, advertising from the 20's-50's, great reference point. In the meantime, we've come up with FDA, CDC, etc. for EXACTLY these reasons.

 

[AggieInDC]

@tsip despiser - just to clarify, the FDA was founded in 1906 and the CDC in 1946.

 

[Reckless75]

Just to confirm, you feel those cigarette company advertisements represent science?

Do you feel actors and singers in advertisements stating vaccines are safe and necessary represent science?

 

[Dean Mortimer]

Do you feel actors and singers in advertisements stating vaccines are safe and necessary represent science?

No, obviously I do not feel actors in commercials represent science

 

[Reckless75]

No, obviously I do not feel actors in commercials represent science

I know you don’t.

 

[Tom_100]

CIGARETTES​

The “Nico Time” advertisement promoting smoking during pregnancy is fake. It stems from the video game series Bioshock, see here. Their site confirms the “Nico Time” advertisement was designed by Kat Berkley, an artist who worked on the game (see here and here).

Before the 1964 surgeon general’s report on smoking, tobacco companies in the U.S. did produce advertisements downplaying the risks of smoking, here. Although in 1963, the FDA expressly stated that tobacco did not fit under the category of “hazardous” substances, by 1965 the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act required labels on cigarette packs warning of potential health hazards, here.


In September 1965, the Public Health Service established a small unit called the National Clearinghouse for Smoking and Health. This unit—later the Office on Smoking and Health, under the CDC—has been responsible for 29 reports on the health consequences of smoking, here. It is therefore false that the CDC promoted smoking, or the use of nicotine.


https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...arettes-ddt-heroin-and-asbestos-idUSKBN20T1RO

 

[Dean Mortimer]

I know you don’t.

 

[AggieInDC]

For the antiviral part, when I thought I had covid and was waiting to get in to be tested, my doc told me to take a pepcid twice a day and drink tonic water.
Seemed weird but whatever.

I had never heard of the pepcid thing before you posted it and just saw this, which coming from a county health department, I would think is at least a little more credible than some recs. I wonder what the pepcid does.

 

[chandler bhang]

tricks the virus into thinking it can handle the habanero chaser.

 

[tsip despiser]

Ivermectin was approved for human use in 1987. Whether or not it truly helps prevent or treat Covid, I personally would require more data to see it proven. However, no harm in taking it if in the form for which it was approved for human consumption (ie not available at Tractor Supply). Well, potentially some harm if using it instead of a vaccine and if later proven wrong about which one is or is not effective.

Ahhhhhhhh......but the TSC stuff is apple flavored. After my first couple of doses, I tried to lift my tail to take a shit.

 

[tsip despiser]

@tsip despiser - just to clarify, the FDA was founded in 1906 and the CDC in 1946.

Not in the form that they are today and with the oversight that they now give. My father, class of '59 worked for the FDA at the National Center for Toxicological Research. Hell, even Jonas Salk in the early 50's injected himself with his polio vaccine to see if it worked. That would not, and could not happen today.

The U.S. is typically the last western country to approve drugs, vaccines, etc. Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand almost always get access to drugs before we ever give emergency or full approval. We have the highest hurdles on safety and efficacy in the world. But you are correct on the founding dates.

 

[pharm11]

So here is what I’m struggling with, if you want to take ivermectin for an off label use…fine take it. Why not get vaccinated and take ivermectin?

 

[schmak01]

Did you just pull this out of your ass? The vaccine and antibodies from Alpha are both less effective against Delta but still provide protection. If you've had Delta though that protection far exceeds the vaccine. While natural immunity wears off over time it is typical far superior in the short term unless we're talking about somebody immunocompromised.
Also depends on which vaccine - J&J is like 30% against Delta.

EDIT: Just to be clear there is evidence of a huge benefit to getting a shot after previous infection, hybrid immunity. Not arguing with that.

I’ve only seen one report claiming vaccination was better than natural immunity and it was railed by multiple experts for being faulty.

Just the science behind it makes that statement impossible. Vaccination gives you one IgG Antigen. Infection gives you multiple IgM and IgG antigens, the prior being critical to prevent re-infection as well as t-cell memory. This would be saying having just one DB on the field is better than 4 Linemen, 3 LB’s, 2 CB’s and 2 Safety’s. It’s stupid and makes no sense.

This is why the CDC was pushing for no masks for vaccinated in March and April when Biden, Cuomo, and other idiots where saying vaccinated still had to mask. I remember the CDC director saying this exact thing might happen, that they needed vaccinated to get exposed while the vaccines were effective to build full immunity. Then that night Biden said the opposite and she acted like she never said it the next day.

The science is simple here, that one antibody is good for preventing serious illness/death as long as the virus doesn’t mutate against it, which it will and quickly because that is the path of least resistance. Really basic evolution, and viruses are a wonderful example of how quickly evolution can happen on a macro scale.

What nobody is saying is if the IgG antigen created by the vaccine works against delta or if it has mutated against it. I haven’t seen a single study on it. It’s very odd, and now you are talking boosters without knowing this, which would be useless.

We may have missed the window here. Without vaccinated getting hybrid immunity, lacking the IgM Antigens, they aren’t going to provide any protection for future variants.

 

[Longneck 80]

While I won't dispute a single thing you say I must point out the fact that it is all academic if you don't survive the initial infection.

Please get vaccinated, for those who care and depend on you.

 

[IDRILL4GASOIL]

the families of the capital police who were murdered by the rioters you cheered on say hi.

traitor.

View embedded media

Yes they moved up the date. Was Memorial day. Rushed? Yes that is a fact but beyond may mean nothing?

 

[Big Bobby B]

relative to trump?

you bet.

now go ahead and turn up the volume like you always do.

it’s funny.

You used be be a fantastic poster.

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

Well no shit

Oh, so you posted your personal success story to just tell everyone about a useless correlation then? Any other useless information you’d like to share?

Or is it more likely you said you and lots of others were cured because you wanted people to believe this drug actually cured COVID?

 

[superag1000]

Just to confirm, you feel those cigarette company advertisements represent science?

No...why?

 

[Reckless75]

There were around 150 nurses and hospital workers fired a few weeks ago because they refused to get the vaccine.

Why did these employees in the medical field take such a staunch position, to the point of losing their careers?

I'd like to hear from board members in the medical field.

• Were these employees so completely eat up with politics that they could not process getting a vaccine that is being pushed so vigorously by Democrats?
• Were they so totally incapable of recognizing true science they just did not see the need to receive the vaccine?
• Did they have well founded concerns in the safety of the vaccine and felt a greater responsibility to place their families first and be their for them long term?

 

[Mac1014]

I had never heard of the pepcid thing before you posted it and just saw this, which coming from a county health department, I would think is at least a little more credible than some recs. I wonder what the pepcid does.

Doctor said it was an antiviral
Don’t know if it works or not since my bout a couple weeks ago wasn’t covid.

 

[Reckless75]

Doctor said it was an antiviral
Don’t know if it works or not since my bout a couple weeks ago wasn’t covid.

If it means anything, I'm glad you didn't die.

 

[Dean Mortimer]

No...why?

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

There were around 150 nurses and hospital workers fired a few weeks ago because they refused to get the vaccine.

Why did these employees in the medical field take such a staunch position, to the point of losing their careers?

I'd like to hear from board members in the medical field.

• Were these employees so completely eat up with politics that they could not process getting a vaccine that is being pushed so vigorously by Democrats?
• Were they so totally incapable of recognizing true science they just did not see the need to receive the vaccine?
• Did they have well founded concerns in the safety of the vaccine and felt a greater responsibility to place their families first and be their for them long term?

One hundred and fifty whole people in the what… millions of people in health care? Well damn, let’s stop the presses and shut this whole universe down! 150 people clearly should rule the world.

For real people…. 150 people believe some crazy ass conspiracy theory. If that doesn’t sway you to understand basic science, what will? 150 actual (well…. theoretical) people have spoken.

Guys!!! This fella said 150 people. Case straight closed.

 

[AggieInDC]

One hundred and fifty whole people in the what… millions of people in health care? Well damn, let’s stop the presses and shut this whole universe down! 150 people clearly should rule the world.

For real people…. 150 people believe some crazy ass conspiracy theory. If that doesn’t sway you to understand basic science, what will? 150 actual (well…. theoretical) people have spoken.

Guys!!! This fella said 150 people. Case straight closed.

If you were half as informed as you are condescending here you’d know that there have been news stories from all over the USA about large numbers of healthcare workers, especially nurses, refusing to get vaccinated. And in many instances being fired or suspended.

The New York Times just had a story about this very thing today and how the staffing issues are partly driven by these concerns vs. mandates.

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

If you were half as informed as you are condescending here you’d know that there have been news stories from all over the USA about large numbers of healthcare workers, especially nurses, refusing to get vaccinated. And in many instances being fired or suspended.

The New York Times just had a story about this very thing today and how the staffing issues are partly driven by these concerns vs. mandates.

Not saying it’s not a real thing. I am saying that randomly claiming 150 anonymous people may or may not have been fired or quit is useless to the conversation.

 

[Reckless75]

Not saying it’s not a real thing. I am saying that randomly claiming 150 anonymous people may or may not have been fired or quit is useless to the conversation.

More than 150 employees resign or are fired from Houston hospital system after refusing to get vaccinated

Houston Methodist was one of the nation’s first health systems to impose a coronavirus vaccine mandate.

www.texastribune.org

This was at Houston Methodist. Alone.

Surprised you were not up to date on this.

 

[Reckless75]

In you own damned town, you know everything about COVID, but you didn’t know this?

STFU

 

[Reckless75]

One hundred and fifty whole people in the what… millions of people in health care? Well damn, let’s stop the presses and shut this whole universe down! 150 people clearly should rule the world.

For real people…. 150 people believe some crazy ass conspiracy theory. If that doesn’t sway you to understand basic science, what will? 150 actual (well…. theoretical) people have spoken.

Guys!!! This fella said 150 people. Case straight closed.

THIS is why we cannot have civil discussions.

FYYGDCP

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

In you own damned town, you know everything about COVID, but you didn’t know this?

STFU

I know everything about Covid??? I’m not sure where that came from but ok.