Started By
Message

re: Conversation with a liberal about ivermectin

Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:25 am to
Posted by concrete_tiger
Member since May 2020
6141 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:25 am to
A friend of mine owns a chain of pharmacies, and has been an amazing asset for the region, bringing healthcare basics to places that didn't have it and/or lost hospitals thanks to ACA compliance costs.

That being said, she is on a vaccine mission, and in the process has joined the fray of treating any alternative treatment as voodoo science. And not just warning people, but sharing the stuff that implies the only ivermectin is the type farmers use on their cows. Ugh. And, oh, by the way, they advocate CBD as an alternative for other things.

I am firmly in the camp that healthcare providers need to be offering up any and every option. She could certainly say that she endorses the vaccine. No problem. But why not let people know that if they oppose the vaccine, to at least be doing this other thing?

Posted by JayWhite
Member since Nov 2020
1008 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:26 am to
quote:

So, like I said.


Well, should I tell them to come in so I can bill them for nothing?
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111799 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:29 am to
quote:

Well, should I tell them to come in so I can bill them for nothing?


You gonna check em for the herp?
Posted by JayWhite
Member since Nov 2020
1008 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:30 am to
Yeah, that other guy is an idiot.
Posted by Aces_full
Bridge City, TX
Member since Aug 2018
83 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:32 am to
Wife tested positive yesterday. Through a friend she was able to find a local doctor that would prescribe Ivermectin.

The doctor (surprisingly) was very forthright in his opinions. He said obviously the vaccine is not working. He also directed me to the website Americasfrontlinedoctors.org for more information. Very informative videos there from American doctors.

My biggest question/concern has always been: why is there no push to TREAT the illness? I get the push to some extent to want to vaccinate. But why not improve the treatment of those already infected?

They are suppressing drugs like Ivermectin & HCQ that can save lives. It’s evil.
Posted by ThinePreparedAni
In a sea of cognitive dissonance
Member since Mar 2013
11100 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:32 am to
https://medium.com/on-the-trail-of-the-saucers/avi-loeb-sciencef3ed3f14f26-cf3ed3f14f26

quote:

Some `Defenders’ of Science Might Actually Be Hurting It

Whether it’s the lab-leak theory of COVID’s origin or the evidence for anomalous objects near Earth, those who insist uncomfortable ideas are unscientific are holding back potentially important discoveries.

Bryce Zabel Bryce Zabel Follow Aug 24 · 8 min read


quote:

The posture that we are smart enough to know the answer in advance, results in a self-fulfilling-prophecy that dismisses the need to collect new data, which in turn supports the premise that the existing data for anomalies is not convincing. This loop maintains a status-quo of ignorance and promotes speculations by the public. The duty of scientists is to promote evidence-based knowledge, not to assume that they know the answers based on past experience.


I think this is at the root of my issues with those on the left
The smug certainty that they know all the answers in advance...
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:33 am to
quote:

a bit more than this flawed study


Wow.....

Pretty hypocritical from a guy who admits he bases all he knows on skewed and manipulated data......
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124641 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:35 am to
quote:

It treats parasites not anti-viral.

Yeah, but...It'S fDa ApPrOvEd!
Yet another silly response.

Penicillin is FDA Approved. It does not possess apparent antiviral characteristics.

The concept of FDA approval simply indicates, if prescribed correctly, ivermectin is quite safe for human consumption ... as opposed to journalists' and politicians' insistence to the contrary. Period.
Which BTW, you still have not called out. There is a rationale for ivermectin trials.




Actually there is quite a bit of study on ivermectin's antiviral properties
Posted by JayWhite
Member since Nov 2020
1008 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:38 am to
quote:

There is a rationale for ivermectin trials.


Who said there wasn't?

It treats parasites. It's still being studied. That shouldn't be a controversial statement.
Posted by concrete_tiger
Member since May 2020
6141 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:39 am to
You can use Coca Cola to clean toilets, or you can drink it.

The concept that one thing can do "2" things shouldn't be that shocking to people.

If you told someone that drinking Pepto Bismol would give you an erection, people would rush to stores to buy it.

If you tell people that eating a raw onion will help with arthritis, they'd run to the store to buy onions.

Is Ivermectin killing people? If the news would say, consult your doctor about it, instead of "look at these morons using horse medicine, and it doesn't work at all..." Maybe people wouldn't use horse medicine, and maybe they'd ask their doctor, and maybe a few people could be helped. Maybe just talking to the doctor without the fear of being told a JAB is the only answer would give people courage to talk to a doctor if they feel sick. It's not fricking rocket surgery here.
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:42 am to
Liberals do not think outside the box, period.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111799 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:42 am to
quote:

My biggest question/concern has always been: why is there no push to TREAT the illness?


That’s the trillion dollar question.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111799 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 7:44 am to
The good doctor begins a hasty retreat from his earlier attitude in the thread.
Posted by Jorts R Us
Member since Aug 2013
14925 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 8:03 am to
quote:

Why wouldn't I come back? That isn't me.


Doxing gone wrong? Yikes.
Posted by deltaland
Member since Mar 2011
91197 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 8:12 am to
quote:

think the takeaway is that you can drop the proof right in front of them, from their own source of authority, but the brainwashing has already taken over. I used to call it being in a bubble, but it has escalated to flat-out brainwashing at this point.


Demoralization
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 8:26 am to
quote:

The good doctor begins a hasty retreat from his earlier attitude in the thread.


In this and other threads, I've asked him to answer a simple question:

Simple question: If someone's work depends on skewed or manipulated data, can the results be trusted?

The coward will not answer.
Posted by BuckyCheese
Member since Jan 2015
50434 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 8:54 am to
quote:

I’m as conservative as they come on this board but based on this study alone, I would not recommend ivermectin.



So instead of prescribing something that may very well help, you're one of the docs just sending people home telling them to stay hydrated.

Comical logic.

Posted by LSUROXS
Texas
Member since Sep 2006
7195 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 9:01 am to
quote:

"I'm not reading that"


Ignorance is bliss especially when it goes against your political beliefs.
Posted by Kattail
Member since Aug 2020
3378 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 9:09 am to
quote:

My biggest question/concern has always been: why is there no push to TREAT the illness? I get the push to some extent to want to vaccinate. But why not improve the treatment of those already infected?

They are suppressing drugs like Ivermectin & HCQ that can save lives. It’s evil.



Why not do anything and everything to minimize the suffering and sometimes death caused by this illness. Both Ivermectin and HCQ work to varying degrees, why not give it a try?
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124641 posts
Posted on 8/31/21 at 9:11 am to
quote:

It treats parasites.
Indeed .... and COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the discussion at hand


quote:

There is a rationale for ivermectin trials.

Who said there wasn't?
You did.
quote:

not anti-viral

Yeah ...
The statement was "it is not anti-viral." You agreed it is not.
Now that may have simply been a careless quip. But it is also an unfortunate counterfactual which aligns very much with journalists, politicians, and administrators who take such misinformation as grounds to legitimate prohibition of its use.

If one suggests using ivermectin as a substitute for other care, THAT is a problem. Substitution for other care is not what is being discussed, because we don't know the extent to which ivermectin actually works against CV19. We do know it is safe, relatively inexpensive, and may have an anti-viral effect though.

So when the alternative is "to self monitor for symptoms and to hydrate," it would seem irrational to PROHIBIT the addition of ivermectin to that regimen.

E.g.,
quote:

That's when she stated she sought medical advice from their physician Dr. Fred Wagshul. In the complaint, it states Wagshul supported the use of Ivermectin and prescribed it to him. After the hospital refused to administer the treatment, Julie filed the complaint.
This post was edited on 8/31/21 at 9:19 am
first pageprev pagePage 6 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram