- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The real reason HCQ, ivermectin and any other early treatment for COVID was demonized.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 4:40 pm to BamaAtl
Posted on 8/30/22 at 4:40 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
No, because the plural of anecdote has never been data.
LOL
there were 11 separate case studies from that one origin point, meathead
1
Posted on 8/30/22 at 4:53 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
...because they don't work.
Ivermectin stops the nuclear transport of viral proteins, aka the spike protein. If it's administered early, it keeps the viral load of COVID low, which allows your body to fight off the virus.
This post was edited on 8/30/22 at 4:54 pm
Posted on 8/30/22 at 5:00 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
...because they don't work.
And how do you know they don't work....you don't know shite!
Posted on 8/30/22 at 5:12 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
there were 11 separate case studies from that one origin point
That's a statistical power of "lol"
Posted on 8/30/22 at 5:31 pm to BamaAtl
You cited the approval study for Pfizer’s vax which is now clearly fraudulent. Not sure you should be taken seriously on any of this.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 5:46 pm to BamaAtl
Go take a look at New Zealand and how they are faring right now.
Maybe one of the highest % of vaxxed total population.
Some of the most draconian restrictions .
They did well very early on restricting the spread of Alpha in the early days.
Right now they are being absolutely ravaged by this newest weak Omicron BA. 5 variant.
Contrast that with South Africa. They kicked the BA 5 wave quickly with few hospitalizations.
They had comparably
. A very low vaccination status and rate.
It’s beyond dispute at current, that the fully vaxxed and boosted are getting their asses handed to them by these new variants.
The non vaxxed are not getting the virus.
Maybe one of the highest % of vaxxed total population.
Some of the most draconian restrictions .
They did well very early on restricting the spread of Alpha in the early days.
Right now they are being absolutely ravaged by this newest weak Omicron BA. 5 variant.
Contrast that with South Africa. They kicked the BA 5 wave quickly with few hospitalizations.
They had comparably
. A very low vaccination status and rate.
It’s beyond dispute at current, that the fully vaxxed and boosted are getting their asses handed to them by these new variants.
The non vaxxed are not getting the virus.
This post was edited on 8/30/22 at 5:47 pm
Posted on 8/30/22 at 5:57 pm to the808bass
quote:
Not sure you should be taken seriously on any of this.
This has been a given for quite a while.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:06 pm to GumboPot
quote:
The FDA can only issue EAU status to medications if an alternative is not available.
For some reason I knew this but the point at the time did not fully sink in.
Yep. This plague could have ended by the beginning of May, but that fricks up Fauci, Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Establishment's bottom line. It's the greatest crime and practical joke in American history. Only slavery can compare to it's level of evil that we've inflicted on our fellow man here. This was an attack on our bodies and civil liberties never seen before in this country (save again for slavery).
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:12 pm to the808bass
quote:
This isn’t the issue on a technical level. Ivermectin and HCQ being approved treatments for Covid would not have disallowed an EUA for a Covid vaccine.
Oh you're fricking wrong there. It absolutely would have destroyed the vaccine. DeSantis got close to destroying the emergency use vaccination authorization with his use of monoclonal antibodies, but by the time he was using them in October, the vaccine had been created and was no longer a threat to the emergency use authorization.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:12 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Oh you're fricking wrong there. It absolutely would have destroyed the vaccine.
I’m not. Thank you for your input.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:16 pm to STEVED00
quote:
Whether HCQ/Ivermectin works or not is a discussion in itself. When Drs swear that it does.
Fact is that the pharmaceutical lobby had an EXTREME Financial incentive to conclude that those treatments DID NOT work bc if they did then their vaccine would be ineligible for EUA!
Knowing everything thing we know now, it is a very logical assumption that HCQ/IVR were purposely down played in order to allow the vaccines to move through.
Fauci bought pretty much the entire country's supply of HCQ and Ivermectin in March 2020 and then reimbursed the pharmaceutical companies with tax incentives. HCQ and Ivermectin cost less than $10 a treatment, so instead he recommended Remdesivir to be used on the back end of the treatment which killed many thousands of people. Fauci has to be charged with crimes against humanity for this among other things. They'll have to have him in a bulletproof booth by the end of the trial (if it's publicly broadcast) for when people really find out who this evil mother fricker is. He is America's Eichmann.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:19 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
Ivermectin is about a buck a dose
Paxlovid or whatever is 500 or whatever a dose.
And my mom had Covid last month and she said she started feeling better when she STOPPED taking Paxlovid.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:24 pm to GumboPot
quote:
All the establishment preached was:
Mask
Social distancing, and
Vaccine.
No early treatment.
Or exercise, or diet, or Vitamin D, or Zinc. Nope just stay locked in your house or apartment, and with that it was gold since the virus spread through the air vents.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:30 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
That isn't a peer-reviewed study, and it's not methodologically sound. We went over this when it was posted.
Are these the same peers where Fauci oversees their entire budgets and can end their careers if they don't fall in line?
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:31 pm to the808bass
quote:
I’m not. Thank you for your input.
quote:
For FDA to issue an EUA, there must be no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the candidate product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating the disease or condition.
FDA says you are
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:31 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Sure.
The study is published in a pay-to-publish 'journal' with false peer-review.
The study is a population-level observational study with limited ability to discern any characteristics that may have subjects self-select into either of the 2 study groups and arbitrary study start/stop dates (Jul 30...why? what happened July 29th?, when the program ostensibly started Jul 8/9).
The study didn't have an IRB until data collection was complete but claimed to have a protocol at the beginning of the study period which makes it not a prospective study as the authors claim.
The study protocol changed halfway through for no reason explained by the authors and conveniently sliced the non-intervention group n in half.
The study authors admitted they had no way to track adherence and this prophylaxis dose could have been unused by a significant proportion of the intervention group. The city of Itajaí recorded and posted how many subjects picked up subsequent dose series. Of the 140k initial ivermectin group only 80k returned for dose pack 2, and only 8k completed the 5-pack regimen recommended.
The study has numerous errors in the data presented in the tables - subgroup counts change with no explanation, and their exclusion criteria don't match up - e.g. no deaths under 30 occur before 'matching' but somehow 3 deaths under 30 occur after 'matching'.
The study used an opaque propensity score matching scheme that wasn't necessary and somehow reduced the intervention mortality n from 62 to 25, but left the non-intervention n preserved at 79.
The study matched interventions to the controls in order to fudge their numbers, when normally you do the opposite.
Finally, the first 2 authors listed on the study disclose that they are being or have been recently funded by the company that produces ivermectin (Vitamedic) and have a history of unethical work.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:32 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
BamaAtl
quote:
Yep
…
quote:
However, even when significantly diluted by exclusion of disputed trials, meta-analysis continues to show an improved mortality outcome. Moreover, additional data from the later trials are broadly consistent with the original findings.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:33 pm to memphisplaya
quote:
I'll counter with you showing a peer reviewed study including long term results that prove your point
Peer reviewed studies are such a fricking joke. All that happens if a peer says something Anthony Fauci doesn't like, he ends their career and threatens to end anyone else's who would dare defend anyone who would defy him and his iron fist.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:35 pm to Lightning
And yet they approved Remdesivir, three vaccines, 4 different Mabs and two antivirals (among others). If the theory in the OP is accurate, they could’ve only approved one of the above.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 7:35 pm to the808bass
quote:
I’m not. Thank you for your input.
Read this book:
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News