- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Vitamin D, Ivermectin, Vaccine...great information
Posted on 3/31/21 at 12:20 pm to MuleSkinner
Posted on 3/31/21 at 12:20 pm to MuleSkinner
0
Posted on 3/31/21 at 12:24 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
FDA says, “ FDA has not approved ivermectin for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans. ”
Yes, but Ivermectin has been used safely in humans for a very long time. That’s what’s your getting at, right? Vaccine safety?
Posted on 3/31/21 at 1:06 pm to IslandBuckeye
quote:
The point I was making to him was presenting adverse reactions to vaccines without providing the number of those vaccinated with no adverse reactions is fear mongoring.
There are the potential adverse reactions to the vaccines but they are extremely rare.
Are there any potential adverse reactions to this medicine if used properly? What is the success rate of this treatment?
We have been told the success rate of the vaccines and they are pretty good but we don’t know for how long.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 1:46 pm to STEVED00
One of the biggest problems I have with the CDC/NIH is that they crap all over HCL siting a study that was bogus, while other countries are having success.
Then they crap all over Ivermectin and their guidance is not to prescribe it. So they tie the hands of your Dr. Then in Nov they start backing down on these guidance's. All while other countries are having a lot of success.
But a new type of "vaccine" where they inject mRNA which has not been very successful on animals and hasn't been used on humans widespread ever....well they push that like it is the only answer.
Untested, new technology never used on humans before.....CDC/FDA/NIH are all for it
Medicines and therapeutics that have been around for decades and used by billions, with success in other countries in defeating Covid-19....CDC/FDA/NIH we can't have people taking this stuff. It's unproven and there are risks.
This should tell you all you need to know about the corrupt govt and their partnership with big pharma. Ignoring successful therapeutics so they can push vaccines from big pharma. They are not there to help the people, this much is evident.
Then they crap all over Ivermectin and their guidance is not to prescribe it. So they tie the hands of your Dr. Then in Nov they start backing down on these guidance's. All while other countries are having a lot of success.
But a new type of "vaccine" where they inject mRNA which has not been very successful on animals and hasn't been used on humans widespread ever....well they push that like it is the only answer.
Untested, new technology never used on humans before.....CDC/FDA/NIH are all for it
Medicines and therapeutics that have been around for decades and used by billions, with success in other countries in defeating Covid-19....CDC/FDA/NIH we can't have people taking this stuff. It's unproven and there are risks.
This should tell you all you need to know about the corrupt govt and their partnership with big pharma. Ignoring successful therapeutics so they can push vaccines from big pharma. They are not there to help the people, this much is evident.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 2:19 pm to IslandBuckeye
Island into still wondering how the doctor for our facility was as to use hydroxy. I have no clue how much it did/didn’t help but I know it was used on every positive resident.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 2:21 pm to MikeBRLA
Someone I know said the pharmacist who gave her injection told her 8 months. Said that came with the information.
Not sure which company.
Not sure which company.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 2:22 pm to LSU316
It won't be just like the flu shot, which is a true vaccine and unlike mRNA, which is an experimental gene therapy with unknown long-term effects.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 2:22 pm to Hobnailboot
Hob was is prescription or was it from the feed store?
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:21 pm to IslandBuckeye
quote:
IslandBuckeye
Long story short, is the doctor full of it or is he on to something???
This post was edited on 3/31/21 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:25 pm to winkchance
quote:
winkchance
my post went way over your head and/or you are responding to some argument I never made or claimed.
quote:
How could anyone be questioning what they have heard this past year and be a bit skeptical to scared.
your sarcasm is noted and is misplaced.
I was referring to individual data interpretation not CDC/national guidelines. IDGAF about fauci, what he or the CDC says about covid or the vaccines. It has no impact on the data showing the covid vaccine is safe and adverse reactions are equivalent to other vaccines we use routinely. fauci or the CDC and their guidelines are irrelevant to the fact that the vaccines are safe.
Batman is as relevant as your fauci timeline regarding vaccine safety data.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:31 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
I highlighted the key word for you. Which also means it could NOT provide 2-3 years of protection. Hell, there are already reports of “vaccinated” people getting COVID-19.
bruh nothing in medicine is 100% and the vaccine never claimed to be. Of course a small proportion of vaccinated folks can still catch COVID. Its the same with all of our other vaccines, you can still get the diseases. although the illness will be less severe and shorter duration. a vaccine isn't a magic wand
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:35 pm to tiger91
quote:
Hob was is prescription or was it from the feed store?
Went to the vet
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:41 pm to jp4lsu
quote:
Untested, new technology never used on humans before.....CDC/FDA/NIH are all for it
although it is the first widespread usage of an mRNA vax, its far from 'untested/new'. mRNA tech has been tested and researched for well over a decade.
maybe your argument made sense 1 year ago, but now multiple vaccines have completed phase 3 trials, we have a over a year's worth of data on human trials. Around the world hundreds of millions have been vaccinated and there is no statistical difference in adverse effects than vaccines we routinely use.
if there were those unspecified long term side effects everyone is so scared of, we would already be seeing those manifest, but crickets. At this point with the wealth of data we have being afraid of the vaccine makes about as much sense as being afraid of monsters under your bed
This post was edited on 3/31/21 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 3/31/21 at 4:48 pm to AMS
AMS, you missed the point.
They (CDC/NIH/FDA) jump on something that is relatively new with limited testing and had to have special waivers to be used. It is not FDA approved because they haven't had the time to rigorously test it.
Yet they are against therapeutics and medicine that have been used for decades and had very high success rates in treating CV-19. Which could've been employed in late spring or summer.
They (CDC/NIH/FDA) jump on something that is relatively new with limited testing and had to have special waivers to be used. It is not FDA approved because they haven't had the time to rigorously test it.
Yet they are against therapeutics and medicine that have been used for decades and had very high success rates in treating CV-19. Which could've been employed in late spring or summer.
Posted on 3/31/21 at 5:22 pm to jp4lsu
quote:
Yet they are against therapeutics and medicine that have been used for decades and had very high success rates in treating CV-19. Which could've been employed in late spring or summer.
This
Posted on 3/31/21 at 5:45 pm to STEVED00
there is no vaccine and no covid
Posted on 3/31/21 at 5:52 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:FDA also says, "There is no FDA approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19."
FDA says, “ FDA has not approved ivermectin for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans. ”
Posted on 3/31/21 at 6:00 pm to jp4lsu
quote:
they haven't had the time to rigorously test it.
wrong. mRNA tech has been researched+tested for over a decade. also it cleared FDA phase 3 trials (thats the rigorous phase).
quote:
Yet they are against therapeutics and medicine that have been used for decades and had very high success rates in treating CV-19. Which could've been employed in late spring or summer.
lmao nice, basing your argument off small non-rigorous studies that you had just decided was so important in the previous sentence. even knowing those studies are immensely less rigorous than the vaccine testing.
your logic is hilarious... those drugs aren't FDA approved for COVID, they have not been rigorously studied for COVID aaaaand they don't even have special use waivers for COVID.
This post was edited on 3/31/21 at 6:02 pm
Posted on 5/17/21 at 11:09 am to jp4lsu
For those who have used it, where are yall getting the mectin?
Posted on 5/17/21 at 11:17 am to Herooftheday
Urgent care doctor who cares about his patients and not politics.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News