Coronavirus

[RoarEmotion]

It’s not just that though RE. It’s not just about infecting themselves or their family. Loved ones. It’s also about infecting others in the community trying to do the right thing and/or haven’t had access to vaccinations yet.

This is what *smile* me with anyone who says “I don’t care if I get Covid” because quite frankly I don’t care if you do ahole. I care about who you might give it to and make ill or kill.

This isn’t an “I” or “me” virus. It’s a “we” virus. Unfortunately, there are just huge proportions of dumb and self focussed people who don’t get this or don’t care.

I agree it’s a we virus.

Do you think if people REALLY believed (ie at an emotional level) they would kill their loved ones they would exhibit these behaviours? I don’t in general think this would be the case.

you can argue for sure that they should know. But they don’t….. many smart people I know get surprised at the 1000+ nsw case numbers (and thinking about 8000 in a month) and then but it was obvious weeks ago if maths is your friend. It just doesn’t feel believable for many folks because they can’t touch taste and feel it. I really think most don’t get it and just don’t think yet that it can happen to them because their nose wasn’t covered or they caught up with their friends like they always had.

unfortunately we will see the outcome of this over the coming months.

 

[AngryAnt]

Brian Stelter

https://www.thewrap.com/cnn-brian-stelter-shredded-by-own-guest-michael-wolff-video/

Prednizone is interesting. You wouldn't take it unless you had significant breathing issues. It's a steroid and used in moderate to severe covid. Probably an overkill if he only had mild symptoms.

That CNN piece was embarrassing. The pause when the 'medical expert' was asked about safety was telling. She totally avoided human medication (approved by FDA) and started waffling on about horse medication.

CNN are real pimps for their owners, board members and major advertisers. I suppose it's what you guys consider real news.

BTW the medical expert in that CNN clip was an example of a 'biostitute' (great term )

It's almost as you believe Ivermectin is made by mom and pop stores in the local neighborhood and not big pharma.

 

[Redford]

I agree it’s a we virus.

Do you think if people REALLY believed (ie at an emotional level) they would kill their loved ones they would exhibit these behaviours? I don’t in general think this would be the case.

you can argue for sure that they should know. But they don’t….. many smart people I know get surprised at the 1000+ nsw case numbers (and thinking about 8000 in a month) and then but it was obvious weeks ago if maths is your friend. It just doesn’t feel believable for many folks because they can’t touch taste and feel it. I really think most don’t get it and just don’t think yet that it can happen to them because their nose wasn’t covered or they caught up with their friends like they always had.

unfortunately we will see the outcome of this over the coming months.

What you are talking about there RE is the self focussed and narrow thinking of humans that’s been getting worse and worse the last 20 years to the point people often end up doing self harm to themselves. Be it Covid, narcissistic behaviour…whatever. Emma Murray and Ben Crowe talk about it all the time. If it’s not happening to ME, right now, this very instant, then it’s not happening at all, or at best, their thinking is its only happening to others.

Selflessness should be taught in schools.

 

[Mr T.]

I may need to report myself for this but it brightened my day.

 

[lamb22]

Nice of you to quote my post, but you forgot this bit:



My question remains, apparently you can use the Horse Parasite treatment as a prophylactic, so, are you? Or are you all talk?

Anecdotal evidence is not accepted in scientific circles for very good reasons. Find me a double blind, peer reviewed, test of Ivermectin in which it is the only treatment and we will start to get somewhere. YouTube videos simply don't cut it.

All the vaccines were tested in this way and it is grossly irresponsible to promote this drug without the scientific evidence to back up your case. There are very good reasons why we get new drugs and new vaccines extensively tested before they are recommended.

DS

Hi David. It's a fast moving thread so you might have missed my reply to you at post 16,847.

I love your naivety when it comes to the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Firstly you should know that knowledge always flows up and not down and even in competent and well intentioned bodies there will be a lag between proving efficacy and approval. Secondly the FDA is neither competent nor impartial in these matters.

The FDA has recently approved an Alzheimer's drug for Biogen which has had ONE randomised control trial. The trial found that the drug WAS NOT effective. The trial found that 30% of participants had serious side effects like brain swelling or brain bleeding. The Advisory panel of 11 experts assessing the drug voted 10 No 1 abstained. The FDA approved the drug anyway. Three members of the advisory panel resigned.

Now you are a reasonable sort of bloke. Maybe you can explain why such an approval can be granted on that evidence in a non emergency or pandemic setting. To help you with your considerations Biogen will charge $US 56,000 for a yearly treatment.

Even your comment that "vaccines need to be extensively tested" before approval is laughable. The FDA actually has a rule that before they can approve a drug it needs to be proven at least 50% effective. As you know the FDA has just approved the Pfizer vaccine. The CDC has data that the vaccine's effectiveness has dropped to 78% in New York, Israeli authorities have found that Pfizer effectiveness drops to 39%. The FDA knows that the effectiveness for Pfizer is dropping yet in its press release it claimed that Pfizer was 91.3% effective ( the March figure) even though they know and have data showing this is not true. Also vaccines require long term follow up in trials on adverse events . This has not been done. The editor of the BMJ a pretty prestigious journal has blasted this approval in an opinion piece.

Does the FDA think these data justify the first full approval of a covid-19 vaccine? - The BMJ

The FDA should demand adequate, controlled studies with long term follow up, and make data publicly available, before granting full approval to covid-19 vaccines, says Peter Doshi On 28 July [...]More...

blogs.bmj.com

Biogen stock falls after FDA calls for federal investigation into Alzheimer's drug approval

Biogen shares fell Friday after the head of the FDA called for an investigation into the recent approval of the company's Alzheimer's drug, Aduhelm.

www.cnbc.com

 

[lamb22]

By the way David I have posted details of numerous RCTs and furthermore meta anlalyses, which are in terms of scientific evidence considered superior to individual RCTs (as you no doubt know) which prove efficacy.

As a general tip it is actually worthwhile bringing some level of knowledge to a debate rather than banal cliches.

To get you started try the Tess Lawrie et al meta analysis, the Pierre Kory et al meta analysis and the WHO Andrew Hill et al meta analysis.

 

[mrposhman]

Brian Stelter

https://www.thewrap.com/cnn-brian-stelter-shredded-by-own-guest-michael-wolff-video/

Prednizone is interesting. You wouldn't take it unless you had significant breathing issues. It's a steroid and used in moderate to severe covid. Probably an overkill if he only had mild symptoms.

That CNN piece was embarrassing. The pause when the 'medical expert' was asked about safety was telling. She totally avoided human medication (approved by FDA) and started waffling on about horse medication.

CNN are real pimps for their owners, board members and major advertisers. I suppose it's what you guys consider real news.

BTW the medical expert in that CNN clip was an example of a 'biostitute' (great term )

How do you know she was paid off to make those statements? Do you know that for sure, or are you just mud slinging?

Not sure what the video had to do with any of this, everyone knows that Big Pharma owns the US, the fact that they can't get universal healthcare is driven by this as 1 of the major components of universal healthcare held in many nations is a cap on prescriptions medication costs. Many of those regulated healthcare industries outside of the US also prohibit the provision for kick backs from pharma companies to GP's, hence then they have no interest in providing repeat prescriptions or in promoting 1 drug over another. The US has a massively corrupt healthcare industry but I'm not sure what you now stating that has to do with the studies that other nations have done. I've shown that the UK are doing a PROPER CONTROLLED STUDY INTO IVERMECTIN. What do you not get about requiring a controlled study into medication? I notice you didn't answer my question several posts ago, about the vast majority of Ivermectin studies providing purely anecdotal evidence?

 

[lamb22]

Poshy, if that Medical 'expert' had mentioned how safe Ivermectin was (one of the safest medicines ever made) she would lose her gig on CNN. You could see she was uncomfortable when she said every drug has side effects. The banal statement that high doses are harmful is nonsense. No respectable proponent is reccommending unsafe doses. Water is toxic at a high enough dose.

It is simply not true that the evidence is just anecdotal.

Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of 262 studies

Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of 262 studies

c19ivermectin.com

The Levels of Evidence and their role in Evidence-Based Medicine

As the name suggests, evidence-based medicine (EBM), is about finding evidence and using that evidence to make clinical decisions. A cornerstone of EBM is the hierarchical system of classifying evidence. This hierarchy is known as the levels of evidence. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[AngryAnt]

Poshy, if that Medical 'expert' had mentioned how safe Ivermectin was (one of the safest medicines ever made) she would lose her gig on CNN. You could see she was uncomfortable when she said every drug has side effects. The banal statement that high doses are harmful is nonsense. No respectable proponent is reccommending unsafe doses. Water is toxic at a high enough dose.

It is simply not true that the evidence is just anecdotal.

Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of 262 studies

Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of 262 studies

c19ivermectin.com

The Levels of Evidence and their role in Evidence-Based Medicine

As the name suggests, evidence-based medicine (EBM), is about finding evidence and using that evidence to make clinical decisions. A cornerstone of EBM is the hierarchical system of classifying evidence. This hierarchy is known as the levels of evidence. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You are seriously going with c19ivermectin.com as your source?

 

[lamb22]

You are seriously going with c19ivermectin.com as your source?

Are you kidding? Do you think they hijack the hyperlinks to the journal papers and trials?

Poshy asked for evidence. The page is a link to all the relevant evidence, including equivocal or negative.

You really don't read anything do you. It's all knee jerk bias confirmation for you! Or maybe you do read it and it fingers in the ears stuff and block out the world.

 

[AngryAnt]

Hi David. It's a fast moving thread so you might have missed my reply to you at post 16,847.

I love your naivety when it comes to the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Firstly you should know that knowledge always flows up and not down and even in competent and well intentioned bodies there will be a lag between proving efficacy and approval. Secondly the FDA is neither competent nor impartial in these matters.

The FDA has recently approved an Alzheimer's drug for Biogen which has had ONE randomised control trial. The trial found that the drug WAS NOT effective. The trial found that 30% of participants had serious side effects like brain swelling or brain bleeding. The Advisory panel of 11 experts assessing the drug voted 10 No 1 abstained. The FDA approved the drug anyway. Three members of the advisory panel resigned.

Now you are a reasonable sort of bloke. Maybe you can explain why such an approval can be granted on that evidence in a non emergency or pandemic setting. To help you with your considerations Biogen will charge $US 56,000 for a yearly treatment.

Even your comment that "vaccines need to be extensively tested" before approval is laughable. The FDA actually has a rule that before they can approve a drug it needs to be proven at least 50% effective. As you know the FDA has just approved the Pfizer vaccine. The CDC has data that the vaccine's effectiveness has dropped to 78% in New York, Israeli authorities have found that Pfizer effectiveness drops to 39%. The FDA knows that the effectiveness for Pfizer is dropping yet in its press release it claimed that Pfizer was 91.3% effective ( the March figure) even though they know and have data showing this is not true. Also vaccines require long term follow up in trials on adverse events . This has not been done. The editor of the BMJ a pretty prestigious journal has blasted this approval in an opinion piece.

Does the FDA think these data justify the first full approval of a covid-19 vaccine? - The BMJ

The FDA should demand adequate, controlled studies with long term follow up, and make data publicly available, before granting full approval to covid-19 vaccines, says Peter Doshi On 28 July [...]More...

blogs.bmj.com

Biogen stock falls after FDA calls for federal investigation into Alzheimer's drug approval

Biogen shares fell Friday after the head of the FDA called for an investigation into the recent approval of the company's Alzheimer's drug, Aduhelm.

www.cnbc.com

Speaking of the FDA

 

[AngryAnt]

Are you kidding? Do you think they hijack the hyperlinks to the journal papers and trials?

Poshy asked for evidence. The page is a link to all the relevant evidence, including equivocal or negative.

We've been through the lit reviews already lamby.

 

[mrposhman]

Never mind even getting in a car. Being a pedestrian or riding a bicycle in an urban area. Swimming in a river or the surf and the chance of drowning. Playing contact sport and copping a life threatening injury......the list goes on. Yet we do these things every day.

The other thing that makes the vaccine shopping principle ridiculous. Most of them have some minor risk of side effects. And the difference in risk profile BETWEEN them then becomes even more miniscule than the overall risk.

Finally, finally, the media are starting to do the right thing, but whether thats enough to change the perception of AZ.

9 News were just running a story on Covid, and were showing the vaccine status, even showing that Pfizer is now the dominant vaccine in Australia, they did the segment with the very important stat that the chance to die from AZ in Australia is 1 in a million. Still have no idea why people are still vaccine shopping at this rate, particularly for the 500-600k people that have not had a vaccine but are over 60.

 

[TigerForce]

Ch 7 news just showed McGun looking depressed as his hairdressing business is in lockdown. I know how you feel Luke.

 

[Panthera Tigris]

Finally, finally, the media are starting to do the right thing, but whether thats enough to change the perception of AZ.

9 News were just running a story on Covid, and were showing the vaccine status, even showing that Pfizer is now the dominant vaccine in Australia, they did the segment with the very important stat that the chance to die from AZ in Australia is 1 in a million. Still have no idea why people are still vaccine shopping at this rate, particularly for the 500-600k people that have not had a vaccine but are over 60.

My wife was an early immunisation recipient, because she has genetic health ailments that put her in a priority group. That was pretty much when all there was, was AZ. So that’s what she got.

When I became eligible, we booked mine at one of the state government clinics in Hobart (6 week wait at the time) which pretty much is just dishing out Pfizer, so I simply waited my turn and got Pfizer.

Like the old saying goes. “You get what you get and don’t get upset.”

 

[mrposhman]

My wife was an early immunisation recipient, because she has genetic health ailments that put her in a priority group. That was pretty much when all there was, was AZ. So that’s what she got.

When I became eligible, we booked mine at one of the state government clinics in Hobart (6 week wait at the time) which pretty much is just dishing out Pfizer, so I simply waited my turn and got Pfizer.

Like the old saying goes. “You get what you get and don’t get upset.”

I wonder if those over 60 that won't get AZ and prefer to wait for Pfizer have seen the daily deaths coming out of NSW. Its almost always age (usually 70+), unvaccinated etc etc.

Personally, I don't think over 60's or at least over 70's shouldn't be offered Pfizer. If they want to wait for Pfizer, thats fine, but they should have to wait until after all the 16-39's have had the opportunity to be vaccinated. Those over 70's want to make a choice when those under 40 are now given a choice but at a much higher risk rate.

Not sure why its even a debate. Why would you give AZ to a person under 40 with a risk rate of 1 in 40,000 just because someone over 70 (with a risk of 1 in a million) just decides that they don't want it.

 

[lamb22]

Memes... of course. Here was I concentrating on data. Irony on so many levels on here. Brighten's the day up I suppose.

 

[AngryAnt]

Memes... of course. Here was I concentrating on data. Irony on so many levels on here. Brighten's the day up I suppose.

Data or Youtubes from Joe Rogan who flipflops between an anti-vaxxer and a *smile*, and some other dude in an ill-fitting suit and toupee?

That isn't data Lamb.

 

[lamb22]

Data or Youtubes from Joe Rogan who flipflops between an anti-vaxxer and a *smile*, and some other dude in an ill-fitting suit and toupee?

That isn't data Lamb.

I don't even know what this means . Are you suggesting I have posted Joe Rogan videos? Who's the dude with the toupe?

Amazingly you are less cogent than usual

 

[AngryAnt]

I don't even know what this means . Are you suggesting I have posted Joe Rogan videos? Who's the dude with the toupe?

Amazingly you are less cogent than usual

I am normally pretty cogent, agreed, but we all have off days.

This is the toupee guy you posted...


Post in thread 'Coronavirus' https://www.puntroadend.com/threads/coronavirus.55647/post-2664050

The Posh posted the Rogan video. You just gave Joe your full support, so I retract that non-cogent accusation.