Pushed by con artists on those "salt of the earth" types who really ought to know dosing differences between a half-ton horse and a soccer mom who's 115 pounds soaking wet and carrying a bowling ball.
Lifting Masks = Back to Getting Down With The Sickness
- Thread starter hanselthecaretaker
- Start date
Sure thing, bob.
Feel free to come and haunt me even.
Keeping busy, haven't we?
What is it with these doorknobs thinking anti-parasitic drugs will have any effect on a viral infection?It has. The new rage is ivermectin. People have even been taking veterinary versions of it (inevitably leading to hospitalization due to dosing differences).
FAQ: COVID-19 and Ivermectin Intended for Animals
Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? A: No. Ivermectin is not approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19.www.fda.gov
They're fucking idiots who know nothing about anything related to science and medicine (because they openly criticize both fields as evil), yet think they're experts in the fields.
It reminds me of a supervisor I had many years ago, who I heard say to a client "well the doctors say this, but, you know what doctors know" in a very dismissive tone. But once HE got prostate cancer, ho BOY was he listening to those doctors and taking their advice! Idiotic hypocrites, the lot of them.
Disclaimer: I am not encouraging the use of ivermectin to treat covid
Wikipedia does say: "In vitro, ivermectin has antiviral effects against several distinct positive-sense single-strand RNA viruses, including SARS-CoV-2."
COVID-19 drug repurposing research - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
* * *
Whilst I appreciate positives of the general public being able to look up information themselves, it often ceases to be a positive when they do not have appropriate skills to tell good information from bad.
One of the particular problems are people so inveterately hostile to or suspicious of authoritiy - such governments, institutions, pharmaceutical companies, even the field of medicine itself - that they deliberately seek out a lot of the bad information. And not only that, they are producing the majority of it, too.
In this specific case, it's not only the general public looking up the information themselves, parts of the media are helping too, including the Wall Street Journal
Last edited:
Yes, it always needs to be remembered that the media is both comprised of and sells content to the general public. This means both that there are fucking idiots already in the media who want to spread misinformation that they sadly adhere to, and also a substantial market niche for fucking idiocy from which to derive sales.
This might therefore tell us something about the WSJ's contributors and customer base. Although I would be inclined to temper that by pointing out it is not unusual for news organisations to print alternative ideas, "both sides of an argument", and many views that do not reflect the institutional beliefs of the organisation.
Last edited:
Let's also not forget that the WSJ is a Rupert Murdoch owned media outlet, and their opinion section is known to sometimes publish outlandish partisan nonsense.
Yes. A certain form of belief in crank medicine has taken root in the US right wing (whether rich or poor), and the WSJ is an organ providing news for the US right. So the WSJ will throw them some meat to keep them sweet.
My policy on masks is this. I am not going to wear it when and where I can get away with it. And the left, and the right will flame me for my reasoning on why I do so.
Think about who is dying to Covid-19 right now. The unvaccinated. Guess who is mostly unvaccinated; right-wingers. And what do most of these people believe; climate change is not real, or manmade.
So if you believe these things that will harm me in the future. Why should I protect you by wearing a mask. Why should I be the bigger person, when their political opinion is that I should die in a climate disaster in 2050, and beyond. In my opinion, this should be the opinion of any liberal, or left-winger. They wouldn't wear masks for you, so why would you do so for them.
Well, you can be a good person, and etc., etc., etc. Fuck that, what do I get from being a good person, more climate change from people riding F-150s. More insane ring-wing policies. LIke refusing refugees, more brutal policing, and etc. I don't agree.
Also, I am not near the immunocompromised, and kids so that's a dumb argument.
Think about who is dying to Covid-19 right now. The unvaccinated. Guess who is mostly unvaccinated; right-wingers. And what do most of these people believe; climate change is not real, or manmade.
So if you believe these things that will harm me in the future. Why should I protect you by wearing a mask. Why should I be the bigger person, when their political opinion is that I should die in a climate disaster in 2050, and beyond. In my opinion, this should be the opinion of any liberal, or left-winger. They wouldn't wear masks for you, so why would you do so for them.
Well, you can be a good person, and etc., etc., etc. Fuck that, what do I get from being a good person, more climate change from people riding F-150s. More insane ring-wing policies. LIke refusing refugees, more brutal policing, and etc. I don't agree.
Also, I am not near the immunocompromised, and kids so that's a dumb argument.
By your own logic, they don't believe that you SHOULD die in a climate disaster, they believe that you WON'T die in a climate disaster, because, like you said, they believe that "climate change is not real, or manmade"
"I don't trust the gubmit/doctors/MSM/UN, but you know what, Random dude on the internet and that orange guy who bankrupted almost every business he's ever owned and ran the government I distrust so much, those guys know what's up!"
yeah, they say they don't want to take the vaccine because they don't like to put experimental drugs in their systems....but their more than happy to take fucking horse anti-parasite medicine on FAR less established scientific evidence. So apparently they ARE happy to put experimental drugs in their system. Logic!
People insecure in their intelligence are often desperate to latch onto anything that makes them feel smart for a second. Facebook has been a major source of this problem.
But the man on FOX/OAN told them it was okay! Those guys are better than Doctors because they have a TV Show!
If Civilization crashes down to the ground the next few decades, I won't be shocked in the least. Maybe the next go around will get it right somehow.
"Here lies Humanity. They stupided themselves to death"
I saw a little snippet about the UK's nascent OAN equivalent, where one of the
So the academic afterwards went onto Twitter and said a somewhat intemperate piece about some twit on TV asking him about HCQ. And that was a mistake, because of course he got his Twitter account dogpiled by the crank medicine and anti-vaxx brigades, with the gleeful assistance of the presenter and channel.
This is always a danger of messing with these guys, because they might be staggeringly clueless about the stuff they're presenting and/or ideologically half-baked, but what they do tend to know is how to manipulate the public. They have advantages, because you're fighting on their territory. They are likely to have better communication skills, control the interview and the liberty to prepare traps, and the backing of a media organisation to amplify their message and control/edit pieces to their benefit.
And so it proved. He ambushed the academic with bogus science - the academic is unlikely to know what those US academic said exactly, and it wouldn't be easy to refute them on the spot anyway. So at best, it's become one expert word against another, and of course by choosing Yale and Harvard, the presenter has implied they're at better universities than Reading, so more likely to be right. I think just shutting it down was a viable option for the academic - although of course this was characterised as the academic being unable to dispute the presenter's "evidence". The academic taking it to social media was only going hand even more publicity and power to the presenter, particularly with ill-humour as it made him look less cool and rational.
And this, kids, is the sort of way misinformation can be made to stick against the truth, and why people believe gobshites on YouTube and TV.