Our Covid Response

[Phoenixmgs]

It's getting testing because a bunch of morons are taking it anyway.

Ivermectin is getting tested because it has reasons that it can work.

The vaccines were trialled with two doses two weeks apart. That's what the proven science defended. The theory was that a longer gap had a good chance of better immunity, but that's not tested and proven so it is therefore a risk to proceed on a different protocol than the one established.

Again, you're not looking at the big picture. Even if I'm wrong about immunity being better after a long gap, you're still getting more immunity across the population in the same amount of time. Also, there is data showing longer gap is better. You're so attached to official recommendations it's ridiculous, your own country didn't go by those recommendations anyway and is there any data saying England did it wrong vs say the US or Israel. It's past theory at this point, there's plenty of real world data to look at.

Delaying a COVID vaccine’s second dose boosts immune response

Older people who waited 11–12 weeks for their second jab had higher peak antibody levels than did those who waited only 3 weeks.

www.nature.com

Yes, it is.

No it's not, you didn't watch it. Plus why does it matter, they went over all the major issues one at a time, even if it is chummy, the data can be gotten from it.

I'm right in what I've said on the drugs (which you are misrepresenting anyway), I'm right that there is evidence excessive Vit D might be dangerous, and I am right to point out that the science does not at all defend how safe you think outdoors is.

I posted studies from people taking 10k or 20k (I forget which) for years and nothing happened. There's no evidence saying what is now considered "normal' amounts (way more than a measly 400 IUs) is dangerous. Outdoors is very safe, all you produced is that it's possible to get covid outdoors, which nobody said it isn't. The extremely small chance of getting covid outside is nothing anyone should be worrying about. You make really poor arguments like saying there's only less covid outside because people are inside more often, which negates all the science about ventilation being the #1 contributor to lowering covid transmission inside, opening a window is so many more times effective than people wearing masks for example.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Then you've failed basic reading comprehension.

Wrong. You said they don't go three feet: this is a small but significant attempt to move the goalposts.

And herein again you display your ability to read science only to mine and distort it for the interpretation you want.

A metre is longer than three feet (by about 10%), so "less than a metre" can be more than three feet. Never mind that the range is greater, because if you're arguing that a distance such as 2'10" doesn't simplify to three feet for the purposes of general discussion, you can just f*** off.

Some sensible context in language use is then necessary here. "Less than a metre" means "up to close to a metre". We can understand this context, because they also say "more than 6m" by sneezing: but they clearly don't mean that to include as far as 100m, which is more than 6m. Were it substantially less than a metre, they would surely have used a term such as "about half a metre".

Next, you need to think about real world situations. Breathing varies from light to heavy, with the latter at higher velocities (and thus further droplet spreads) than the notional value of 1 m/s the paper used. Furthermore, as per the sentence you quoted yourself, this distance only refers to the largest diameter droplets which fall fastest anyway, even though we know smaller droplets can carry virus (hence airborne transmission).

You can't even read your own studies you link to me and you talk about me having reading comprehension issues. I said normal breathing doesn't travel more than 3 feet (or 3 feet apparently, which doesn't change the point of the argument) and you post a study to prove me wrong and your own study says breathing is less than 1m of distance. It's common sense that downward breathing out of your nose is not going 3 feet, I didn't need a study to know that. Seriously, what the fuck? So what if it goes exactly 3 feet or 3.1 feet, the fucking point is it doesn't go very far at all (not that it goes a tenth of a foot farther than my "goalpost"). And, your study that you posted said less the 1m, which could be 3.1 feet or 1 foot (I couldn't care less honestly). And even if it is indeed going 3.1 feet (and I'm wrong by less than an inch), it's going that distance mainly downward and not that distance to another person. The point is the virus will build up in the air after time and go more than 3 feet and 6 feet and whatever distance some public health person picks out of their ass next, and you need good ventilation to actually help that from not happening.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

And this is why I've been against lockdowns because there needs to be a cost/benefit analysis done to show they actually do cause less harm. And look what happens when you do an actual cost/benefit analysis...

“The benefit of lockdown, therefore, was the avoidance of this extra 22,333 years of lost life. However, the cost of lockdown… was 6,300,000 years of lost life.”

https://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf

 

[MrCalavera]

No to lockdowns, no to masks, no to vaccines.
"When will Covid end? "

 

[Buyetyen]

Ivermectin is getting tested because it has reasons that it can work.

No it doesn't. Dude, just stop. We're all tired of dealing with your arrogance.

 

[Casual Shinji]

No to lockdowns, no to masks, no to vaccines.
"When will Covid end? "

There's so many jokes I wanted to make in response to this, but each one made me fear some idiot would take it seriously and start more conspiracy nonsense based on my sarcastic remark. That's how bad shit has gotten, that's how fucked the human race is.

 

[Silvanus]

“The benefit of lockdown, therefore, was the avoidance of this extra 22,333 years of lost life. However, the cost of lockdown… was 6,300,000 years of lost life.”

What complete bullshit. Who in their right mind believes that living in lockdown is equivalent to being dead?

 

[Buyetyen]

What complete bullshit. Who in their right mind believes that living in lockdown is equivalent to being dead?

People who can't tell the difference between a minor inconvenience and a right denied. Sadly, the US is full of them.

 

[Casual Shinji]

What complete bullshit. Who in their right mind believes that living in lockdown is equivalent to being dead?

Emphasis on 'Right'. And unfortunately a lot of people are on it.

 

[CriticalGaming]

FYI here is a 2011 report on the history of ivermectin.

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective - PMC

Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably beneficial ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The media likes to harp on the drug as strictly an animal drug, but the report of this paper on invemectin repeatedly states that the drug is perfectly human friendly and has been given to shitloads of people for parasitic infections all over the world and has been shown to be remarkably helpful.

There is nothing as to it's effectiveness on Covid though, but that doesn't mean it isn't effective. It just means that there isn't enough testing. It also might not be intended to treat specifically the virus, but instead help combat other shit the virus does or leaves the body open for. Much in the same way they provide antibodics to prevent infection before it can occur.

The way the media is railing on treatments makes it all seem like they want people to know that it is vaccine or bust in terms of covid. Do not take any other medications, only vaccine!!! And they are very much anti-invermectin even though it seems to be fairly harmless to take one way or the other for the most part.

 

[Cheetodust]

FYI here is a 2011 report on the history of ivermectin.

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective - PMC

Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably beneficial ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The media likes to harp on the drug as strictly an animal drug, but the report of this paper on invemectin repeatedly states that the drug is perfectly human friendly and has been given to shitloads of people for parasitic infections all over the world and has been shown to be remarkably helpful.

There is nothing as to it's effectiveness on Covid though, but that doesn't mean it isn't effective. It just means that there isn't enough testing. It also might not be intended to treat specifically the virus, but instead help combat other shit the virus does or leaves the body open for. Much in the same way they provide antibodics to prevent infection before it can occur.

The way the media is railing on treatments makes it all seem like they want people to know that it is vaccine or bust in terms of covid. Do not take any other medications, only vaccine!!! And they are very much anti-invermectin even though it seems to be fairly harmless to take one way or the other for the most part.

Take this medication, it might not help but they're might not be side effects (there very much are though, just to be clear) is really not how medicine should work.

 

[Buyetyen]

The media likes to harp on the drug as strictly an animal drug, but the report of this paper on invemectin repeatedly states that the drug is perfectly human friendly and has been given to shitloads of people for parasitic infections all over the world and has been shown to be remarkably helpful.

There is nothing as to it's effectiveness on Covid though, but that doesn't mean it isn't effective. It just means that there isn't enough testing. It also might not be intended to treat specifically the virus, but instead help combat other shit the virus does or leaves the body open for. Much in the same way they provide antibodics to prevent infection before it can occur.

Can you explain the mechanism by which an anti-parasitic drug can knock out an airborne virus? And if its meant to treat the symptom and not the cause, then it shouldn't be anybody's priority.

The way the media is railing on treatments makes it all seem like they want people to know that it is vaccine or bust in terms of covid. Do not take any other medications, only vaccine!!! And they are very much anti-invermectin even though it seems to be fairly harmless to take one way or the other for the most part.

It's still baffling to me how many people would rather take unproven drugs than one of the most thoroughly tested vaccines in history. And no, ivermectin is not "fairly harmless" unless you take it in specially prescribed dosages by a credible medical professional, and even then you're going to shit yourself stupid. The dose makes the poison.

 

[CriticalGaming]

you explain the mechanism by which an anti-parasitic drug can knock out an airborne virus? And if its meant to treat the symptom and not the cause, then it shouldn't be anybody's priority.

I cant and im not claiming i do. I just posted a report about the drug that i found.

But there are drugs given to people that treat other things an illness can cause without actually treating the illness. For example if you have a ruptured gallbladder you would be given antibotics to prevent infection, but the antibotics dont treat the gallbladder.

That could be something like what they are using ivermectin for. Though i dont know why. I dont really care or have a dog in the race, im just trying to offer possible rationale.

 

[Buyetyen]

I cant and im not claiming i do. I just posted a report about the drug that i found.

But there are drugs given to people that treat other things an illness can cause without actually treating the illness. For example if you have a ruptured gallbladder you would be given antibotics to prevent infection, but the antibotics dont treat the gallbladder.

That could be something like what they are using ivermectin for. Though i dont know why. I dont really care or have a dog in the race, im just trying to offer possible rationale.

And the rationale you have offered does not make an argument for ivermectin over the vaccine. Seriously, why don't you want the vaccine?

 

[CriticalGaming]

And the rationale you have offered does not make an argument for ivermectin over the vaccine. Seriously, why don't you want the vaccine?

I'm vaccinated though. Why don't people ever read what i say when they argue with me? How do you argue against a person if you don't even know what the fuck they are saying?

I merely linked the article about ivermectin. And i never said anything about taking it (or any other drug) over the vaccine, so I dunno why you are putting that on me. If other's have said that, then talk to them about it because I never said that.

 

[Buyetyen]

I'm vaccinated though.

Good. I just find it weird that you'll go to bat for every hypothetical treatment, but most of what I've seen you express toward vaccines is tepid skepticism. Shit for treating the symptoms is after you've already caught the disease and are suffering immensely. Preventive medicine is about not being in that position in the first place.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Good. I just find it weird that you'll go to bat for every hypothetical treatment, but most of what I've seen you express toward vaccines is tepid skepticism. Shit for treating the symptoms is after you've already caught the disease and are suffering immensely. Preventive medicine is about not being in that position in the first place.

I'm skeptical towards the government and media pushing anything so fucking heavily as the vaccine. And I'm in favor of people having the right to choose whether they want treatment for anything or not.

If someone wants to not get the vaccine, then let them not get it. If YOU are vaccinated then it shouldn't matter to you whether or not someone else isn't. And if they get covid and die then sucks for them.

It's like smoking, everyone knows that shit will fuck you up, and if someone wants to smoke I don't care that's on them. I also don't feel bad for people who get smoking related diseases because they spent their whole live doing the thing that EVERYONE told them was gonna fuck them up. Hell the fucking pack of cigarettes even says it will fuck you up.

 

[Buyetyen]

I'm skeptical towards the government and media pushing anything so fucking heavily as the vaccine. And I'm in favor of people having the right to choose whether they want treatment for anything or not.

If someone wants to not get the vaccine, then let them not get it. If YOU are vaccinated then it shouldn't matter to you whether or not someone else isn't. And if they get covid and die then sucks for them.

It's like smoking, everyone knows that shit will fuck you up, and if someone wants to smoke I don't care that's on them. I also don't feel bad for people who get smoking related diseases because they spent their whole live doing the thing that EVERYONE told them was gonna fuck them up. Hell the fucking pack of cigarettes even says it will fuck you up.

The whole idea of claiming you have a right to refuse live-saving medicine is absurd. You have the privilege of turning it down. Healthcare itself is a right, self-destruction less so.

And yes, it does matter to me if someone is unvaccinated because the anti-vaccine bullshit is precisely why Covid is here to stay. We're going to be masking up every winter and probably have to get annual boosters for the new variants, just like the flu. This is public health we're talking about, not personal comfort. If we don't have over 90% of the population vaccinated, then there's no herd immunity. Immuno-compromised people will continue to be put in unnecessary risk. And by your admission, you condone this stupidity because of a petty, paranoid grudge against the government and the media.

Time was, people were lining up to get the polio vaccine and within a generation iron lungs became a thing of the past. That would have been nice today.

 

[CriticalGaming]

We're going to be masking up every winter and probably have to get annual boosters for the new variants, just like the flu.

WE don't know that yet, we haven't even been able to Un-mask for any real period of time since this whole shit started. Let's see what happens when the regulations finally go away, if they ever will. And you are never FORCED to get a flu shot. They encourage it but it's never forced and a health crisis typically doesn't arise because 100% of people don't get a flu shot.

This is public health we're talking about, not personal comfort.

Second hand smoke is dangerous, yet people can literally smoke in public places. People can freely smoke on their balconies at home and force other people to shut their windows to avoid the smoke. If it was truly about public health, why can people still smoke and drink alcohol?

Immuno-compromised people will continue to be put in unnecessary risk

The world doesn't accomodate the individual. It never has. Nobody lives their lives thinking of how to cater their day to the outliers of society.

People with disorders and health risks, take extra precautions in their everyday lives because they understand this. They can't trust proper cleaning of grocery shops so they wear gloves or bring their own wipes. They can't trust the world to constantly adhere to their specific special needs, so they take extra steps to protect themselves.

Those at risk should be vaccinated (if able) and otherwise taking extra procautions to keep themselves as safe as possible.

But again you are talking about an incredibly small number.

Like in boxing or MMA, you are responsible for your own defense. Protect YOURSELF at all times because you can't realistically control everyone else.

And by your admission, you condone this stupidity because of a petty, paranoid grudge against the government and the media.

You call it stupidity. I just call it right to choose. Much in the same way women have the right to choose whether or not to murder their fetuses.

Time was, people were lining up to get the polio vaccine and within a generation iron lungs became a thing of the past. That would have been nice today.

If Covid was as debilitating and deadly as polio was, I bet a lot more people would be lining up. With a death rate of 2% (250m total worldwide cases, 5m deaths) covid is not as serious as a lifetime of fucked up limbs, or a 30% rate of death.

It's apples and oranges.

 

[Kwak]

I'm skeptical towards the government and media pushing anything so fucking heavily as the vaccine. And I'm in favor of people having the right to choose whether they want treatment for anything or not.

Why on earth do you think, IN THE MIDDLE OF A DEADLY PANDEMIC, that government, and media, should NOT heavily promote the method that will prevent lots of suffering?
Do you think they should just say, "oh yeah, here's the thing that will stop the spread and severity of the disease that is everywhere right now, but you know, only take it if you want, even though successfully strangling this thing depends on the most amount of people taking it, but whatever, do what you want, or not, it's cool."