The Covid cure has arrived! (1 Viewer)

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
So who determines what constitutes "misinformation"?
Consider also that the official guidance on Covid is all over the map. Fox News has been running endless clips of official pundits one day making one recommendation to only change their recommendations and never acknowledging that they are flip-flopping.
So Elizabeth Warren has come-out-of-the-closet to say that the burning of books for unauthorized themes is acceptable.
Censorship is OK and must be unthinkingly embraced.
 
Last edited:

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
Niki Minaj is just now finding out you can't question science. The Whitehouse has offered to re-educate her about the dangers of free speech but so far Niki isn't having it. :love::love::LOL:

1631849476716.png
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
1631894018446.png


Don't forget the border czar Kamala Harris was against it just before she was for it. Just about every liberal was against the vaccine when President Trump was in office. It's about science people, not politics :LOL: :LOL::ROFLMAO:

Climate change is no different, just another power grab.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
Prior to 2020, the science on masks was settled. Well people should not wear masks. Medical people wore masks under some conditions to avoid infecting wounds. I do believe that tiny virus' existed prior to 2020. The turnabout in the "science" was political rather than a new discovery. There is no proof that asymptomatic people spread COVID. So someone without symptoms wearing a mask is virtue signaling. I have anecdotal evidence of asymptomatic people not spreading. My mother-in-law fell in her assisted living place and was sent to a rehab center for recovery. My brother-in-law removed her after a week since they weren't doing any rehab. He took her to his home and had a therapist come daily.. A month later she had to get tested before the AL would take her back. She tested positive and had to stay away for two weeks and then get tested again. They did wear masks for those two weeks but she never managed to infect anyone else during the unmasked month when everyone was close to her and even touching. Many of the family visited her AFTER the positive test because we knew we weren't going to infect her and we hadn't seen her for a year. We did wear masks during that period and kept a distance and she didn't infect us then either.
 
Last edited:

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
Why is it the places with the highest vaccine rates also have the highest re-infection rates? Israel comes to mind, or is that just right-wing propaganda?
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
The bigger question is why are doctors not treating patints with any of the therapeutics that are showing promise in testing like Hydroxichloriquine and Ivermectin?

Why do countries in the malaria belt have much lower deaths per 100,000 than we do. Is it because their medical systems are so much better? I don't think so.
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,849
The bigger question is why are doctors not treating patints with any of the therapeutics that are showing promise in testing like Hydroxichloriquine and Ivermectin?

Why do countries in the malaria belt have much lower deaths per 100,000 than we do. Is it because their medical systems are so much better? I don't think so

Other Hypotheses

Drugs Against Parasitic Infections

Infections with parasites have been suggested to be associated with less severe COVID-19 in an as yet non-peer-reviewed Ethiopian study although this finding requires replication in other locales.80 SSA countries within the tropical and equatorial regions appear to have the lowest proportion of confirmed COVID-19 cases and the highest burden of malaria infection.81 Several factors have been posited to contribute to the low incidence of COVID-19 in these malaria-endemic countries, including cross-protection from consistent use of antimalarial medication.81 However, the failure of hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19 in randomized studies makes this hypothesis less likely.82 In addition, ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug used to treat several neglected tropical diseases, such as onchocerciasis, strongyloidiasis, and lymphatic filaria,83,84 has been widely used across SSA since the 1990s.85 A study conducted by Caly et al.86 found ivermectin to be an inhibitor of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro. Despite the hypothesized association between antiparasitic medications and COVID-19, at present, there is still only limited evidence to support it.87,88

Mobility

It also has been hypothesized that lower mobility and spending a greater amount of time outdoors may have reduced the risk of COVID-19, especially in impoverished rural areas.93 Reduced travel between African countries due to limited visa-free relationships may have also limited spread across the continent.94 Further study would be necessary to confirm these hypotheses.

CONCLUSIONS

In reviewing the totality of the evidence, we believe that it is suggested that in SSA the overall death rate is lower than in most other regions primarily due to the demographic structure with a low median age and a small percentage of vulnerable elderly, although as noted, other factors likely also play a role.
The median age in Africa is 19.7years. U.S 38.1
 
Last edited:

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
The bigger question is why are doctors not treating patints with any of the therapeutics that are showing promise in testing like Hydroxichloriquine and Ivermectin?

Why do countries in the malaria belt have much lower deaths per 100,000 than we do. Is it because their medical systems are so much better? I don't think so.
The biggest question is why isn't self-immunity taken into consideration when restricting people's rights.
 

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
8,738
Funny Confessions Time:

During a 6 mo. period when both Black Lives Matter and COVID were still co-occurring at a shared peak, I ordered a box of 1000 "Black Lives Matter" facemasks from China and sold them online. Just saying it out loud makes me laugh at myself.

I do like to try experiments. I learned a little and earned a little, but it was mostly just a fun experiment. Unfortunately, 46,000 other people had the same idea.

Sorry guys, I've got none left except one I saved as a souvenir for myself.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
1631917153027.png

What is also disturbing is that many of the unvaxxed are people of color, meaning that the Biden administration is proposing a negative disparate impact (racist policy) on the minority communities. That is the very same hyperbolic accusation that Democrats make to (falsely) accuse Republicans of "suppressing the vote". So when a Black person shows up to vote and ID is required, that is racist according to Democrats; now when a Black person has to show proof of vaccination (ID) to eat, that amazingly is not racist. Real repulsive pretzel logic from the Demorats.
 
Last edited:

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
Florida has set up infusion centers and is very effectively using the mono-clonal antibodies medicine to treat infected people IMMEDIATELY after the positive test result. This is so threatening to the Biden administration that they are now restricting distribution of the drug to Florida because they want to make the disbursement "equitable". Therefore every state gets the same quantity regardless of population or infection levels???????????? WTF? They've now resorted to killing people who do not obey! They've been killing people for 18 months by withholding Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin as therapeutic treatments. They've just upped the stakes.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:46
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
Let's face it - big Pharma doesn't like Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine because these already-developed palliatives would reduce reliance on vaccination, and you KNOW that big Pharma makes money off of the new expensive vaccines (regardless of who actually pays the bills). But the idea that something would reduce the severity of COVID-19 such that death rates would shrink without that expensive vaccine? Oh, that's not good for business. It would give the illusion big Pharma is in this strictly to make a buck... oh, wait - they ARE. I actually don't question the science of the vaccines but I might question the motives of their makers.

I am not an anti-vaxxer. I think vaccines are generally a good idea, a good strategy. But how do you know whether it is safe? Your individualized test for deciding is this: Have you had "ordinary" flu vaccines within the last 3 years without a reaction? If yes, then the COVID-19 vaccine will not hurt you. If you had a reaction? Be more skeptical. Why? Because at least for Pfizer's offering, and I believe also for Moderna's offering, they use the same general method to make COVID-19 vaccine as various companies have used for influenza vaccines.

Because of all of the flip-flopping going on, I understand why folks are hesitant. They don't know which pundits to trust - and the fault lies firmly in the laps of the pundits themselves. Politicians must think that the public has an even worse memory than the pols themselves, who can't remember their own foibles from one day to the next.

So as a believer that the past is at least a partially effective predictor of the future, consider your own personal history with flu vaccines.

@moke123 - your post #489 linked to an article that contained a scientific error. This quote: "However, the failure of hydroxychloroquine to prevent COVID-19 in randomized studies makes this hypothesis less likely" uses the wrong purpose. HCQ was a palliative, to reduce symptoms. It was not a preventive drug to block the disease. Careless statements like that indicate that someone either (a) is ignorant of the intent of the drug or (b) is duplicitous in trying to misdirect attention away from what the drug REALLY does. Neither duplicitous nor ignorant people need to give folks bad advice, yet all too often that is exactly what they try.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:46
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
For the record I'm not an anti-vaxxer either, I am fully vaccinated against C19. I have also taken the occasional flu jab.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:46
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
The complete flip-flop of both Biden and Harris is suspicious. Their position - if Trump was for it, we're against it. The dutiful big pharma refused to release the vaccines before the election even though two of them had given Trump reports that they would be ready by early to mid-October. Once the election was over and the vaccines approved for emergency use, then Biden and Harris were "for" the vaccines. Politics is coming back to bite them. However, they are actually killing Americans because they are against Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, because Trump said they offered promise if administered early enough and that report was supported by published papers. The public hasn't quite gotten this message though.

You should take the vaccine if you are older or in some danger group. The young and healthy, especially children, should NOT be forced into taking an experimental drug whose long term side effects are unknown. I felt a clear and present danger so I took the vaccine but then I'm not planning on having any more children and at best, I have 10-20 years left to live so long term effects are less worrisome to me than catching COVID and being told by my doctor to tough it out and call if I can't breath any more so they can put me into the hospital and let me die. They won't even try the cheap therapeutics because my Governor, whose scientific knowledge is immense, banned them because if Trump was for them, he was against them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom