August 31, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, DBW said: These monkeys are Sheep. https://youtube.com/shorts/k_NwZHcy_so?feature=share They are ridiculously smart and I'm willing to bet he is doing that cause he sees people with them on.
August 31, 20214 yr 39 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said: They are ridiculously smart and I'm willing to bet he is doing that cause he sees people with them on. Definitely smarter than 70 million +\- US citizens. 😂
August 31, 20214 yr 15 hours ago, toolg said: This story is just ridiculous: An Ohio judge orders that a patient in the hospital must be treated with ivermectin. Only the judge has no license to administer medicine, a doctor that ordered it obviously does not have hospital rights... So how are they supposed to get this snake oil into the patient? I mean, ivermectin is actually prescribed as a human drug as well. It's not JUST used in animal dewormers, it has legitimate applications in humans. And the preliminary studies are mixed but some show positives, so there ARE actual studies ongoing (despite Rand's nonsense politicking) Based on conflicting evidence I'd say it's unlikely to be effective at least at late stages. The possible exception is using ivermectin early MAY be helpful for the immune system in some way. The above IMHO falls into a right to try kind of scenario. There's a remote but non-zero chance it may help, this guy in Cincy is basically on his deathbed and the doctor wants to try. Seems to me if the guy signs a waiver that it's not the worst thing. I'm not endorsing the general idea. But the headline is misleading.
August 31, 20214 yr No, Ivermectin Is Not Making People Poop Out "Rope Worms". The Truth Is Much Worse https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/no-ivermectin-is-not-making-people-poop-out-rope-worms-the-truth-is-much-worse/ Apparently, it isn't worms, just parts of your intestinal lining you just killed with poison.
August 31, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, Toastrel said: No, Ivermectin Is Not Making People Poop Out "Rope Worms". The Truth Is Much Worse https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/no-ivermectin-is-not-making-people-poop-out-rope-worms-the-truth-is-much-worse/ Apparently, it isn't worms, just parts of your intestinal lining you just killed with poison. Whats her problem? suck it up! i look like that everyday after consuming dairy lol
August 31, 20214 yr 10 hours ago, DBW said: Zero deaths. Go Duke!!! Well, yeah. Exactly what you'd expect from college-aged kids who get it.
August 31, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said: I mean, ivermectin is actually prescribed as a human drug as well. It's not JUST used in animal dewormers, it has legitimate applications in humans. And the preliminary studies are mixed but some show positives, so there ARE actual studies ongoing (despite Rand's nonsense politicking) Based on conflicting evidence I'd say it's unlikely to be effective at least at late stages. The possible exception is using ivermectin early MAY be helpful for the immune system in some way. The above IMHO falls into a right to try kind of scenario. There's a remote but non-zero chance it may help, this guy in Cincy is basically on his deathbed and the doctor wants to try. Seems to me if the guy signs a waiver that it's not the worst thing. I'm not endorsing the general idea. But the headline is misleading. Then let's break down the headline: Quote "Judge orders Cinci hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with Ivermectin," This is what happened: Quote Butler County Common Pleas Judge Gregory Howard ordered West Chester Hospital, part of the University of Cincinnati network, to treat Jeffrey Smith, 51, with Ivermectin. The order, filed Aug. 23, compels the hospital to provide Smith with 30mg of Ivermectin daily for three weeks. The judge has no license to administer medicine. But later we found out the patient's wife did her own research: Quote Julie Smith found Ivermectin on her own and connected with Dr. Fred Wagshul, an Ohio physician who her lawsuit identifies as "one of the foremost experts on using Ivermectin in treating COVID-19.” He prescribed the drug, and the hospital refused to administer it. A hospital spokeswoman said she can’t comment on litigation and federal patient privacy laws prevent her from commenting on any specifics of patient care. I contend, how is the patient supposed to receive the medicine if the patient is too ill to leave the hospital, and the doctor has no affiliation with the hospital? Quote "despite CDC warnings" CDC warns against ivermectin use on COVID patients. LINK The sub-headline says: Quote Doc calls Ivermectin’s advocates "snake oil salesmen” Quote Dr. Leanne Chrisman-Khawam, a physician and professor at the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, called the FLCCCA "snake oil salesmen.” She reviewed the association’s research on the drug’s uses and said there are some serious problems with its cited studies: many of them don’t show positive results, and those that do bear design flaws like small control groups, unaccounted for variables, non-blinded studies, not accounting for mitigations like vaccines and masking practices, and others. "Based on evidence-based medicine and my read on this large number of small studies, I would find this very suspect, even the positive outcomes,” she said. I think it all adds up. The West Chester hospital must treat the patient with utmost care, the Hippocratic oath "do no harm". The hospital is vulnerable to malpractice if treatment doesn't work. If ivermectin is not approved, I believe the hospital is under to authority to administer it, medically or legally. I do agree, if the patient and his wife waive their rights to sue the hospital, or they can arrange to get him released, then the wacko ivermectin doctor can apply treatment where he is licensed.
August 31, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said: I mean, ivermectin is actually prescribed as a human drug as well. It's not JUST used in animal dewormers, it has legitimate applications in humans. And the preliminary studies are mixed but some show positives, so there ARE actual studies ongoing (despite Rand's nonsense politicking) Based on conflicting evidence I'd say it's unlikely to be effective at least at late stages. The possible exception is using ivermectin early MAY be helpful for the immune system in some way. The above IMHO falls into a right to try kind of scenario. There's a remote but non-zero chance it may help, this guy in Cincy is basically on his deathbed and the doctor wants to try. Seems to me if the guy signs a waiver that it's not the worst thing. I'm not endorsing the general idea. But the headline is misleading. Thing is, once you're in the care of a hospital, your primary doctor's script means diddly squat if your doctor is unaffiliated with that facility. You can refuse treatment all you want, but you don't get to force the doctors at a hospital to give you anything they don't agree is safe or effective. You aren't forced to stay there if you feel you're better off at another facility that will administer whatever you wish. Also to be clear, there are far more studies that show ivermectin is ineffective at any stage of disease including onset, compared to the opposite.
August 31, 20214 yr 26 minutes ago, Kz! said: Well, yeah. Exactly what you'd expect from 99.9% of people of any age who get it. FYP
August 31, 20214 yr 4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Thing is, once you're in the care of a hospital, your primary doctor's script means diddly squat if your doctor is unaffiliated with that facility. You can refuse treatment all you want, but you don't get to force the doctors at a hospital to give you anything they don't agree is safe or effective. You aren't forced to stay there if you feel you're better off at another facility that will administer whatever you wish. Also to be clear, there are far more studies that show ivermectin is ineffective at any stage of disease including onset, compared to the opposite. I get that, and acknowledge that it's unlikely ivermectin is doing anything. There's no biological reason why it should (though from what I can verify it's been effective at reducing COVID-19 in a lab; but so has UV light and bleach) and has been shown to reduce , though medicines have had unexpected off-label uses nobody saw coming and become mainstays for conditions they were never intended to treat. My understanding of most of the studies is that they were at best inconclusive and contradictory, which is why actual studies are currently underway. e.g. https://www.principletrial.org/news/ivermectin-to-be-investigated-as-a-possible-treatment-for-covid-19-in-oxford2019s-principle-trial The downside risk of this drug being touted is absolutely immense - taken incorrectly or worse taking a version not designed for humans could lead to major complications and even death. So I get why the medical community is pumping the breaks - and it absolutely should. That said, if a doctor is prescribing a dosage that isn't harmful, I don't necessarily see this as a terrible thing as long as it's in a controlled environment. The bigger issue is people taking the veterinary version of ivermectin, which is a HUGE problem obviously. I'm just trying to keep an open mind and be cognizant of the fact that politics can push both ways here. There's no excuse for morons going out and buying animal dewormer and ingesting it. But with the University of Oxford and others studying it, it's also not exactly fair to say the science is settled and it has no effect.
August 31, 20214 yr Pastor Fired for Promoting COVID Vaccine on MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ https://www.thedailybeast.com/pastor-daniel-darling-fired-for-promoting-covid-vaccine-on-morning-joe Quote National Religious Broadcasters, a 1,100-member organization of Christian communicators, told Darling his statements violated their policy of remaining neutral about COVID vaccines, Religion News Service reports. He was told he could sign a statement admitting he had been insubordinate, and admit that his pro-vaccine statements were wrong, or be fired. He chose the latter.
August 31, 20214 yr Eight months into the Biden administration, this is what community transmission looks like for Covid-19.
August 31, 20214 yr 3 minutes ago, The Norseman said: Eight months into the Biden administration, this is what community transmission looks like for Covid-19. At least he's restored our good-standing on international stage. The adults are back!
August 31, 20214 yr Tucker is a moron. He thinks you have rights on Twitter. You have rights, like you have rights here. Follow the TOS or risk banning. You have no recourse.
August 31, 20214 yr 15 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: I get that, and acknowledge that it's unlikely ivermectin is doing anything. There's no biological reason why it should (though from what I can verify it's been effective at reducing COVID-19 in a lab; but so has UV light and bleach) and has been shown to reduce , though medicines have had unexpected off-label uses nobody saw coming and become mainstays for conditions they were never intended to treat. My understanding of most of the studies is that they were at best inconclusive and contradictory, which is why actual studies are currently underway. e.g. https://www.principletrial.org/news/ivermectin-to-be-investigated-as-a-possible-treatment-for-covid-19-in-oxford2019s-principle-trial The downside risk of this drug being touted is absolutely immense - taken incorrectly or worse taking a version not designed for humans could lead to major complications and even death. So I get why the medical community is pumping the breaks - and it absolutely should. They weren't contradictory, they were actually in an agreement... Quote That said, if a doctor is prescribing a dosage that isn't harmful, I don't necessarily see this as a terrible thing as long as it's in a controlled environment. The bigger issue is people taking the veterinary version of ivermectin, which is a HUGE problem obviously. I mean, there are plenty of drugs that aren't harmful when prescribed off label. She could just as easily have walked in with a script for minoxidil or amoxicillin, but that doesn't mean she can force a doctor she has no affiliation with to administer that to her husband. This isn't about politics, it's about what you can legally force a doctor to give you after you walk into their facility and start ordering them around. Quote I'm just trying to keep an open mind and be cognizant of the fact that politics can push both ways here. There's no excuse for morons going out and buying animal dewormer and ingesting it. But with the University of Oxford and others studying it, it's also not exactly fair to say the science is settled and it has no effect. That's actually exactly how the null hypothesis works. It's how it's always worked when conducting medical trials. You have to prove a treatment under trial has an effect on the condition, otherwise the initial assumption must be that it has no effect. And that's exactly where we are with ivermectin. 9 minutes ago, The Norseman said: Eight months into the Biden administration, this is what community transmission looks like for Covid-19. It's definitely Biden's fault that trumpbots won't get vaccinated. Salient point.
August 31, 20214 yr 13 minutes ago, Toastrel said: Pastor Fired for Promoting COVID Vaccine on MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ https://www.thedailybeast.com/pastor-daniel-darling-fired-for-promoting-covid-vaccine-on-morning-joe A pastor must remain neutral about a proven way to save lives medically? Yeah, that sounds exactly like what Jesus would do!
August 31, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: I mean, there are plenty of drugs that aren't harmful when prescribed off label. She could just as easily have walked in with a script for minoxidil or amoxicillin, but that doesn't mean she can force a doctor she has no affiliation with to administer that to her husband. This isn't about politics, it's about what you can legally force a doctor to give you after you walk into their facility and start ordering them around. That's actually exactly how the null hypothesis works. It's how it's always worked when conducting medical trials. You have to prove a treatment under trial has an effect on the condition, otherwise the initial assumption must be that it has no effect. And that's exactly where we are with ivermectin. It's definitely Biden's fault that trumpbots won't get vaccinated. Salient point.
August 31, 20214 yr 11 minutes ago, The Norseman said: Eight months into the Biden administration, this is what community transmission looks like for Covid-19. Norseman, get the vaccine you dope
August 31, 20214 yr 11 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: It's definitely Biden's fault that trumpbots won't get vaccinated. Salient point. You mean the "Uniter in Chief"? Also, might want to check your facts on who's not vaccinated. Its not just "Trumpbots"...it's also Black people and Hispanics who have been resistant.
August 31, 20214 yr 16 minutes ago, The Norseman said: Eight months into the Biden administration, this is what community transmission looks like for Covid-19.
Create an account or sign in to comment