Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[HammerTime96]

1. I agree, because of vaccines. If we had vaccinated faster, it would have been all over. Thanks for your people for prolonging it.

2. Already done. Reports coming after trip. Let's meet up.

1) The vaccine roll-out has been incredibly slow due to HUGE government incompetence, or have you already forgotten the debacle of the German government ordering too few vaccines back in January-February? Even if you wanted to, people could not get vaccinated in Germany, and vaccination rate only started to pick up pace in April, when the Delta Plus (Indian!) variant already was in full swing in India. In the meantime, confidence in vaccines has been eroded, again not because of the fault of the public, but because of the fault of Big Pharma and their corrupt politicians who kept on pushing the AstraZeneca #ClotShot crap despite all it's problems. Gino02 summarized it perfectly with a meme he posted:

The manufacturer is not responsible.

The vaccine promoting government is not responsible.

The vaccinating doctor or nurse is not responsible.

But if you chose not be vaccinated.

You are irresponsible.

The vaccine is never fully tested, it only has an Emergency Use Authorization, and is promoted by corrupt politicians & corrupt journalists. It's not exactly confidence inspiring, and only dumbest and most easily brainwashed idiots take the #ClotShot as it's now becoming known. / sarc.

2) "Let's meet up?" Why? I go to FKK clubs to fuck sexy women and to have a good time, not to meet sad lonely guys who have no friends and who need a P6 forum and FKK clubs for male bonding and validation. By pure coincidence I ran into Siri once in Sharks, that was more than enough, hahaha! I have male friends that I go drink a beer with in a regular bar (provided CCP lockdown fascists like yourself don't close the regular bars too) so I don't need to meet sad CCP internet trolls in between FKK sessions thank-you-very-much.

Pistons, if you read this: your inbox is full.

[Mursenary]

How am I misrepresenting here? You gave the impression that it is unsafe. The fact is, it is as safe as a baby aspirin at the recommended dose.

Murse-07-10-21 16:57.

Murse-07-12-21 16:50.

I already told you. You found one questionable study against ivermectin. I also told you, with all of the small study supporting ivermectin, I can sit here and rip them apart all day long. However, in totality and with meta study done by flcc and other meta study, and with population evident and anecdotal evident, I find it very convincing. Not gold standard, but very strong convincing evident.

No have done a gold standard study for ivermectin, because there is no money with something that is cheap as candy.

That was hyperbole for dramatic effect. Obviously, Ivermectin has historical use at established doses.

Plenty of avenues to scrutinize Ivermectin, yet you did not afford those studies the same scrutiny.

Less clinical information on Ivermectin against covid than vaccines but not the same scrutiny is applied here either.

The term gene therapy was applied to mRNA vaccine. Quite a misleading statement at best, intentionally fraudulent at worst. A sin against anyone in the field of any life science. Abuse of power / knowledge seems apparent.

There is no way that you read the studies mentioned in FLACC publication and walked away satisfied if you actually scrutinized the design qualities. Flaws mentioned in previous post. I suspect that you either only read the infographic or at best, the meta-study, but never looked at the designs of studies that were cited as supporting evidence.

Again, skewed selection bias (0 critical patients), compromised controls, confounding variables (concurrent meds), overstating the clinical improvements (anosmia), yada yada yada.

It is early, but something doesn't add up. In the UK, the number of new case with delta are almost half vac and half un vac. Chris Martenson point out that delta infected people over 50 is more sick and more likely to die if they are vaccinated compare to un vac over 50.

It might be too early and time will tell.

Maybe I'm wrong but I understand that it is not a 50-50 distribution in clinically symptomatic patients. I have seen no evidence supporting this claim of higher mortality in the over 50 and vaxxed demographic.

I do know this, American Delta hotspots are also amongst the least vaccinated US states. Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, and Missouri are amongst the 10 least vaxxed states and represents the current top 5-8 highest incidence spots. Delta accounts for over 50% of our cases here also.

Considering that we are in a pandemic, the option is a vaccine with questionable long term safety. Yet to be determine effectiveness against variant and fuck over your innate antibody and contribute to immune escape.

I have not and will not take the vaccine. I have been taking 5000 IU (sometime 10,000 IU) of vitamin D3 per day since March 2020. Since November, I take 3 MG of ivermectin once every 3 days. All of this time, I have been seeing Cali escort lady 3 or 4 time per month, try to live life as if it is 2019. No covid so far. But that is just me. Cheer.

Evolutionary pressure to escape host defenses is not exclusive to pathogens evolving to escape host adaptive immunity. It is equally affected by other components of host defenses, such as nuclear transport seen in Ivermectin. Focusing on a vaccines effect on host evasion but not ivermectin shows more bias.

Take the ivermectin all you want. Criticizing the vaccine but not your personal regimen to reassure your choice at the expense of absolute truth telling is pretty professionally irresponsible.

[ExpatLover]

Considering that we are in a pandemic, the option is a vaccine with questionable long term safety. Yet to be determine effectiveness against variant and fuck over your innate antibody and contribute to immune escape.

I have not and will not take the vaccine. I have been taking 5000 IU (sometime 10,000 IU) of vitamin D3 per day since March 2020. Since November, I take 3 MG of ivermectin once every 3 days. All of this time, I have been seeing Cali escort lady 3 or 4 time per month, try to live life as if it is 2019. No covid so far. But that is just me. Cheer.

For sure on the long run you will have to take the vaccine or your social life will be very limited, all medicine have placebo effects, and side effects including ivermectin.

[NiteRiderCal]

Considering that we are in a pandemic, the option is a vaccine with questionable long term safety. Yet to be determine effectiveness against variant and fuck over your innate antibody and contribute to immune escape.

I have not and will not take the vaccine. I have been taking 5000 IU (sometime 10,000 IU) of vitamin D3 per day since March 2020. Since November, I take 3 MG of ivermectin once every 3 days. All of this time, I have been seeing Cali escort lady 3 or 4 time per month, try to live life as if it is 2019. No covid so far. But that is just me. Cheer.

[NiteRiderCal]

It is early, but something doesn't add up. In the UK, the number of new case with delta are almost half vac and half un vac. Chris Martenson point out that delta infected people over 50 is more sick and more likely to die if they are vaccinated compare to un vac over 50.

It might be too early and time will tell.

[NiteRiderCal]

How am I misrepresenting here? You gave the impression that it is unsafe. The fact is, it is as safe as a baby aspirin at the recommended dose.

Yeah, because it kills the human, stopping the vaccine dead in its tracks. Facepalms at Dr WebMD.

Murse-07-10-21 16:57.

Who proposed 2 MG / kg to be safe? That's 150 MG for a 75 kg man. You trying to kill people? Geesuz.

Murse-07-12-21 16:50.

I already told you. You found one questionable study against ivermectin. I also told you, with all of the small study supporting ivermectin, I can sit here and rip them apart all day long. However, in totality and with meta study done by flcc and other meta study, and with population evident and anecdotal evident, I find it very convincing. Not gold standard, but very strong convincing evident.

No have done a gold standard study for ivermectin, because there is no money with something that is cheap as candy.

[Pistons]

So. I'm vaccinated without any side effects, but this meme kinda got me thinking.

If you have a bad or even fatal side effect.

The manufacturer is not responsible.

The vaccine promoting government is not responsible.

The vaccinating doctor or nurse is not responsible.

But if you chose not be vaccinated.

You are responsible?

Let that sink in. Is that even logical or legal?

It only means us non vaccinated people are responsible for carrying on the human legacy past that date when the vaccinated die out. Albeit to a large degree due to vaccine induced infertility. As far as carrying on the human legacy, trial me any day!

[Mursenary]

You are so fucking clueless, are you five years old? That would explain your childish insults about farting on other people. You do realize that normal people are grossed out by your weird insults?

Let me tell you have it is; you are not funny or smart, but you are a liar, weirdo and a giant loser with some serious mental issues.

You can say whatever you want but in the end of the day I feel sorry for you because you are such a loser.

Thank you so much for your sympathy and feeling sorry for me. It's kinda like a homeless guy giving someone a dollar. I almost feel guilty about it.

Keep working on this creativity thing. Elon Musk overcame his disability and look at him now. You can do this!

[ShooBree]

Oh, people can post all they want. Multiple threads of conversation is not exactly difficult.

It's the multiple posts to the same person in a row that's obsessively embarrassing. I get it though. Autism spectrum leaves one unaware of social nuances.

B_T_Dubs, your insults are pretty clich, perhaps try to exercise the creative part of the brain a little? Good for people with Asperger's.

You are so fucking clueless, are you five years old? That would explain your childish insults about farting on other people. You do realize that normal people are grossed out by your weird insults?

Let me tell you have it is; you are not funny or smart, but you are a liar, weirdo and a giant loser with some serious mental issues.

You can say whatever you want but in the end of the day I feel sorry for you because you are such a loser.

[Mursenary]

Then obviously the Delta Plus Mutation is no big deal, but we already knew that. LOL!

If you're so bored, why not book a flight to Germany and write some reports of how great FKK clubs are?

1. I agree, because of vaccines. If we had vaccinated faster, it would have been all over. Thanks for your people for prolonging it.

2. Already done. Reports coming after trip. Let's meet up.

[Mursenary]

Murse, are you smoking. I want some of whatever you are having. It got to be really good.

You posted that link. You did. The above quote does NOT support your claim that ivermectin kill people.

The author of the JAMA paper admitted to an error of giving Ivermectin to the placebo. They rightful accounted for that. It is not misdirection to point out that the side effect is the same for both ivermectin and placebo. Clearly there is more error here. The author changes the primary end point in the middle of the trial. That is data miming when you don't like the result. The whole paper is questionable. Why should I believe them when they claim that 10 x higher dose is needed. That crazy idea originated from a cell culture lab bench study.

Scientist don't just read a paper and accept the conclusion. NO, no, no. They look to see if it was done correctly according to the scientific process.

Again, the FLCCC is not recommending this crazy high dose to anyone. From the FLCCC website.

14 invermectin prohylaxis trial.

26 invermectin early treatment trial.

22 invermectin late treatment trials.

With a total of 22,000 patients.

No, I'm not misrepresent and I'm not confounding anything. You found only one erroneous, poorly designed study, done on a healthy population, where covid is just a common cold in this population. Am I suppose to just read and believe everything from a paper without any critical analysis? Am I not suppose to ask if it was done according to the scientific process? Am I just going to threw all of my training in the trash? Just because some dude name Murse on a hooker website think he is a scientist.

Okay, we are getting somewhere. My apologies for saying you missed the 2 MG versus 2 microgram point. I understand now that you were citing the safety abstract and not the JAMA paper. You are correct, the paper shows no Central Nervous System toxicity for doses up to 10 x the recommended dose.

Now, to the misrepresentation point. This is how you use misrepresentation.

1. No one claimed that JAMA proposed 10 x dose as you say. They only said that even 10 x dose would be ineffective in pharmacokinetic models. Hence, Misrepresentation.

2. No one claimed that FLCCC recommended that dose either. Hence, misrepresentation.

3. I did not claim that Ivermectin was an unsafe drug. Again, the claim was that doses required to be effective in COVID treatment would be unsafe. I even left the door open for its use as prophylaxis when I mentioned that at the time of vaccine release, there was insignificant studies supporting Ivermectin use even for prophylactic effect.

Now, as for critical appraisal. You want to talk about critical analysis. It doesn't seem that you critically analyze FLCCC supporting evidence to any rigor. Here is their meta-analysis to which I will critique.

https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-c...f-COVID-19.pdf

1. Main and largest study for treatment was Elgazaar et all, 2020. This is their flagship study of 380 patients, wohoo. But guess what? It compared Ivermectin to Hydroxychloroquine and not a true placebo. By the way, HCQ was shown to have detrimental cardiac effects when treating covid patients. Is that not an extremely poor study design? Of course it is, and you know it, yet you don't criticize.

2. The next cited study with the best Ivermectin supporting numbers, Hashim et al, 2020. Guess what, a whopping 22 patients per group. And guess what, the Ivermectin group admittingly had only 22 severe patients and 0 critical patients while the control had 11 severe plus 11 critical patients. Of course Ivermectin group would show less mortality. Selection bias, the worst form of experimental design manipulation short of straight lying. Poor design, and you know it, yet you don't criticize.

3. The next study Niaee, 2020 looked at 180 patients in 6 groups, 30 each, wohoo such rigor. This study once again used HCQ as a standard across all arms, confounding. And guess what, results showed marginal improvement to the point that the authors said this:

One of the limitations of ivermectin in clinical utility is its potential to cause toxicity. Studies have shown that this defect can be eliminated by changing the formulation and pharmacokinetic properties. Therefore, a systematic design based on concentration of ivermectin is essential. Schmith et al. showed in a study based on the pharmacokinetic simulations that ivermectin may have limited therapeutic utility on control COVID- 19. The reason is that the concentration of inhibitor required to act on the COVID-19 virus is much higher than the maximum plasma concentration by managing the approved dose

Their meta-analysis goes on and on to describe more studies oddly almost entirely from the Middle East and Indian subcontinent. More and more confounding variables of poor design and what looks to be selection bias. Some studies showed that no deaths were found in either groups. Healthy population? Other studies use metrics such as Anosmia to evaluate "clinical improvement. " Really? Sense of smell to justify a drug as the standard of care? Other studies had confounding variables such as only using ivemectin as an adjunct medication. Standard of care really?

All in all, it appears that FLCCC went out of their way to find obscure studies using questionable metrics from countries with poor quality of care to justify Ivermectin as a miracle treatment, when at best it's natural antiinflammatory properties may have some benefit in prophylaxis or as an adjunct in low doses. It does inhibit nuclear transport of viral proteins after all. This is likely why it may see some efficacy as a prophylaxis or very early treatment. But is its wide use for the general population practical? Without further evidence, how could one assume this, especially in lieu of other effective vaccines.

Furthermore, and not due to the lack of trying, it has routinely failed to find use against other viruses in the past. No approved uses for Yellow Fever, Dengue, Zika, HIV, etc. Why is that? Hmmm. What makes you expect differently for covid?

In vitro studies over and over again suggests that Ivermectin would need dosages 100 x higher than approved dosages to be effective. In vivo studies shows that it accumulates in tissues and not plasma where it is needed, thus low bioavailability. So we come back around to my original point, your points and background are academic and doesn't consider clinical realities. Your bias is later revealed in your selective "critical analysis," a point that can be easily seen when appraising the FLCCC studies. Obviously you looked at their colorful infographic and did not dive into their studies yourself to genuinely vet their sources.

NIH statement:

https://www.covid19treatmentguidelin...py/ivermectin/

Check. Your move.

[Pistons]

Say hello, to 2022. The world without Covid quarantines and where everything is back to normal with the plandemic being a thing of the past:

https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-...n-oil-shortage

"To keep track, the remaining oil demand growth to be supplied from February through December 2021 is 3.4 mb / the, plus another 3.5 mb / the of growth in 2022, per EIA. That's a total of 6.9 mb / the of new demand through 2022, which combined with the replacement of natural production declines would require total new crude oil production of 14.7 mb / the to 20.5 mb / the by the end of 2022, respectively, with and without investments.

The key question is where this new production will come from. The most immediate source would be to bring oil spare production capacity back on stream. In January, EIA estimated that OPEC had 6. 7 mb / the of crude oil spare production capacity, and the Russia and Caspian region's production was 1. 7 mb / the below its highest output of 15.0 mb / the in December 2018. Consequently, OPEC and Russia and Caspian producers might be able to raise their production by 8.4 mb / the only about half of what's needed.

If we accept this amount which might be optimistic because OPEC historically has not produced 100% of its spare capacity that would require the rest of the world to invest, drill and produce 6.3 mb / the to 12.1 mb / the of new oil by 2022."

P.S. it won't be enough! We can maybe add 5 mb / day globally outside of that region. Maximum if all shale nuts in North America gets back on track. Probably less.

In other words, send me your hard earned money for expensive fuel next year! $$.

Those garbage can floating trash bins will need solar panels!

Did I say an oil price of 250 usd two months ago? LOL. Make that 500 usd!

Or of course trash the initial part of this post and consider new rounds of lockdowns and cars stuck in garages worldwide!

[BigBuddy69]

Touche. But I hear stories from the girls about how they feel gross when he licks them all over, from head to toe. So creepy. Sends shivers down my spine.

The sole too? And between the toes? And the ass crack?

[HammerTime96]

I am quite bored. Bam!

Then obviously the Delta Plus Mutation is no big deal, but we already knew that. LOL!

If you're so bored, why not book a flight to Germany and write some reports of how great FKK clubs are?

[Pistons]

So funny? You realized that Australia is poorly vaccinated right? More supporting evidence for Team Get Vaxxed.

If we had it your way, we would have lost tens if not hundreds of millions of senior citizens. But of course that doesn't matter to you. You're unable to think of what's good only for you.

https://youtu.be/cjMZvpmuaKY

I prefer to listen to real virology experts. And not wannabes on a sex forum!

Basically the vaccines will greatly enhance the mutation process and extend the entire plandemic. But that is all good for the betterment of humanity in relation to the great reset as it enhances the automation trend and increases the wealth per capita going forward while the vaccinated morons die out.

Then again many would be wannabes who claim to be vaxxed aren't vaccinated. They just got a vial full of saltwater instead. So even morons can be lucky.