-
Mean while Chris Matterson show early evident that the vaccine work differently in people under 50 and over 50. It is still early and remain to be proven.
If you are over 50 and taken the vaccine, you are more likely to deteriorate or die from Delta variant than un-vaccinated.
If you are under 50, it is the opposite of the statement above.
Clearly, we don't know much about this vaccine, it long term safety, and the ramification of immune escape. This is a grand experiment. I'm very pro-vaccine and I think it does great thing for human health. I'm just against these fail gene therapy vaccine. Some worry that we will prove the anti-vaxxer right, that covid vaccine is a terrible mistake, while we have an effective treat for covid. As some have pointed out, it would turn the whole public against all vaccine.
-
[QUOTE=Mursenary;2580442]I expect them to actually be quite meek people in person, cowering at the sight of any actual in-person confrontation. I've seen 'S' a few times. In person, he gives off the energy of a wet, shivering chihuahua.[/QUOTE]You've never even left your mother's basement.
-
[QUOTE=Mursenary;2580429]3 responses to me in a row? That's called a Tourette's tic. Or do you just like licking my asshole that much?[/QUOTE]LMFAO, a minute ago he was crying about "ad hominem", calling other posters "young and angry" and know he's talking about people "licking his asshole".
What kind of weirdo does that? He's obviously schizophrenic.
You're the biggest loser I've ever had the displeasure to come across. Making hundreds of posts on here week after week won't change that. You're a weird little loser and you will always be a weird little loser.
-
[QUOTE=Mursenary;2580432]I mean. I'm not wrong.[/QUOTE]I wouldn't want to be you, that's for sure.
-
[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2580493]Mean while Chris Matterson show early evident that the vaccine work differently in people under 50 and over 50. It is still early and remain to be proven.
If you are over 50 and taken the vaccine, you are more likely to deteriorate or die from Delta variant than un-vaccinated.
If you are under 50, it is the opposite of the statement above.
Clearly, we don't know much about this vaccine, it long term safety, and the ramification of immune escape. This is a grand experiment. I'm very pro-vaccine and I think it does great thing for human health. I'm just against these fail gene therapy vaccine. Some worry that we will prove the anti-vaxxer right, that covid vaccine is a terrible mistake, while we have an effective treat for covid. As some have pointed out, it would turn the whole public against all vaccine.[/QUOTE]Good info. Also if one doesn't smoke and doesn't have excessive weight or diabetes or heart disease, these are also factors.
The government legalizes marijuana in many US states during a respiratory pandemic. There is nothing done to stop smoking in apartments which have shared ventilation. Once the government gets serious then get back to them on taking their experimental vaccine.
If they can just come out with a normal vaccine.
-
Your FLCC website is obviously a pro ivermectin website (with a little hint of conspiracy theories), maybe funded by ivermectin producers. It's like using the website of the good Doctor Raoult to support the fact that hydroxychloroquin really works, or quoting Russia Today to prove that the good old Vladimir is a freedom loving president. That's propaganda.
-
[QUOTE=HammerTime96;2580293]Mursenary, BigBuddy69, PaulInZurich have plunged the P6 world into fear about nothing.[/QUOTE]Next step is world domination!
-
[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2580487]Murse claim that ivermectin is unsafe, posted a link, but refuse to read what is on that link.
10 time 200 microg / kg is a lot. I would never imaging anyone use that high of an amount.
Murse also posted a paper that claim ivermectin does not work. While he did not read. Or he did read it but don't understand it. The author admitted to having made an error, giving ivermectin to some of the placebo. How can a drug that Murse claim to kill people have the same side effect as the placebo. Clearly, the the author also make more error. He did understand that the aurthor was borderline data-mining. With data mining, I can prove shit cure cancer is a sub-population.
Mean while he pointed to a lab study as proof doses ivermectin needed to work. Data in the lab does not translate to human for a million of unknown reason, absorption, tissue distribution, on and on. In human, there is an immune system, inhibitory peptide, interferon and on, and on. All of these could work synergistically with ivermectin to treat covid. Who know..[/QUOTE]I see you ignored your own misreading in asserting that anyone recommended 10 x dosing when they explicitly said 10 x dosing was not enough.
No need to make up scenarios. If your argument held merit, honesty would have been enough.
My point was that ivermectin in dosages required to be effective against covid was unsafe. Low dosages for anti-helminth use is fine.
Obviously I read my own paper since I pointed out that you falsely claimed that they suggested that a 10 x dose was safe when they just said that a 10 x dose would be ineffective. Obviously the no one recommends that high dose, it was a mis reading on your part. Or perhaps an intentional mistelling. Both are equally possible.
So again from JAMA:
[QUOTE]Cumulatively, the findings suggest that ivermectin does not significantly affect the course of early COVID-19, consistent with pharmacokinetic models showing that plasma total and unbound ivermectin levels do not reach the concentration resulting in 50% of viral inhibition even for a dose level 10-times higher than the approved dose[/QUOTE]The synergistic bit is a whole lot of bullshit meant to distract the lay man by using science words when the poster says nothing about how that works. That claim for this medicine's mechanism of action doesn't even jive. Ivermectin specifically loses bioavailability on first pass through the liver. That's a pharmacokinetic FACT.
When you say 48 studies, you confound prophylaxis studies with treatment studies. Yet in total, sample size would still be in the low thousands. More data manipulation / misrepresentation.
Your dishonesty on matters of science is should give you pause and shame.
-
[QUOTE=DrPoon;2580500]If they can just come out with a normal vaccine.[/QUOTE]Johnson and Johnson. Pretty normal, non-mRNA vaccine.
-
[QUOTE=HammerTime96;2580477]So what? The essence is still true. You see the inside of an FKK club in July 2021 and what do you see? A shitty line up and hordes of tripods!
Herzlichen Glueckwunsch! / sarc.
P.S. 9 replies in less than 5 hours on one topic? You must be one very bored and one very lonely CCP troll.[/QUOTE]Nope and life. You get stuck with me.
No essence. Clubs open. Hookers in them. Many mongers have been enjoying them.
Sore loser. No honor. Just a big whiney mouth rooting for clubs to fail.
-
[QUOTE=ShooBree;2580497]LMFAO, a minute ago he was crying about "ad hominem", calling other posters "young and angry" and know he's talking about people "licking his asshole".
What kind of weirdo does that? He's obviously schizophrenic.
You're the biggest loser I've ever had the displeasure to come across. Making hundreds of posts on here week after week won't change that. You're a weird little loser and you will always be a weird little loser.[/QUOTE]3 more in row? Get over me dude. Leave my asshole alone, I'm not into you. I'll fart on you next time.
-
[QUOTE=BigBuddy69;2580503]Your FLCC website is obviously a pro ivermectin website (with a little hint of conspiracy theories), maybe funded by ivermectin producers. It's like using the website of the good Doctor Raoult to support the fact that hydroxychloroquin really works, or quoting Russia Today to prove that the good old Vladimir is a freedom loving president. That's propaganda.[/QUOTE]He ignores the points that directly contradict him. Typical bullshitter.
-
[QUOTE=BigBuddy69;2580474]Could you please show some respect to the chihuahuas? They're very decent living beings.
And is it possible that the Swedish troll writes all his insults in a single post? Because he's in my ignore list and I see 4 times the same sentence: 'this user is in your ignore list', 4 times in 7 minutes.[/QUOTE]True. Girls use chihuahuas as therapy dogs sitting on their lap. Wait, that's like "s" following girls around stalking them in the club. So still very similar.
-
Murse, are you smoking. I want some of whatever you are having. It got to be really good.
[QUOTE] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12362927/[/QUOTE][QUOTE]Ivermectin was generally well tolerated, with no indication of associated CNS toxicity for doses up to 10 times the highest FDA-approved dose of 200 microg/kg[/QUOTE]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.
[QUOTE]When you say 48 studies, you confound prophylaxis studies with treatment studies. Yet in total, sample size would still be in the low thousands. More data manipulation / misrepresentation.[/QUOTE]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.
-
[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2580493]Mean while Chris Matterson show early evident that the vaccine work differently in people under 50 and over 50. It is still early and remain to be proven.
If you are over 50 and taken the vaccine, you are more likely to deteriorate or die from Delta variant than un-vaccinated.
If you are under 50, it is the opposite of the statement above.
Clearly, we don't know much about this vaccine, it long term safety, and the ramification of immune escape. This is a grand experiment. I'm very pro-vaccine and I think it does great thing for human health. I'm just against these fail gene therapy vaccine. Some worry that we will prove the anti-vaxxer right, that covid vaccine is a terrible mistake, while we have an effective treat for covid. As some have pointed out, it would turn the whole public against all vaccine.[/QUOTE]I am a pro vaccine, got so many shots since I am child. I got the Pfister but I don t think it is efficient, I just do it because the life is so much easier in Europe when you are vaccinated and with the Delta variant the things are getting worse. Probably the 4th wave is on it way and new restrictions will be implement sooner or latter.
