Jump to content
Bjornebye

Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, redinblack said:

I took a train from Chester up to Liverpool on Saturday, station was packed with people arriving for the races, already pissed at 12 noon, pretty much zero in terms of masks and distancing around the station which made me feel a little uncomfortable. A fair few masks on the train and out and about in Liverpool but it seems that generally a lot of people have decided Covid is done with. Which of course it isnt.

I was in my local Asda on Friday evening and I was one of about a quarter/maybe a third of people in there wearing a mask. The place was really busy as well. Most of the Asda staff weren’t wearing a mask either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, redinblack said:

I took a train from Chester up to Liverpool on Saturday, station was packed with people arriving for the races, already pissed at 12 noon, pretty much zero in terms of masks and distancing around the station which made me feel a little uncomfortable. A fair few masks on the train and out and about in Liverpool but it seems that generally a lot of people have decided Covid is done with. Which of course it isnt.

 

It's a weird one, we still mostly wear our masks but when the quota goes down of other people wearing it you do feel like a dick, there's a fine line between being sensible and being Roy Cropper.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

No it looked cool so I just thought I'd randomly link it.

It’s always worth checking to be honest.  
 

So, the fact that one of the people highlighted has been given a research grant to see if it works, is fishy?  I just want to be clear that studying it’s efficacy is now a reason to distrust someone.  Is that a policy you’d like to see applied to all drugs?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

So, the fact that one of the people highlighted has been given a research grant to see if it works, is fishy?

 

No I think this looks fishy :

 

Quote

The FOIA response shows that the working group has nine members. Three members of the working group, Adaora Adimora, Roger Bedimo, and David V. Glidden, have disclosed a financial relationship with Merck. Merck has campaigned against the use of ivermectin in COVID-19.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

No I think this looks fishy :

 

But the financial relationship you are worried about is proving it’s efficacy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merk have said there isn’t evidence it works on Covid.  They are providing money to see it works and that’s proof they don’t want it to work?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile there's lots of tele-medicine schemes from the likes of the AFLD offering anti vaxxers online prescriptions of ivermectin for a fee, many of whom then don't receive that prescription.

 

It's almost like it's beneficial to the wallet to push Ivermectin as a real treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Merk have said there isn’t evidence it works on Covid.  They are providing money to see it works and that’s proof they don’t want it to work?  

 

A third of the NIH panel went against recommending it and they had previous funding from Merck. Do you think the money they provide for the other study will really say something good about ivermectin?

 

The Fraudian are now at it too which is again, no surprise at all. The headline contains "Ivermectin FrEnZy" and they include a flat out lie too which also shouldn't be any surprise :

 

Quote

Poison control centers in multiple states have received a spike in calls from people taking Ivermectin not intended for human consumption, including Mississippi reporting last month that at least 70% of its recent calls were due to the drug.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/13/ivermectin-treatment-covid-19-anti-vaxxers-advocates

 

No, it's not 70%. Or 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20% or even 10%. It was 2%. The 70% was the percentage of that 2% that'd taken the animal version.

 

Isn't it funny how all these mistakes go against ivermectin? You'd think maybe after a while there'd be a "mistake" in favour of it just out of random chance?

 

AP news correction that the Guardian "missed" :

 

Quote

This story was first published on Aug. 23, 2021. It was updated on Aug. 25, 2021 to correct that the number of calls to poison control about ivermectin was about 2%. Incorrect information provided by the Mississippi Department of Health had said the number was 70%.

 

https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-69c5f6d4476ca9b25bc7038e99a4a075

 

50 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Ivermectin approved for use on 12 to 15 year olds in the UK. 

 

Sorry, not Ivermectin. As that doesn't work. I meant vaccines. 

 

I don't think anybody here can state that "ivermectin doesn't work" when there's so much proven bullshit around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest, what's Pierre Kory's area of expertise, is it as a virologist or a pulmonologist?

 

No doubt he's incredibly well qualified but where's his focus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.Main points

In England, between 2 January and 2 July 2021, there were 51,281 deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19); 640 occurred in people who were fully vaccinated, which includes people who had been infected before they were vaccinated.

 

The risk of death involving COVID-19 was consistently lower for people who had received two vaccinations compared to one or no vaccination, as shown by the weekly age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs) for deaths involving COVID-19.

 

"Breakthrough cases" are where infection has occurred in someone who is fully vaccinated, whereas we define a "breakthrough death" as a death involving COVID-19 that occurred in someone who had received both vaccine doses and had a first positive PCR test at least 14 days after the second vaccination dose; in total, there were 256 breakthrough deaths between 2 January and 2 July 2021.

 

61.1% of breakthrough deaths occurred in males, compared to 52.2% and 48.5% for other COVID-19 deaths and for non-COVID-19 deaths respectively; the median age of breakthrough deaths was 84, compared to 82 for other COVID-19 deaths and for non-COVID-19 deaths.

 

13.1% of breakthrough deaths occurred in people who were identified as likely to be immunocompromised from hospital episodes or causes of death, compared to 5.4% for other COVID-19 deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

Imagine prescribing a de-wormer for intestinal parasites.

 

The monsters.

 

A bit strange that they're using a horse dewormer though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason they're calling it horse dewormer is because loads of people are getting the fucking horse paste as they don't need a prescription for that and can just get it in a store. What else would they call it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3 Stacks said:

The reason they're calling it horse dewormer is because loads of people are getting the fucking horse paste as they don't need a prescription for that and can just get it in a store. What else would they call it?

 

They said Joe Rogan praised a horse dewormer which was a complete lie. He got his from a doctor. Maybe they could just call it what it's meant for in humans and not horses and stop being lying propagandistic twats for a change.

 

If only ivermectin wasn't so right wing.

 

As usual there's not much sense to be made, I'll go and play on my PS4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vegas odds that, Gladiators I salute you.

 

 

There have been only 256 deaths with coronavirus among people in England who were fully vaccinated in the first six months of the year, out of a total of 51,281 Covid deaths, new data has revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

 

It's a weird one, we still mostly wear our masks but when the quota goes down of other people wearing it you do feel like a dick, there's a fine line between being sensible and being Roy Cropper.

This is where I'm at. We do shopping for a restaurant at 8 different shops / cash and carry outlets and I often feel like I am practically the only masked one in some of the places like Makro. I often feel like I am getting glares and I am the weirdo.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody reckon there'll be loads of 14 and 15 year olds getting the vaccines behind their mad, anti-vax parent's backs and not letting on? That's if the government go ahead with their previous stance of saying parental consent isn't needed if the child is deemed competent to consent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

A third of the NIH panel went against recommending it and they had previous funding from Merck. Do you think the money they provide for the other study will really say something good about ivermectin?

 

The Fraudian are now at it too which is again, no surprise at all. The headline contains "Ivermectin FrEnZy" and they include a flat out lie too which also shouldn't be any surprise :

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/13/ivermectin-treatment-covid-19-anti-vaxxers-advocates

 

No, it's not 70%. Or 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20% or even 10%. It was 2%. The 70% was the percentage of that 2% that'd taken the animal version.

 

Isn't it funny how all these mistakes go against ivermectin? You'd think maybe after a while there'd be a "mistake" in favour of it just out of random chance?

 

AP news correction that the Guardian "missed" :

 

 

https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-69c5f6d4476ca9b25bc7038e99a4a075

 

 

I don't think anybody here can state that "ivermectin doesn't work" when there's so much proven bullshit around.

There’s no evidence it works.  All the evidence purporting to should it does has been faked.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of our cats has got worms and we’ve been given a paste for him to treat it. I was fucking dying for it to be ivermectin but alas it wasn’t.  I’d have relearned how to post pics just for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

They said Joe Rogan praised a horse dewormer which was a complete lie. He got his from a doctor. Maybe they could just call it what it's meant for in humans and not horses and stop being lying propagandistic twats for a change.

 

If only ivermectin wasn't so right wing.

 

As usual there's not much sense to be made, I'll go and play on my PS4.

They should if the majority of people aren't getting the horse stuff, but that's what people seem to be doing because you have to go to some America Frontline weirdo doctor to get the human pill version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

 That's if the government go ahead with their previous stance of saying parental consent isn't needed if the child is deemed competent to consent. 

Going to go with not legal here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Going to go with not legal here.

It likely is. You'd imagine that a straightforward Gillick competency test would apply? Either way, I definitely think that we'll get some judicial clarification on the matter as you'd expect litigation on the issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×