Alternative 'rona thread

[Pureblood]

1 minute ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I haven't. 

 

I'm not going to watch it just because some gobshite says "watch this". (I thought a free-thinker like you would appreciate my lack of blind obedience.)  I can be persuaded to watch it if someone explains why it's worth watching.

Oh, so you do want to watch it?  The link is on the other page.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

9 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

Oh, so you do want to watch it?  The link is on the other page.

You really are thick, aren't you.

[Pureblood]

19 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

You really are thick, aren't you.

I'll let you be the judge of that, oh wise one. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

We can’t call these people “loons” remember. What other nomenclature would be appropriate? 
 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/baby-turns-blue-after-dad-26049388

[Pureblood]

4 minutes ago, Nelly-Fauci said:

We can’t call these people “loons” remember. What other nomenclature would be appropriate? 
 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/baby-turns-blue-after-dad-26049388

Sounds similar to the prison thing where an inmate was given 48mg instead of 14mg.  

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10410765/Inmates-Arkansas-sue-medical-staff-prison-giving-ivermectin-treat-COVID-19.html

[A Red]

Invermectin works if given the correct dosage?

 

Fucking loons

[Rico1304]

15 minutes ago, Nelly-Fauci said:

We can’t call these people “loons” remember. What other nomenclature would be appropriate? 
 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/baby-turns-blue-after-dad-26049388

I often get medical advice off loons on the internet. I mean who doesn’t.  But it’s definitely not the fault of the people giving g the advice despite no medical training.  

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

 

[Pureblood]

https://www.riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/modern-day-censorship/new-scientific-study-on-the-efficacy-of-ivermectin-in-covid-19-positive-patients/

 

New scientific study on the efficacy of ivermectin in Covid-19 positive patients

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower.

 

January 25, 2022

 

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Brazilian endocrinologist Dr. Flavio Cadegiani and eight other co-authors have published a peer-reviewed scientific study on the efficacy of early treatment with ivermectin against covid-19, involving more than 200,000 people.

 

“Before the study was published, I was very cautious about the efficacy of ivermectin as part of the treatment against covid-19,” Dr. Cadegiani admits to FranceSoir at the outset.

 

Read also: Check out our coverage on curated alternative narratives

However, he asserts that he prescribed the drug to prevent the disease because “there is no risk in taking it.” In his opinion, the risk-benefit balance can only be positive since the risk is zero.

 

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower:

• 44% reduction in risk of infection;
• 56% reduction in risk of hospitalization (this may be comparable to the severe form of the disease);
• 68% reduction in risk of death

Dr. Cadegiani states that this is the first publication and that four more will follow with data from other countries. He also emphasizes that he has no ties to pharmaceutical laboratories and even says that he contributed 100,000 euros out of his pocket to these various studies to conduct them.

 

He also used very conservative statistical models to provide the most rigorous evidence possible.

 

Although it is widely used in India, Japan, and many other countries, ivermectin is not recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) as part of treatment for covid-19.

[3 Stacks]

8 hours ago, Simbo said:

Absolutely awful.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60132765

 

The selection of certain patients for a transplant, versus others who don't fulfill certain conditions is extremely common. This is an article written with the goal of shocking people who don't know how transplants work and who don't know how selective medical professionals are in choosing who gets them and who don't get them.

[Pureblood]

1 minute ago, 3 Stacks said:

The selection of certain patients for a transplant, versus others who don't fulfill certain conditions is extremely common. This is an article written with the goal of scaring people who don't know how transplants work and who don't know how selective medical professionals are in choosing who gets them and who don't get them.

[3 Stacks]

3 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

Your man Novak's face when he couldn't get away with his nonsense.

[Bjornebye]

 

 

[A Red]

1 hour ago, TK-421 said:

Go on, do it.  Lives are at stake, in your view.  What could be more important than that? If that doesn't justify a ban, what does?  Get on with it. 

I'm beginning to think that you being active on this subject is actually helping the fight against the anti vax loons. Keep up the good work.

 

Don't ban TK we need him!

[Pureblood]

13 minutes ago, A Red said:

I'm beginning to think that you being active on this subject is actually helping the fight against the anti vax loons. Keep up the good work.

 

Don't ban TK we need him!

Maybe I'll help save lives?  I can picture it now; Sajid Javid clicks on the thread, reads the Ivermectin article and sees the published and peer reviewed study, rolls out Ivermectin and reduces 68% of the deaths from Covid.  If I post it, he will come. 

 

[Rico1304]

51 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

https://www.riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/modern-day-censorship/new-scientific-study-on-the-efficacy-of-ivermectin-in-covid-19-positive-patients/

 

New scientific study on the efficacy of ivermectin in Covid-19 positive patients

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower.

 

January 25, 2022

 

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Brazilian endocrinologist Dr. Flavio Cadegiani and eight other co-authors have published a peer-reviewed scientific study on the efficacy of early treatment with ivermectin against covid-19, involving more than 200,000 people.

 

“Before the study was published, I was very cautious about the efficacy of ivermectin as part of the treatment against covid-19,” Dr. Cadegiani admits to FranceSoir at the outset.

 

Read also: Check out our coverage on curated alternative narratives

However, he asserts that he prescribed the drug to prevent the disease because “there is no risk in taking it.” In his opinion, the risk-benefit balance can only be positive since the risk is zero.

 

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower:

• 44% reduction in risk of infection;
• 56% reduction in risk of hospitalization (this may be comparable to the severe form of the disease);
• 68% reduction in risk of death

Dr. Cadegiani states that this is the first publication and that four more will follow with data from other countries. He also emphasizes that he has no ties to pharmaceutical laboratories and even says that he contributed 100,000 euros out of his pocket to these various studies to conduct them.

 

He also used very conservative statistical models to provide the most rigorous evidence possible.

 

Although it is widely used in India, Japan, and many other countries, ivermectin is not recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) as part of treatment for covid-19.

It’s never a small % is it? It’s always a huge reduction. Hopefully he’s publishing the data. 

[Pureblood]

Just now, Rico1304 said:

It’s never a small % is it? It’s always a huge reduction. Hopefully he’s publishing the data. 

Perhaps the clue is in the word "published"? 

[Rico1304]

7 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

Perhaps the clue is in the word "published"? 

He’s published the study.  Now, has he published the data?  

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

He’s published the study.  Now, has he published the data?  

This is from the PDF linked in the article.  Looks pretty transparent to me.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

The full underlying data for the present analysis were analyzed by two independent statisticians, and discrepancies were evaluated by a third statistics expert.

 

For transparency reasons, two data sets of the 7,345 COVID-19 cases and the 113,845 participating subjects considered for the present analysis will be made public upon peer-reviewed publication. 

[Rico1304]

Just now, TK-421 said:

This is from the PDF linked in the article.  Looks pretty transparent to me.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

The full underlying data for the present analysis were analyzed by two independent statisticians, and discrepancies were evaluated by a third statistics expert.

 

For transparency reasons, two data sets of the 7,345 COVID-19 cases and the 113,845 participating subjects considered for the present analysis will be made public upon peer-reviewed publication. 

So do you want to walk back on your ‘published’ comment then?  Because it hasn’t been yet. 

[Pureblood]

Just now, Rico1304 said:

So do you want to walk back on your ‘published’ comment then?  Because it hasn’t been yet. 

No, because in the same section of the report it states:

 

There were no missing data since the registry system design mandated that all data variables be filled to be formally included in the registry.

[Red Lead]

1 hour ago, TK-421 said:

https://www.riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/modern-day-censorship/new-scientific-study-on-the-efficacy-of-ivermectin-in-covid-19-positive-patients/

 

New scientific study on the efficacy of ivermectin in Covid-19 positive patients

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower.

 

January 25, 2022

 

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Brazilian endocrinologist Dr. Flavio Cadegiani and eight other co-authors have published a peer-reviewed scientific study on the efficacy of early treatment with ivermectin against covid-19, involving more than 200,000 people.

 

“Before the study was published, I was very cautious about the efficacy of ivermectin as part of the treatment against covid-19,” Dr. Cadegiani admits to FranceSoir at the outset.

 

Read also: Check out our coverage on curated alternative narratives

However, he asserts that he prescribed the drug to prevent the disease because “there is no risk in taking it.” In his opinion, the risk-benefit balance can only be positive since the risk is zero.

 

In the empirical study conducted in the heart of the port city of Itajai in southern Brazil, more than 200,000 people were observed, and the results are clear. The risk of infection, severe cases, or mortality is lower:

• 44% reduction in risk of infection;
• 56% reduction in risk of hospitalization (this may be comparable to the severe form of the disease);
• 68% reduction in risk of death

Dr. Cadegiani states that this is the first publication and that four more will follow with data from other countries. He also emphasizes that he has no ties to pharmaceutical laboratories and even says that he contributed 100,000 euros out of his pocket to these various studies to conduct them.

 

He also used very conservative statistical models to provide the most rigorous evidence possible.

 

Although it is widely used in India, Japan, and many other countries, ivermectin is not recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) as part of treatment for covid-19.

I thought this study was from last year some time and wasn't there a lot of scepticism surrounding it? 

 

https://www.science.org/content/article/too-good-be-true-doubts-swirl-around-trial-saw-77-reduction-covid-19-mortality

 

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/ivermectin-study-itajai-contains-methodological-weaknesses-questionable-conclusions/

Edited January 26, 2022 by Red Lead
Found the links

[Pureblood]

3 minutes ago, Red Lead said:

I thought this study was from last year some time and wasn't there a lot of scepticism surrounding it? 

It was published 15th January 2022, presumably to address alleged shortcomings of the earlier study you refer to. 

[Red Lead]

3 hours ago, TK-421 said:

Yay, we got there!  Took a few posts, but you spat it out eventually.  Anthi-thvaxxer!!!

 

Do we really have to do this silly dance again? What's the point?

 

Even if I was anti-vaccine (I'm not, I'm pro choice), who cares?  What's wrong with not liking something?  I don't like you, but I don't mind if other people do and wouldn't want to deny them that choice.

I'm all for open dialogue etc, but claiming to be "pro choice" and then making fun of peoples choices with endless memes is not doing yourself or the discussion any favours.

[Rico1304]

19 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

No, because in the same section of the report it states:

 

There were no missing data since the registry system design mandated that all data variables be filled to be formally included in the registry.

Typical.  If it’s published link it here.   Or are you so incapable of admitting you’re wrong you just can’t do it?