Covid-19

Not sure how we can give accurate medical advice based on a meta-analysis of several poorly designed studies pooled together. Ivermectin may or may not be of benefit and there are some ongoing studies but it’s a far cry from making it a first line treatment when we have a first line treatment that likely works better (70-85% reduction in hospitalizations) and has already gone through phase 3 clinical trials. The in vitro activity it has against covid would be toxic in humans at that level so that makes the starting point for a randomized controlled trial a lot tougher.

In a country with little access to therapeutics/resources, the benefit/risk ratio may be different and it is more reasonable to use it in higher risk individuals.

Also court mandated treatment for someone 6 weeks into infection is borderline insanity if you ask me. The virus is not likely even active after 2-3 weeks tops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muskie in dayton

I’ll be the first to advocate that the average healthy person with natural immunity does not need the vax, but this is too far Lou. The vax enhances natural immunity. Yes, it may be a negligible difference, but why not? For someone in a higher risk group, it’s a good idea.

---

MID - yes, you might be right. The key phrase in your analysis is "it may be a negligible difference". In an Israeli study I quoted a few days ago, it reported that unvaccinated individuals who had contracted Covid in the past saw reinfections at a rate of just 0.12%. According to a few studies I've seen, the IFR for an average 40-year-old is in the 0.1% range. This translates in to roughly a one in a million chance that an average 40-year-old, previously infected, would die after a reinfection. A healthy 40-year-old would obviously have even better odds than this. I think we would both agree that the risk of a Covid death for this person is extremely low. However, on the flip side, we can't ignore the risks of getting a vaccine.

It's hard to know what the true figures are - for a variety of reasons - but there are now almost 14K deaths and 18K permanent disabilities, as well as more than 55K hospitalizations and 14K life threatening reports on the VAERS database (as a result of getting the vaccine). I realize those numbers are extremely low in comparison to the overall number of jabs. However, many pundits say the VAERS database under-reports the real numbers. This, in addition to the growing evidence that vaccine efficacy is waning after a few months, leads me to believe that the risks outweigh the rewards for a healthy 40-year-old who previously had Covid.

For the record, I totally agree that people in higher risk groups - regardless of age - should strongly consider getting the vax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muskie in dayton

I don’t understand this stupid vax vs. therapeutics argument. They are in no way mutually exclusive.

Get the vax, then if you still contract COVID-19, take Ivermectin. The Dems call anti-vaxxers killers, but the same is true for those trying to scare people away from therapeutics. Before anyone chimes in with some shit about horse worms (looking at you Bobbie), know that Ivermectin has had full FDA approval for human use, and has proven safe. https://www.covid19treatmentguidelin...py/ivermectin/. Lou’s links are the strongest evidence I’ve seen that it has some effectiveness against covid too.

So, why not both?

---

"The Food and Drug Administration warned that ivermectin in large doses can cause side effects including “skin rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, facial or limb swelling, neurologic adverse events, sudden drop in blood pressure, severe skin rash potentially requiring hospitalization and liver injury.”

Yeah, gimme some cow medicine.

That sounds like fewer side effects than are listed in every single boner pill commercial.

My apologies must have gotten lost in the mail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee

"The Food and Drug Administration warned that ivermectin in large doses can cause side effects including “skin rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, facial or limb swelling, neurologic adverse events, sudden drop in blood pressure, severe skin rash potentially requiring hospitalization and liver injury.”

Yeah, gimme some cow medicine.

---

Just about anything in large doses can have bad side effects or kill you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

That sounds like fewer side effects than are listed in every single boner pill commercial.

---

Well, they (boner pills) were originally designed to lower blood pressure. The boner was just a welcome side effect. So they have lowering blood pressure in common.

Phil Valentine loved the cow medicine.... Oh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noteggs

Well, they (boner pills) were originally designed to lower blood pressure. The boner was just a welcome side effect. So they have lowering blood pressure in common.

---

This is why I love this board! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee

Phil Valentine loved the cow medicine.... Oh

---

Do you have a point? Ever?