Covid-19

[Lloyd Braun]

I did have COVID so it’s hard to say but I certainly wouldn’t want to feel pressured on a message board or forced by politicians to make that choice.

Using the hypothetical I presented is a common scenario I come across. People were ok with the first but tend to not be ok with the booster for whatever reason. Just curious to see the mindset on that. And I am referring to those that did not have covid yet.

[Strange Brew]

Using the hypothetical I presented is a common scenario I come across. People were ok with the first but tend to not be ok with the booster for whatever reason. Just curious to see the mindset on that. And I am referring to those that did not have covid yet.

Lack of need due to the idea of get the shot to back to normal turned out to be a fallacy. I’ve had COVID and been exposed to it since. There’s no need for additional gene therapy for me at this point. But that’s me personally. I can’t speak for each of your patients.

Personally, I wasn’t really ok with the first if that helps you to be more empathetic.

[Muskie in dayton]

Wow Debby downer over here…Perhaps you’ve read a little too much Nietzsche? I wasn’t aware that it is so difficult to have a rewarding job!

I still believe people at the core are inherently good.

I'm calling your strawman argument. I never said people were inherently bad. I did say, and maintain, that people will inherently do stupid things contrary to their own interests, whether health or otherwise. That, Mr. Braun, will never change.

[Muskie in dayton]

I think Lloyd explained it pretty perfectly and he’s in the medical field, doesn’t play one on the internet. Plus, this question of yours has been answered several times on his thread already.

Cop out. It has not been answered with any defensible reason. If you wish to take the stance that we (society) should incur the costs of a vaccine mandate, you must first be able to articulate the social benefit against which it can be argued.

[Muskie in dayton]

I’m sure I will regret responding but-

No it doesn’t work and the data isn’t there to support it’s use. Some doctors still prescribe it outpatient for covid and I know this because I see them in the hospital for it. 100% of them unvaccinated.

Lloyd you know this isn't true. While It's now a "silver bullet" there are certainly enough data to show some effectiveness, and many, many data to show it's very safe. It should have been widely prescribed for Covid cases, vs. doing nothing but intubating patients to prolong their death by a few days. Being proven very safe, why wouldn't it have been tried?

The failure to repurpose potentially viable therapeutics will go down as the second biggest crime against humanity of the COVID era, right behind lockdowns.

[Xville]

Cop out. It has not been answered with any defensible reason. If you wish to take the stance that we (society) should incur the costs of a vaccine mandate, you must first be able to articulate the social benefit against which it can be argued.

Vaccine mandate wasn’t what was in question. The question you posed that started this up again was why should I or someone who is vaxxed care what unvaxxed people do. That question has been answered on here pretty definitively numerous times. Comparing it to smokers, diabetes because of eating choices etc holds zero water and has been answered as to why several times.

It’s not a cop out when someone who knows a hell of a lot more on the subject than me and (I’m sorry you don’t believe this) and YOU, answers the question pretty definitively. you still choose to ignore it even though it’s been answered on this thread numerous times which I guess is your prerogative

[Lloyd Braun]

Lloyd you know this isn't true. While It's now a "silver bullet" there are certainly enough data to show some effectiveness, and many, many data to show it's very safe. It should have been widely prescribed for Covid cases, vs. doing nothing but intubating patients to prolong their death by a few days. Being proven very safe, why wouldn't it have been tried?

The failure to repurpose potentially viable therapeutics will go down as the second biggest crime against humanity of the COVID era, right behind lockdowns.

Sorry to report that pooled meta-analyses are not substantial enough to warrant clinical use. The amount of damage it has done (including people trusting that it works so much to decline antibody treatments) outweighs any small benefit it might have had.

[Strange Brew]

Vaccine mandate wasn’t what was in question. The question you posed that started this up again was why should I or someone who is vaxxed care what unvaxxed people do. That question has been answered on here pretty definitively numerous times. Comparing it to smokers, diabetes because of eating choices etc holds zero water and has been answered as to why several times.

It’s not a cop out when someone who knows a hell of a lot more on the subject than me and (I’m sorry you don’t believe this) and YOU, answers the question pretty definitively. you still choose to ignore it even though it’s been answered on this thread numerous times which I guess is your prerogative

Ok, then what about alcohol? Should that be banned as people’s use of it often times has negative consequences for others and “society”

[Strange Brew]

Sorry to report that pooled meta-analyses are not substantial enough to warrant clinical use. The amount of damage it has done (including people trusting that it works so much to decline antibody treatments) outweighs any small benefit it might have had.

Huh, the same could be said for over pushing the vaccines unless you think no one has died from side effects. Nothing is perfect and there’s no good reason to deny the drug once someone has COVID.

[Lloyd Braun]

Huh, the same could be said for over pushing the vaccines unless you think no one has died from side effects. Nothing is perfect and there’s no good reason to deny the drug once someone has COVID.

When making a recommendation or prescribing a medication the prescriber weights risk and benefit. In the case of Ivermectin, it has not been shown to be beneficial at the doses humans can tolerate, so the benefit and risk are not that far apart. There are other treatments that have been shown to be beneficial in high risk individuals that are available so we go with those. In the case of vaccines, the benefit far outweighs the risk as the number of people that have died from side effects is extremely low. There’s clear benefit since the vaccine was studied in clinical trials we have actual data. I’m not opposed to an ivermectin study being done but the effective in vitro dose is toxic in humans which makes for a tough starting point. There would be plenty of volunteers though for the study as a lot of people ask about it.