27 Replies to “I Amuse Myself”

  1. I have a great respect for Ivermectin. It’s a miracle drug for parasites.

    But the evidence that it’s useful for treating COVID is weak. The early studies that found benefits tended to be badly designed (small samples, poor or no controls, obvious risk of bias, and so on), and some papers were retracted. When they moved on to well-designed, large-scale, randomly controlled studies, the benefits disappeared.

    https://www.cochrane.org/evidence/CD015017_ivermectin-preventing-and-treating-covid-19

    But for many it had became an article of faith that Ivermectin was all you needed for COVID.

    1. killer lASS, unMe, alla S
      You’v been bullshitting about Ivermectin and HCQ since the start of the scamdemic , but both have shown promise in fighting immune system related issues, including cancer, butt keep earning yer govt provided pay check to lie!

        1. Here’s an idea … COVID was only fatal to the very old, and/or severely medically compromised. No treatment necessary … which is exactly what our public health agencies provided … NOTHING. No therapy whatsoever. Rest, and drink plenty of fluids.

          Not until their magic vaccine [sic] arrived. Which did nothing. Didn’t prevent spread. Didn’t prevent reinfection.

          1. “Not until their magic vaccine [sic] arrived. Which did nothing. Didn’t prevent spread. Didn’t prevent reinfection.”

            But it sure did enrich both Big Pharma and the politicians who they *paid* to push it on us.

          2. “Here’s an idea … COVID was only fatal to the very old, and/or severely medically compromised.”

            Yes, exactly like the seasonal flu virus.

            They screwed up at first by announcing that the survival rate for COVID-19 was 97.6% or 99.3% or something, then later started screeching that it was going to kill us all if we didn’t find a vaccine for it. I smelled a rat right away, but since I have never had a flu vaccination I wasn’t concerned in the least about COVID-19. When I caught it (thanks to someone I was seeing at the time), it wasn’t pleasant but I’ve had worse head colds.

        2. Early on I came across a talk by an immunologist who said that Ivermectin, together with zinc and vitamin D, was a prophylactic for covid and only secondarily a treatment.

          The key was taking them in combination.

          1. I have mega-dosed Vit.D ever since reading that report. I have never had COVID, despite going on with my life as normal. No hand sanitizing with gels. No mask, wherever possible, and going into the public as always.

            Now, perhaps I contracted COVID once, when I was slightly ill … however I NEVER “tested” myself for COVID. And I’ve never gotten seriously ill either.

          3. I take 4,000 IU daily … although 6 or more was recommended. As I do spend plenty of time outdoors and love my cheese.

        3. “Present your evidence that Ivermectin is useful for treating COVID. I’ll go first:

          https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115869”

          That’s where I stopped reading, right there. The New England Medical Journal? LOL…they’re about as credible as The Lancet when it comes to *anything* related to Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine. They were BOTH caught spreading lies about both drugs, and both organizations are little more than marketing arms for pharmaceutical companies. FOLLOW THE MONEY, fool.

          The real bottom line here is that both drugs needed to be attacked relentlessly for two reasons: because if either one was in fact a viable treatment for COVID-19 then Big Pharma *could not have* Emergency Use Authorization (and thus immunity from prosecution). This would cost them BILLIONS of dollars in lost revenue.

          The other reason is the hilariously childish one spewed by people who know nothing about EUAs or ‘combined trials’ or the fact that Pfizer paid a $1.2 billion criminal fine in 2009 and GlaxoSmithKline paying a 3 billion dollar fine in 2012 for LYING about their drugs: because DONALD TRUMP mentioned both drugs a couple of times. That’s it. That’s ALL it takes for some people.

          (three guesses which regular poster here falls into the latter category…)

          For myself, it was the fact that not only did the Canadian Medical Association ban the prescribing of both drugs but so did the Canadian Pharmacists Association (think about that one for a second: pharmacists being allowed to *second-guess* actual doctors??). I knew the fix was in. Again: FOLLOW THE MONEY…it will always lead you to the truth.

          1. 3,515 total test subjects … of which only 679 actually received Ivermectin … and KM calls that a “large scale” trial? Seriously?

            A large-scale medical study typically involves enrolling tens of thousands of participants

            Who cares what “name” is associated with such a crap study. New England Jourrrrrrnalll of Medicine. Puhleeze.

          2. Whatever excuses you come up with to discredit some of the most respected medical journals in the world, these studies are infinitely more convincing than the evidence which you have presented, which is none.

            And I didn’t mention vaccines. That’s an argument for another day.

          3. No, I mentioned the vaccine … as that was the ONLY treatment ever ‘prescribed’ by our Public Health [sic] Agencies. So my inclusion of it is quite relevant.

          4. Kenji:

            No, large scale means big enough to have adequately small confidence intervals to draw statistically significant conclusions from, and that depends on the nature of what is being studied. The earliest studies on COVID and Ivermectin often had less than 100 patients, and were sometimes meant as precursors to larger studies. This one seems well designed, but had only 24 patients:

            https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-53702030464-8/fulltext

            But if you want really large scale, you can go to meta-analyses, which combine the results of many studies:

            https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12879-026-13195-9

    2. But the evidence that it’s useful for treating COVID is weak.

      I’m sorry. I thought we were discussing screw worm treatment, not the Coof. Try to stay on topic, would you?

      1. Notice the label “safe and effective” at the top? Clearly Kate was referring to people’s reaction to those who think Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID. Sometimes such people went too far, dismissing Ivermectin as horse dewormer. No, it’s actually a valuable human medicine. It’s just not much good for COVID.

        1. No…she was referring to the COVID “vaccine” as safe and effective. It was neither.

  2. Wife & I got Covid at same time, her 2 vax, me zero, she was also very sick for 4 days from side effects of her second jab , we almost went to the emergency.
    When we got Covid at the same time, it hit her harder than me and I recovered faster even though I am 5 1/2 years older. I never got it again. I used Ivermectin

    1. You understand that anecdotes establish nothing, right? COVID was highly variable in how it affected people. Some unvacccinated people had no external symptoms. Others died. The only way to determine how effective a treatment is is through large-scale statistical studies, preferably double blind and randomly controlled.

      1. Double blind and randomly controlled! Just as our mysterious overlords want us!

  5. After reading these comments, I would suggest that everyone here should imbibe a measure of laudanum, recline on a fainting couch, and try not to fixate on cures for endless fear porn ailments.
    Hey, wash some ivermectin down with whiskey, it may work, especially if you crank up the tunes and relax.
    Oh, and I like vitamins and turmeric and good old cod liver oil, but no need to shout about whether it works for covid.
    Some, here, are fixated on tying everything back to covid, which is a killer fixation.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation