Jump to content


The Right-Wing Disinformation Machine


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

Why is anyone engaging in the discussion of Ivermectin vis a vis Covid?

 

Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic

 

Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today affirmed its position regarding use of ivermectin during the COVID-19 pandemic. Company scientists continue to carefully examine the findings of all available and emerging studies of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 for evidence of efficacy and safety. It is important to note that, to-date, our analysis has identified:

  • No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies; 
  • No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and; 
  • A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.

We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The MAKER of Ivermectin says it was not designed for, and has no effect on, treating Covid.

 

Full stop.

 

 

 

 

Why is HuskerBoard allowing this kind of disinformation - which has killed Americans - to be disseminated on this site?

It’s a conspiracy man (in my Tommy Chong stoner voice). Merck owns stock in the vaccine makers, man. (Still my stoner voice). They know it really works man. Dave took it and Dave didn’t die from Covid.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

7 hours ago, Redux said:

 

*your

 

If you followed the money you'd know WHY any harmless treatments were cast as nonsense like Horse Dewormer in favor of vaccination.

Thanks for correcting my autocorrect.

 

If you ever read you would know that study you posted had horrible conflicts of interest. Iver is not a proven COVID treatment and is not approved by the FDA. I've no idea why all the sudden you've gotten in a twist about it when we have extremely effective vaccines out there that are proven, and have been available for a long time now.

 

The media is a bunch of morons and it was absolutely lazy journalism to label it as horse dewormer but that doesn't change the efficacy, or lack there of, of the drug.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Thanks for correcting my autocorrect.

 

If you ever read you would know that study you posted had horrible conflicts of interest. Iver is not a proven COVID treatment and is not approved by the FDA. I've no idea why all the sudden you've gotten in a twist about it when we have extremely effective vaccines out there that are proven, and have been available for a long time now.

 

The media is a bunch of morons and it was absolutely lazy journalism to label it as horse dewormer but that doesn't change the efficacy, or lack there of, of the drug.

 

Welcome to most clinical trials.  Also, those conflicts of interest are coming from the side that doesn't want to find a successful treatment.  Again we're talking about a non harmful people medecine, so if it doesn't work for everyone as a treatment it's not a big deal.  So why would there be so much "conflict? :B)

 

No, it's not proven yet to treat Covid.  Probably never will be because, vaccines.  Again it's non harmu, and off label use is not a new concept.

 

Vaccines are preventative, medecine is treatment.  Why wouldn't we want both to help fight a pandemic?  You hear how ridiculous that sentiment you make is right?  And that effectiveness you're touting has as much time being tested as Ivermectin does as a treatment.

 

It wasn't lazy, it was intentional misinformation to deter people from seeking out Ivermectin.  Last time, a non harmful people drug that has been tested and used successfully as a treatment medecine.  The only reason you or anyone else is so against a non harmful people medecine as a treatment is because you've been indoctrinated to so so.

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
49 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Welcome to most clinical trials.  Also, those conflicts of interest are coming from the side that doesn't want to find a successful treatment.  Again we're talking about a non harmful people medecine, so if it doesn't work for everyone as a treatment it's not a big deal.  So why would there be so much "conflict? :B)

 

No, it's not proven yet to treat Covid.  Probably never will be because, vaccines.  Again it's non harmu, and off label use is not a new concept.

 

Vaccines are preventative, medecine is treatment.  Why wouldn't we want both to help fight a pandemic?  You hear how ridiculous that sentiment you make is right?  And that effectiveness you're touting has as much time being tested as Ivermectin does as a treatment.

 

It wasn't lazy, it was intentional misinformation to deter people from seeking out Ivermectin.  Last time, a non harmful people drug that has been tested and used successfully as a treatment medecine.  The only reason you or anyone else is so against a non harmful people medecine as a treatment is because you've been indoctrinated to so so.

A perfect lesson of somebody who desperately wants something to be true so badly they warp their reality to make it true. 

 

I can't believe I have to explain this, but doctors should not prescribe or treat a disease with anything that doesn't work, even if it's not harmful. Do you know why doctors don't prescribe Ibuprofen to treat cancer? Because it doesn't work. The harm comes not from the drug, but from the course of the disease a patient thinks is being treated by said drug.

 

How many people do you think died because they thought Ivermectin was a substitute for the vaccine? To be noted, like I told @knapplc, I really don't care.  If somebody is stupid and wants to die, let them. 

  • Plus1 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment

32 minutes ago, Redux said:

The only reason you or anyone else is so against a non harmful people medecine as a treatment is because you've been indoctrinated to so so.

 

The manufacturer says it's not designed to treat a virus. They stand to benefit most from sales of Ivermectin. Why aren't they pushing it as a treatment?

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
Just now, BigRedBuster said:

No, it won't be proven to treat Covid because it doesn't treat Covid.

 

It's pretty simple actually.

 

It really is. Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral.

 

Covid is a virus. If it was a parasite, Ivermectin may help. But it doesn't, and we know that because unbiased studies have proven it, and the manufacturer of the drug hasn't cashed in on the hype surrounding it.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It really is. Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral.

 

Covid is a virus. If it was a parasite, Ivermectin may help. But it doesn't, and we know that because unbiased studies have proven it, and the manufacturer of the drug hasn't cashed in on the hype surrounding it.

It really is amazing that, normally smart people aren't understanding that.  But...oh my....we are the ones that have been "indoctrinated".  Yeah....OK.....I've been indoctrinated by science and the manufacturer.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

26 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

The manufacturer says it's not designed to treat a virus. They stand to benefit most from sales of Ivermectin. Why aren't they pushing it as a treatment?

 

Because it wasn't designed to treat a virus, that's quite obvious.  Again, off label use is not a new concept.  If it works for some that's great, if it doesn't and there are no real risks why not use it?

12 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

No, it won't be proven to treat Covid because it doesn't treat Covid.

 

It's pretty simple actually.

 

Expect for when it does but we ignore that because the media called it horsey medecine right?

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It really is. Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, not an antiviral.

Quote

Reports from in vitro studies suggest that ivermectin acts by inhibiting the host importin alpha/beta-1 nuclear transport proteins, which are part of a key intracellular transport process that viruses hijack to enhance infection by suppressing the host’s antiviral response.

 

Link to comment

This information is incomplete and outdated. Note the hedging:

 


Reports from in vitro studies suggest that ivermectin acts by inhibiting the host importin alpha/beta-1 nuclear transport proteins, which are part of a key intracellular transport process that viruses hijack to enhance infection by suppressing the host’s antiviral response. In addition, ivermectin docking may interfere with the attachment of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein to the human cell membrane.6 Ivermectin is thought to be a host-directed agent, which may be the basis for its broad-spectrum activity in vitro against the viruses that cause dengue, Zika, HIV, and yellow fever.4,7-9


 

Why did they say "suggest" and "may" here? Because they weren't conducting actual factual studies, but getting reports from doctors trying 1,000 things to help with Covid. When they conducted actual studies, those studies showed Ivermectin is ineffective in treating Covid.

 

Here's the study

 

 

Note the dates on your misinformation and the NEJM study.

 

 

And you conveniently, and laughably and (sadly) predictably left off the last portion OF THE VERY PARAGRAPH YOU QUOTED:

Despite this in vitro activity, no clinical trials have reported a clinical benefit for ivermectin in patients with these viruses. Some studies of ivermectin have also reported potential anti-inflammatory properties, which have been postulated to be beneficial in people with COVID-19.10-12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Super, super weird that you wouldn't include that part.

 

 

Oh, wait. No it isn't.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...