Liberal Forum

ScottMon » 05 Sep 2022, 11:35 am » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 11:35 am

Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed (nih.gov)

Conclusions: Based on very low to moderate quality of evidence, 

You are too stupid to understand what that means. 
 

IkeBana » 05 Sep 2022, 12:48 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 12:48 pm

Mass Formation Psychosis is ****.  Your links are self-promoting ****.

And the people who died at Salem were real witches.

ScottMon » 05 Sep 2022, 1:04 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 1:04 pm

You are a broken record.

The irony.

Cannonpointer » 05 Sep 2022, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 8:00 pm

This is peer reviewed science about the W.H.O.-labeled WONDER DRUG, Ivermectin.

It's not from MSNBC, but they have so much to wade through, wht with russia russia russia and trump selling nuclear secrets to putin. Sorry.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Read this **** first.

Ivermectin is a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic agent, primarily deployed to combat parasitic worms in veterinary and human medicine


COVID is a **** VIRUS.

Cannonpointer » 05 Sep 2022, 8:20 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 8:20 pm

You are too stupid to understand what that means.

Why do you presume, Spam Gorging Imbecile?

Cannonpointer » 05 Sep 2022, 8:12 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 8:12 pm

"Our study has limitations. First, the open-label trial design might contribute to the underreporting of adverse events in the control group while overestimating the drug effects of ivermectin. Second, our study was not designed to assess the effects of ivermectin on mortality from COVID-19. Finally, the generalizability of our findings may be limited by the older study population, although younger and healthier individuals with low risk of severe disease are less likely to benefit from specific COVID-19 treatments."

1. When adverse events in the control group are under-reported, the study is designed for that under-reporting. They have the competence to design a proper study - and chose not to. Who funded this?

2. When the study is not designed to assess the effects of the purported life-saving medicine on saving lives, what IS its intent? A "null" (inconclusive) finding - that's what.

3. People in less danger appeared to derive less benefit. Absolutely astounding.

I see a whole bunch of questions,  you ignorant twat.

 

Cannonpointer » 05 Sep 2022, 8:01 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 8:01 pm

There he goes again - top form. 

You bring science, he brings ad hom. The boy ate his Wheaties today.

I bring the science, you wave the blue box **** you don't even understand. 

clevelandsteamer » 06 Sep 2022, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:39 am

You bring stink, like a pile of fresh horse poop.

BV is known for that

freeman » 05 Sep 2022, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 12:49 pm

Like America First Report is the only site that mirrored that story?
Metaverse Company Appoints Robot as Female CEO
https://duckduckgo.com/?va=j&t=hb&q=Met ... CEO&ia=web

Attacking the messenger is the MO of weak-minded people that are unable to refute a fact or point of view that is contrary to the lies they have been brainwashed to believe.
Interesting catch though, since in your case, you behave as a blind, deaf and dumb robot for Big Pharma, and it's patently easy to see why.
Mass Formation Psychosis - Why the U.S. looks increasingly like Nazi Germany

The support for my posts about **** Mass Formation Psychosis has already been posted here.  It's ****.  Keep arguing...it will still be ****.  It's **** Q-Anon, **** Trumpism, and Republican party ****.

clevelandsteamer » 06 Sep 2022, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:39 am

You bring stink, like a pile of fresh horse poop.

We know you're all anti-science ****.  But thanks for the confirmation.  Your Mass Formation Psychosis is anti-science.  It doesn't matter how many assholes with mystery credentials you dredge up...they're still anti-science assholes.
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 5:26 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 5:26 am

Read this **** first.

Ivermectin is a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic agent, primarily deployed to combat parasitic worms in veterinary and human medicine

COVID is a **** VIRUS.

Google, "Off label usage."

Google, "Is Rosacea caused by parasitism?"

Medicine is not static. It grows - new information avails. More drugs are prescribed off label than on. It is common. 

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 5:27 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 5:27 am

Why do you presume, Spam Gorging Imbecile?

No questions, dick sucker. 
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 5:33 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 5:33 am

I see a whole bunch of questions,  you ignorant twat.

None for you, dick sucker. 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 5:34 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 5:34 am

 

I bring the science, you wave the blue box **** you don't even understand.
 

Cannonpointer » 05 Sep 2022, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 8:04 pm

Blackvegetable » 05 Sep 2022, 10:29 am » wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2022, 10:29 am

show me.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Yeah?  What about it?  Here's what about it, pretty much a summary of the whole treatise in this one paragraph...

Today, ivermectin remains a relatively unknown drug, although few, if any, other drugs can rival ivermectin for its beneficial impact on human health and welfare. Ivermectin is a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic agent, primarily deployed to combat parasitic worms in veterinary and human medicine. This unprecedented compound has mainly been used in humans as an oral medication for treating filarial diseases but is also effective against other worm-related infections and diseases, plus several parasite-induced epidermal parasitic skin diseases, as well as insect infestations. It is approved for human use in several countries, ostensibly to treat Onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis (also known as Elephantiasis), strongyloidiasis and/or scabies and, very recently, to combat head lice.

Nobody's saying ivermectin is a bad drug.  It's a great drug.  It's an effective drug.  It kills all sorts of bugs and worms and can synergize with other drugs to improve the effectiveness of one or both drugs.

BUT IT DOES NOT KILL VIRUSES.  IT DOES NOT SYNERGIZE WITH COVID-19 mRNA VACCINES TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE VACCINES. 

Ivermectin has been shown in INVITRO lab tests to synergize with Remdesivir and other anti-viral drugs but only in concentrations that are dangerously poisonous to the human body.  The one lab study where some impact on the Sars-cov-2 virus was identified was at a dosage level 25 times the maximum safe dose for humans.

This information from Nature.Com says it's a remarkable drug for what it's good for.   I agree.

"Go suck *** cock" from CP in 5...4...3...2...1...

 
 

IkeBana » 06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am

BUT IT DOES NOT KILL VIRUSES.

I don't think these researchers were getting paid by Big Pharma to release these findings.
If these findings were proven fraudulent in  a law suit brought by BIG PHARMA ..imagine the harm it would do to the LITTLE PEOPLE  who are posting their positive findings about ivermectin.

Ivermectin Shows Antiviral Activity Against COVID-19 and May Reduce Transmission (infectiousdiseaseadvisor.com)
 
 

IkeBana » 06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am

Yeah?  What about it?  Here's what about it, pretty much a summary of the whole treatise in this one paragraph...

Nobody's saying ivermectin is a bad drug.  It's a great drug.  It's an effective drug.  It kills all sorts of bugs and worms and can synergize with other drugs to improve the effectiveness of one or both drugs.

BUT IT DOES NOT KILL VIRUSES. 

That is false. It is 100% effective against covid in vitro - that is settled science. And it is one of the safest drugs known to mankind in vivo.

Under the rules of medicine, it is the first drug that SHOULD have been tried against covid.

Under the rules of commerce, not so much - the patent is expired.

You are a tool of pharma.

IkeBana » 06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:21 am

Yeah?  What about it?  Here's what about it, pretty much a summary of the whole treatise in this one paragraph...

Nobody's saying ivermectin is a bad drug.  It's a great drug.  It's an effective drug.  It kills all sorts of bugs and worms and can synergize with other drugs to improve the effectiveness of one or both drugs.

BUT IT DOES NOT KILL VIRUSES.  IT DOES NOT SYNERGIZE WITH COVID-19 mRNA VACCINES TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE VACCINES.

Ivermectin has been shown in INVITRO lab tests to synergize with Remdesivir and other anti-viral drugs but only in concentrations that are dangerously poisonous to the human body.  The one lab study where some impact on the Sars-cov-2 virus was identified was at a dosage level 25 times the maximum safe dose for humans.

This information from Nature.Com says it's a remarkable drug for what it's good for.   I agree.

"Go suck *** cock" from CP in 5...4...3...2...1...

Thank you.

This is not the first time these idiots have been told this.

But these are people too stupid to grasp that petri doesn't have a liver.

Cannonpointer » 06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am

That is false. It is 100% effective against covid in vitro - that is settled science. And it is one of the safest drugs known to mankind in vivo.

Under the rules of medicine, it is the first drug that SHOULD have been tried against covid.

Under the rules of commerce, not so much - the patent is expired.

You are a tool of pharma.

YOU'RE A **** MORON!

Cannonpointer » 06 Sep 2022, 8:11 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:11 am

Google, "Off label usage."

Google, "Is Rosacea caused by parasitism?"

Medicine is not static. It grows - new information avails. More drugs are prescribed off label than on. It is common.

Show me petri with a liver.

Impenetrably **** stupid.