-
The lesson of ivermectin: meta-analyses based on summary data alone are inherently unreliable
-
Karl So you are saying you absolutely wouldnt take ivermectin until there are studies that you consider "respectable" ?
Meaning, If you were on your death bed with covid, you still wouldnt take it?
-
Fred Cloud a somewhat odd question. I won’t be on my death bed from Covid because I have already received proven treatment. 3 doses of Pfizer vaccine. And why take a medicine with no proven benefit and clear side effects?
-
David H a little chip on your shoulder?
-
Karl Yep, and with cause IMHO. "Scientists" view on substances - Orange Man is bad - we will make the substance look bad also - testing substances that stop virus replication in the immunity storm phase of the virus for example. And then declare it doesn't work. You can't trust any of them. Look at the FDA and CDA on the recent booster evaluation - they made it up to go along with the political doctor, Dr. Joe Biden, MD (false). Everyone should have a chip on their shoulder about the CDC, FDA, Big Pharma, and Dr. Joe!!!!!
-
David H And don't forget Dr. Fauci, The Omnipotent. But to the topic, to each his own, but here we are experimenting on ourselves with off-label therapies and we're worried about a few other drugs. And, well, I won't go into the '60s experience!
-
Dorian Gray yes, so glad that I can buy ivermectin, rapamycin, tadalafil, metformin, etc without having to get the permission of anyone.
-
David H You forgot in terms of your political tirade, you forgot to add the political U. S. Supreme Court led by the Chief "Justice" John Roberts . See his rejection of the 1964 Voting Rights Act ( States do not have to get approval of Federal Government to change voting rights) and 2014 decision striking down campaign contribution limits. Our government is bought and paid for by special interests. Whatever statistic we throw out you will just disregard it. 85 % of the people in the hospital due to covid are not vaccinated., This is is the statistic. Vaccines are not 100 % effective, but they do minimize the risk.
I get my Pfizer booster on the 17th of this month and can't wait. Thank you
-
-
Peter H. Howe That's a whole different can of worms, Peter because it was not a matter of approval but election laws within the states on how they are conducted, if that's what you're referring to. Similar to what happened in Philadelphia. But, I "vote" in favor of keeping politics out of our common interest here. Maybe start another thread on vaccines, as it is interesting what is appearing now regarding the booster shots. You can't get Moderna booster (not FDA approved yet) and they won't give you the Pfizer booster if you have had the Moderna initially. Anyone can subscribe to the JAMA newsletter which has constant covid research updates. I review them weekly also. Stay well, and be healthy!
-
Dorian Gray The Roberts court did modify 1964 Voting rights act ( actually got rid of it ) by eliminating the the need for the Feds to concur with any voting changes made by the States. This was based on the assertion that there was no evidence of voter discrimination and the law was not needed. .
On vaccines, I am 81 and in the 1940's polio affected one child in my neighborhood. There were a number of other diseases such as whooping cough, measles for which there was no vaccine.. Our homes had red quarantine signs when this happened. My sister caught the measles when she was pregnant in 1960 and has a mentally challenged child to show for it as the measles vaccine did not show up until latter.
I will get my Pfizer booster shot on the 17th. Will continue my long term use of DHEA, melatonin, Vit. D,, zinc, magnesium, selenium, NAC, whey protein, probiotics etc.
Agree with your proposal on politics, I just could not let David H's comments go unanswered-- at my age I should know better ( grow up ), but they were terribly misinformed and dangerous.
I think it is a tragedy that over 700k have perished due to covid. Many of of these deaths did not have to happen and can be attributed to misinformation. We are in my opinion past the need to study the issue. There is, with all things scientific, room to become more precise.
-
Peter H. Howe You make excellent points, especially about misinformation. It can come from many directions and appear to be perfectly researched and legitimate. It can be difficult to weed out lies from truth these days. I never take what appears to be valid information at face value. I'll do my own research if I feel it's important and try not to get locked into a single narrow point of view.
-
Jay Orman It is important to distinguish between "lies" where the person saying something actually knows it is not true, and situations where people are completely clueless and talk garbage, but that's because they have no ability to work out what the truth is. Human beings do tend to believe the first thing they are told and then stick to that come hell or high water.
-
John Hemming We also have the situation in which peer reviewed articles from two different and credible institutions make different conclusions related to efficacy of a treatment. Cleveland Clinic says fish oil is of little value in terms of preventing heart attacks and Mayo says it does have value in this regard. Neither institutions are fully accurate as high dose fish oil will virtually eliminate ischemic heart attacks, especially with low dose statin. This latter statement is based on my personnel experience with high dose fish oil ( 5.5 grams EPA/DHA/ day) along with 10 mg/day lipitor. My treatment was prescribed by a Dr. Davis almost 30 years ago after an emergency bypass. I will also add that in the past 2 years, two different cardiologists have told me that fish oil is of no value.
-
Peter H. Howe it could be that the situation is different for different people. Science moves gradually to the truth. I personally take fish oil, but have no view on this issue.
-
