TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
Some of it was over the top, but I think some of the Ivermectin downplaying was to keep people from taking the actual horse de-wormer. People are stupid.
And before you say nobody would do that, do your googles.
The official COVID-19/Coronavirus Discussion Thread...aka I hope I don't get the Rona
- Thread starter Goldie
- Start date
And before you say nobody would do that, do your googles.
I know they have but a big reason for that was doctors were refusing to prescribe it and/or pharmacies were refusing to fill it. They either caused or greatly exacerbated that situation.
Can't say it was a shortage bc that shit been given to billions and billions for years.
Ccslim
Active Member
the actual makers of ivermectin said their medicine don’t treat Covid and don’t take it for Covid. If you not gonna believe them then I dunno what to say.
Bc it wasn't intended for antiviral use. The japanese study above says in preclinical trial that it has antiviral effect against Covid.
Merck never provided a study actually researching this.
They went along with FDA while trying to get something they can patent approved.
I'll wait for the data.
DOS_patos
Unverified Legion of Trill member
Viagra was meant to dilate blood vessels yet here we are
Yea that too. Repurposed drugs have helped all throughout history. This is literally the first time to my knowledge that the advice was "don't do anything til we have a product to sell"
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
You have to remember too that a lot of those doctors won’t prescribe it for liability reasons. If you prescribe or use a drug not approved for that thing and somebody dies, you’re done for.
I think liability hasn’t been highlighted enough in why doctors are making the decisions they are and why businesses are establishing these vaccine mandates and masking rules. The pharmaceutical companies might not be liable for vaccine risks, but these other folks can still be sued if they’re not shown to have done everything they can to protect people.
The liability argument falls apart when u have a doctor that is willing to prescribe it bc they believe it works, and a pharmacy won't fill it.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting but is suppressing a cheap, safe drug considered doing everything u can to protect people?
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
Pharmacy may have some liability in that transaction too, idk.
To your second point, it hasn’t been approved to treat Covid so there may be some liability risk that a lot of doctors probably don’t want to take.
Again, I'm speaking of doctors who are willing to take that risk and prescribe it.
Now for all we know, all the current studies will prove it doesn't work, then fine, no harm no foul.
But if a legit study proves it does work, that's a huge failure on many levels
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
So your only beef is with a pharmacy not filling the script. You’re ok and can understand why doctors wouldn’t prescribe it, right?
Lol naw that ain't my beef. That's my explanation for why ppl (still dumb) resorted to the livestock shit.
My beef is if the shit actually helps against Covid and they turned it into this shit show.
My beef would also be w media portraying a drug given to billions of humans as livestock medicine. Also the false reporting of ppl poisoned by ivermectin clogging up hospitals, and over exaggerating the number of ppl who were poisoned by the live stock medicine.
Last edited:
TheNightKing
J.A.P.A.N.
It has helped some people, but hasn’t been proven to help on a massive scale. That’s what the studies are for. There is probably an argument to be made that these studies and their funding is getting stifled due to the push for vaccines and other new medicines where there’s more money to be made, but still. If the vaccine works to prevent you from ever even needing ivermectin then why would anyone push it over the vaccine.
And back to the original point, I still don’t understand why the same people who down the vaccine would trust Ivermectin when the vaccine has been administered to hundreds of millions of people safely and Ivermectin has only been used in a small population of people successfully.
I think we agree on a lot of points, I just don’t care enough about ivermectin or its demonization as much. Some is warranted, some is not.
Back before vaccines even had a timeline ivermectin was being suggested by doctors. When they were telling us if you're sick go home. Don't come to us until u get worse. The only option then was ventilators, we see how that went. Vast majority of hospitals wouldn't give it a try even though it was safe whether it worked or not. Now it doesn't matter bc the vaccines are out. I'm curious to know if they shitted on something that could've saved lives when other options ran out.
A lot of ppl said "u can trust the vaccine millions haven't dropped dead yet."
There's a diff between "I'll take it and hope for the best" vs "let's try a safe drug that's been around for 100 yrs and helped billions with one of the safest side effect profiles on the market"
While I personally suggested ppl take the vaccine I can completely understand that viewpoint. The vaccine was still experimental as it rolled out, ivermectin wasn't.
I only care that it could've possibly saved lives as it was actively suppressed. Again if the current studies prove it to be ineffective then oh well.
Yikes
And yikes!
