What have we here

[nobusinessofurs]

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ivermectin-antiviral-covid/2022/02/01/id/1054909/

[ExpatPattaya]

You have a idiotic ipinion based news site that just stirs controversy for ratings.

Totally bias and one of the misinformation sites that keeps Americans from getting vaxed and reason there are still 50,000 Covid deaths per week in the US .

Keep up the good work Grim Reaper! 555

[nobusinessofurs]

3 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

You have a idiotic ipinion based news site that just stirs controversy for ratings.

Totally bias and one of the misinformation sites that keeps Americans from getting vaxed and reason there are still 50,000 Covid deaths per week in the US .

Keep up the good work Grim Reaper! 555

Do you need a tissue. 

[oldschooler]

Don’t Need It. Appears politically funded by extreme right wingers.
For pure impartial factual “news only” (not analysis or opinions) BBC News Online appears very good. Detest their left leaning Opinion Commentators though.

For sensible factual reliable conservative Analysis / Opinion I like the Daily Mail Online. Andrew Neil & Others. Guardian or NYT are good for opposite lefty Balance although almost sickeningly left wing for me, except in small doses. Gives the “other” perspective well. Keeps the mind open & working. 

[nobusinessofurs]

17 hours ago, oldschooler said:

Don’t Need It. Appears politically funded by extreme right wingers.
For pure impartial factual “news only” (not analysis or opinions) BBC News Online appears very good. Detest their left leaning Opinion Commentators though.

For sensible factual reliable conservative Analysis / Opinion I like the Daily Mail Online. Andrew Neil & Others. Guardian or NYT are good for opposite lefty Balance although almost sickeningly left wing for me, except in small doses. Gives the “other” perspective well. Keeps the mind open & working. 

Typical nutter response, if it doesn't tow the leftist mindset its false. I could go into several responses to your total lack of irrational thought, but I won't. Same as I won't put forth other sources of the same article I posted link to. Why because you and so many's others aren't worth my time. I write you off as a sheep that blindly follows the path you're told too.   No hard feelings though, have a great day in LOS, because I am.

[Fluke]

22 hours ago, ExpatPattaya said:

You have a idiotic ipinion based news site that just stirs controversy for ratings.

Totally bias and one of the misinformation sites that keeps Americans from getting vaxed and reason there are still 50,000 Covid deaths per week in the US .

Keep up the good work Grim Reaper! 555

Do you disagree with the Japanese researchers ?

On what basis do you think that they are wrong ?

Do you think that the Japanese researchers are wrong because of the newspaper that printed the story ?

[oldschooler]

39 minutes ago, nobusinessofurs said:

Typical nutter response, if it doesn't tow the leftist mindset its false. I could go into several responses to your total lack of irrational thought, but I won't. Same as I won't put forth other sources of the same article I posted link to. Why because you and so many's others aren't worth my time. I write you off as a sheep that blindly follows the path you're told too.   No hard feelings though, have a great day in LOS, because I am.

You have not properly read or any understood my post which clearly indicates my views are rational - conservative. Very far from being a “nutter” , “ leftist” or “ sheep” I submit.

Your post fails to address my proposition re. your promoted Newsmax which “ivermectin” article at once identifies it as a totally discredited Disinformation source.

Instead you jump straight to rabid deranged Ad Hominem personal attacks. Typical QAnon conspiracy theorist loon behaviour in response to reasoned challenge. You are accordingly Dismissed.

[BigHewer]

22 hours ago, ExpatPattaya said:

there are still 50,000 Covid deaths per week in the US .

This is not true. Where did you pull that figure from?

[ExpatPattaya]

15 hours ago, BigHewer said:

This is not true. Where did you pull that figure from?

 

[ExpatPattaya]

16 hours ago, Fluke said:

Do you think that the Japanese researchers are wrong because of the newspaper that printed the story ?

This story was published in many online news sites but really no data given.  Any pharmaceutical company that claimes an "antiviral effect" against Covid needs to show some type of data. Numbers of people tested, etc...

Seems to me every pharmaceutical company wants in on Covid.  Making a claim may make them newsworthy, but without explanation of how many people in the clinical trials and numbers it is only that.

Just another news article, nothing substantial other than saying they are having trials IMO

[BigHewer]

31 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Yes, that means between 10,000 and 50,000. Check your facts.

This is what happens when people misread charts and graphs. We get ridiculous figures being passed off as fact.

[ExpatPattaya]

43 minutes ago, BigHewer said:

Yes, that means between 10,000 and 50,000. Check your facts.

This is what happens when people misread charts and graphs. We get ridiculous figures being passed off as fact.

Yes I can read a chart, yes the total last week was around 16,800 upon further investigation.  2 year total 892,000 plus deaths, so its all good on the Covid front. 

You realize Merck pharmaceutical , net worth 200 billion USD,  makes Ivermectin, so they are not interested in having their Ivermectin being marketed as an anti-viral against Covid. 

Pfizer net work is 154 billion, yet everyone seems to think they are the greedy b@stards

[BigHewer]

13 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Yes I can read a chart, yes the total last week was around 16,800 upon further investigation.  2 year total 892,000 plus deaths, so its all good on the Covid front. 

Yes, but that’s not the point you were making, is it now ExpatPattaya?

You said “there are still 50,000 covid deaths per week in the US”, which is a load of tosh.

 

[BraveNewFahrenheit]

17 hours ago, BigHewer said:

This is not true. Where did you pull that figure from?

Maybe from mainstream news who lies constantly like this tweet from MSNBC this week saying kids were in huge danger:

https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1489442571340455945

[BraveNewFahrenheit]

41 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Yes I can read a chart, yes the total last week was around 16,800 upon further investigation.  2 year total 892,000 plus deaths, so its all good on the Covid front. 

 

WRONG, totally false number, most died with covid, most were in nursing home with multiple comorbidities and would have been dead within 6 months. Stop pushing these lies, we all know perfectly healthy people under 65 were not taken out by covid.

[Guest1]

2 hours ago, ExpatPattaya said:

That is the problem with this kind of graphics: Understanding them

You know, dark red covers from 10001 up to 50000/week

Right now it is in the mid 20k, bad enough, but not near 50k/week. Yet

 

[Guest1]

53 minutes ago, ExpatPattaya said:

Pfizer net work is 154 billion, yet everyone seems to think they are the greedy b@stards

Charging for a pill cure pack, that has to be used before doctors even know, how bad it might get, 500+ US$, you think that is for the good cause?

That is 25 times a biontech(pfizer) jab, just not to share with biontech.

Win/win

[Smithydog]

I am not sure why people are seemingly getting so worked up about a non-clinical trial (i.e. laboratory trial). There have been plenty of them for Ivermectin. 

Some people may read this as a "Phase 3 trial", however not in the same context of what many have thrown around as "Phase 3" for other items like vaccines. It has only reached stage 3 of laboratory trials.

In the past, the lack of evidence seems to come up when it goes further into properly established clinical trials with a dosage that can be safely taken yet remain effective. (The Together Trial being an example of this https://www.togethertrial.com/trial-specifications)

As variants change in their features so should testing continue to determine effectiveness against new variants. We shouldn't discount them solely on how they performed against other variants, especially as Omicron is widely reported as being seen more in the throat and not so much the lungs, unlike previous variants. It's effectiveness may possibly improve because of that and hence why testing should continue.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/02/new-studies-reinforce-belief-that-omicron-is-less-likely-to-damage-lungs