Cont: Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories Part IV

[arthwollipot]

Arth, you can lead a horse to water mate...

Oh, I am under no illusions that I will change anyone's mind here. But I am fascinated by the fictional narratives that people weave around incomplete and misleading information.

 

[Blue Mountain]

(snip)

I avoid big pharma products the same way that I avoid GMO food, foods heavy in high fructose corn syrup and sugar, foods with toxic preservatives, foods which were fertilized with toxic organo-phosphates (glyphosate), proprietary pharmaceuticals with laundry lists of side-effects, and now, sadly, hospitals and doctors.

Does that include the nasty deoxyribonucleic acid?

 

[bruto]

arthwollipot,

Good question. I like the Novavax approach for this very reason.

BTW, when I got my booster (Moderna), I turned into a newt. It got better.

That's good. According to some here, you could have been eft.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Why not just post links to the three studies you think are best?

 

[michaelsuede]

Why not just post links to the three studies you think are best?

Because that would be ignoring the other 72.

 

[smartcooky]

I see, so your argument is that out of the 538 authors who published peer reviewed papers on ivermectin's efficacy, the majority (>269?) didn't know how to actually determine if ivermectin was effective at treating COVID-19, and the peer-reviewers they used were similarly incompetent.

Correct?

Correct, and if you thought they did you would post links to the studies to support your claim, as requested a few times now... But of course you won't, and we all know why, don't we?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Because that would be ignoring the other 72.

Well, let’s start with the three you think are best and we can work through the others later.

Have you read all of them?

 

[smartcooky]

Correct, and if you thought they did you would post links to the studies to support your claim, as requested a few times now... But of course you won't, and we all know why, don't we?

Because that would be ignoring the other 72.

Nope, that isn't how things work in reality. You don't get to show us your results and claim they are valid without showing your work.

Put up or shut up!

 

[Norman Alexander]

You know what Ivermectin IS good for??

Horse intestinal parasites. It's excellent for that. Peer-reviewed and proven in the field for years. So if my horse (an I don't have one) gets intestinal parasites (and my non-existent horse doesn't have them), it will probably be the first medication I shall seek out.

But since COVID is not horse intestinal parasite related in any way, let's just say I'm starting out skeptical that Ivermection is going to be a valid treatment.

Convince me that I'm wrong.

 

[a_unique_person]

Drivel and pseudoscience, leavened with lies. The usual.

Thanks for the summary.

 

[angrysoba]

You know what Ivermectin IS good for??

Horse intestinal parasites. It's excellent for that. Peer-reviewed and proven in the field for years. So if my horse (an I don't have one) gets intestinal parasites (and my non-existent horse doesn't have them), it will probably be the first medication I shall seek out.

But since COVID is not horse intestinal parasite related in any way, let's just say I'm starting out skeptical that Ivermection is going to be a valid treatment.

Convince me that I'm wrong.

It’s also been excellent in preventing river blindness in humans caused by worms and certain other parasitic infections.

We should at least acknowledge that it is used for humans, but of course that is no reason to believe it works for Covid.

Micheal Suede will, of course, prove us wrong once he shows us the papers he finds most convincing.

Any time now….

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Derek Lowe on the S1 protein

The spike protein and S1 stories are complex, and I have not grasped everything. However, here is something to ponder: "As the paper itself notes, their patients were all admitted to the hospital, so they were already presenting with severe disease - but some of them had single-digit pg/mL concentrations, while others were at 50, 60, or higher. So you can have hospitalization-worthy severe coronavirus but still have quite low S1 concentrations...And this latest paper showing circulating S1 protein after vaccination? Coupled with the previous paper from the same group, it in fact provides strong evidence that such blood levels are not by themselves the cause of coronavirus symptoms and tissue damage."

 

[Ranb]

Because that would be ignoring the other 72.

Haven't carefully reviewed all of them? If you have, then they are not being ignored. If you have not reviewed them, then why should you be concerned if anyone else is ignoring them when you're doing the same?

 

[Tippit]

Does that include the nasty deoxyribonucleic acid?

I bet you think you're clever.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why? You are you not capable of looking through them and deciding for yourself which ones you like best?

Why? Because your claims are specious and we should not have to sort through each and every one of your supporting sources to address all the bull ****.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why would they be?

If it was so effective and a potential cure for cancer as you claim wouldn't they be ramping up production?
After all, it is the pharmaceutical industry that makes it.

Or do you think it just grows on trees?

Don't you know, anything that contradicts valid science must be something that is being covered up.

 

[Tippit]

The spike protein and S1 stories are complex, and I have not grasped everything. However, here is something to ponder: "As the paper itself notes, their patients were all admitted to the hospital, so they were already presenting with severe disease - but some of them had single-digit pg/mL concentrations, while others were at 50, 60, or higher. So you can have hospitalization-worthy severe coronavirus but still have quite low S1 concentrations...And this latest paper showing circulating S1 protein after vaccination? Coupled with the previous paper from the same group, it in fact provides strong evidence that such blood levels are not by themselves the cause of coronavirus symptoms and tissue damage."

There are something like twenty Sars-CoV-2 antigens, four of which are proteins, and the spike protein was targeted for the "gene therapies" because of how it binds to the ACE2 receptor, and is the nexus point for infecting cells. I imagine that the other nineteen antigens have some important role in disease regardless of S1 concentrations, but according to the Swedish study which was linked far above, the spike itself is also dangerous.

 

[Tippit]

Oh, I am under no illusions that I will change anyone's mind here. But I am fascinated by the fictional narratives that people weave around incomplete and misleading information.

I don't need to have my mind changed. I live in Florida, I'm exposed to Sars-CoV-2 on a routine basis, I have immunity. If and when that wanes, I know how to treat it. Not only am I stronger, fitter, and healthier than you, I behave as if the virus doesn't exist, and I don't live in fear. Why would I want to buy what you are selling?

 

[welshdean]

arthwollipot,

Good question. I like the Novavax approach for this very reason.

BTW, when I got my booster (Moderna), I turned into a newt. It got better.

You were very lucky, if you turned into a frog, you could've croaked!

 

[MBDK]

No. Even if the risk/benefit on its face made sense (it doesn't, since I have natural immunity for a disease with a tiny fractional IFR), and even if leaky respiratory viruses that don't confer sterilizing immunity existed (they don't), I still wouldn't take it, because I believe they're part of a larger softkill agenda to cull or make sterile a significant part of the global population.

If you had natural immunity, you wouldn't have gotten it twice. And, you are still ignoring all the other complications and suffering of the disease, including the unknowns of the heart, brain, lung, etc. damage the disease causes. A lack of sterilizing immunity is not a logical reason for refusing a vaccine, when, (from - https://www.theatlantic.com/science...izing-immunity-myth-covid-19-vaccines/620023/) "An inoculation that guards marvelously well against disease—offering as much protection as it can—can still end an outbreak."

Still, despite your erroneous claims, including your belief in a population culling agenda, it is obvious your conspiracy-tainted thought process makes critical thinking an impossible endeavor for you.

The last couple of years I've thrived by focusing on avoiding all of the pseudo-scientific ******** being sold by large corporations and what I don't need, and this philosophy has served me well.

Being content with wading in pig swill and tilting at windmills is not my concept of having been served well, but to each their own.