Sapper Redux said:

---

You ascribing your recovery to Ivermectin is not evidence. That's an assumption you're making with nothing to support it besides your belief. That's why the "plural of anecdote isn't data." As for the idea that "ivermectin killed no people," if taking it meant people did not get proper medical treatment in a timely fashion, then it likely did result in people's deaths.

---

No. This is pathetic. You can discount the evidence. You can ignore the evidence. You can call the evidence an anecdote. But is absolutely evidence.

I got covid. I took ivermectin and acetaminophen. 12 hours later I felt incredibly better.

Faith is what I had BEFORE I took the ivermectin. Then I took the ivermectin and got the evidence of what happened. I got better.

I'm not saying this alone proves ivermectin works. But it is evidence. I took it, I got better. Joe Rogan took it, he got better. Millions of people in India, Japan, Mexico, Peru and America took ivermectin and got positive results.

All these anecdotal experiences are evidence. You use that evidence to reach conclusions. Many doctors used evidence of all their patients getting over covid using ivermectin to report that ivermectin is beating covid.

I'm forever grateful to those doctors. I took their evidence and bought ivermectin. As bad as I felt, covid may have killed me if I hadn't had ivermectin there and taken it immediately.

So I had ivermectin because of evidence accrued by doctors and advice from a nurse practitioner. Then I got sick. Then I took ivermectin and immediately got better.

That is evidence that ivermectin worked in my case. I feel like I'm talking to children. This is so basic. You can choose to use this evidence however you want. Ignore it if you want. But it is evidence.

Words in English often have more than one meaning, so I understand
both sides as being correct in this argument about what is evidence.
One side is simply saying a massive observation should not be ignored, the other side is saying it was not ignored - it was tested and found wanting by the standards of clinical trials.

A similar thing often happens when police are asked about "suspects" - the general public is likely to consider anyone being investigated to be a suspect, the police will use a more legally fitted definition.

Now, if one accepts my above posting as workable, the question becomes were the clinical trials accurate? Did they get suborned by money from the big pharmaceuticals? I don't know...

The problem is that there's never a pure enough trial for people who refuse to accept the scientific and medical consensus. Good trials and good investigations require extensive time and resources. There are only two good sources for those resources: industry and government. Even retrospective cohort studies require data collected and stored thanks to grants and investments. If you're determined to see any study supported by funds and grants as inherently biased because of that money (despite the fact that distribution of those funds is tied to the proposal and not the results), then you'll never accept that Ivermectin doesn't work for Covid. There's always a way to claim the study is tainted. It's the classic "heads I win (your study isn't robust enough and lacks x,y,z), tails you lose (your study was funded by BIG PHARMA AND FAUCI)."

Great post Jabin - but I'd actually say it is a binary choice between trust or don't trust, and we should all fall on the side of don't trust.

There's a problem with replication going on, there is a lot of fraudulent and poor research, and the funding free for all during covid made that worse. So we should be even more skeptical of everything, hold everything under scrutiny, and be extremely jealous of our opinions.

The issue with how a lot of this has played out regarding ivermectin (or zithromycin or HCQ) is this really fascinating combination of extreme credulity and extreme incredulity. Or in other words, an overpowering bias.

I'd be much more comfortable with someone being an antivaxxer if they were similarly skeptical of ivermectin.

The other problem is people these days want so very badly to belong to something. Especially in the age of social media, and especially especially in the post covid world. Communities have become more and more intangible and people want to belong. What we call conspiracy theories appeal to this - it is an instant community. There is this all intensified during covid. Stress, isolation, fear, all promote in the same direction.

I am reminded of a comment I heard the other day - that people generally don't believe things or hold on to ideas because they're true. If that were the case people would rarely be wrong or disagree. People believe in things when those ideas become useful in explaining experience or structuring our lives. Which of course is just Quine in other words. But this is a powerful sort of bias in and of itself. It pulls you toward accepting answers which explain things without interrogating them as to whether or not they are true - which doesn't necessarily get you ideas or beliefs which are true.

So I would suggest that we combine extreme skepticism with a guard against our very real desire to latch onto the first or simplest predictive explanation, knowing that we have bias for that and for belonging. But that is extremely difficult, it takes an active choice, focus, effort...and sometimes robs us of comforting ideas. Most people are unaware, or simply uninterested.

I will return the compliment: good post. In addition, I've noticed that most people look for single answers to problems, whereas most problems may have multiple answers.

Maximus of Tejas said:

---

Those who got played had zero discernment but you can begin to repent by apologizing to the people you treated poorly. Don't trust the "experts" when the next big thing happens. It's coming sooner than you think.

---

Who did I treat poorly? Sorry but I don't understand what you are saying.

Not saying you treated anyone poorly. Just people in general. There was a lot of hate during that time because people put all of their faith in some of the most evil people in the world. I guess it's more obvious now given the state of the world and a lot has been revealed which helps but still I don't have much faith in my fellow Americans for what comes next.

Maximus of Tejas said:

---

Those who got played had zero discernment but you can begin to repent by apologizing to the people you treated poorly. Don't trust the "experts" when the next big thing happens. It's coming sooner than you think.

---

Over 1 million Americans died during the height of Covid and those areas with greater vaccine uptake once the vaccines were available fared much, much better. But by all means, ignore the research.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Maximus of Tejas said:

---

Those who got played had zero discernment but you can begin to repent by apologizing to the people you treated poorly. Don't trust the "experts" when the next big thing happens. It's coming sooner than you think.

---

Over 1 million Americans died during the height of Covid and those areas with greater vaccine uptake once the vaccines were available fared much, much better. But by all means, ignore the research.

---

Lots of imminent deaths during the pandemic were labeled as COVID. Post pandemic, who's fairing much, much better amongst young people with turbo cancers or myocardial infarction, vaxxed or unvaxxed?

Also, do you believe the world should have shut down for weeks to "flatten the curve?". How many millions of people lost their job due to corporations suffering massive revenue loss and supply chain logistical nightmares? Do you believe military service members should have been put out of service for refusing the vax? How many millions were let from the civilian sector for not getting vaccinated? How many people took the vaccine and subsequent boosters to keep their job, and have now experienced serious adverse effects?

Do you think churches should have been shut down, heavily fined, and pastors arrested for meeting for worship? Are you cool with families being arrested for being outside at the park? (It was interesting during tge 2020 Summer of Love and "Mosyly Peaceful" protests that rioting and looting was somehow exempt from wearing a mask or maintaining six feet of distance).

Angry Jonathan Zaludek said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Maximus of Tejas said:

---

Those who got played had zero discernment but you can begin to repent by apologizing to the people you treated poorly. Don't trust the "experts" when the next big thing happens. It's coming sooner than you think.

---

Over 1 million Americans died during the height of Covid and those areas with greater vaccine uptake once the vaccines were available fared much, much better. But by all means, ignore the research.

---

Lots of imminent deaths during the pandemic were labeled as COVID. Post pandemic, who's fairing much, much better amongst young people with turbo cancers or myocardial infarction, vaxxed or unvaxxed?

Also, do you believe the world should have shut down for weeks to "flatten the curve?". How many millions of people lost their job due to corporations suffering massive revenue loss and supply chain logistical nightmares? Do you believe military service members should have been put out of service for refusing the tax? How many millions were let from the civilian sector for not getting vaccinated? How many people took the vaccine and subsequent boosters to keep their job, and have now experienced serious adverse effects?

Do you think churches should have been shut down, heavily fined, and pastors arrested for meeting for worship? Are you cool with families being arrested for being outside at the park? (It was interesting during tge 2020 Summer of Love and "Mosyly Peaceful" protests that rioting and looting was somehow exempt from wearing a mask or maintaining six feet of distance).

---

You realize Covid itself cause far more harm, such as myocarditis, than the vaccine, right? I'd love to see your sources for "turbo cancer" among the vaccinated. I'm sure it's real research and not right wing Alex Jones-level bull*****

As for the screed, yes, if military service members refused the vaccine they should be punished under UCMJ. That's how the military ****ing works. I didn't love every test they ran on me during my time in the service, but I didn't get to decide because you're a soldier and you follow lawful orders.

Regarding the rest of it, we had an extremely communicable disease with an unknown but high mortality rate that was causing massive breakdowns in the basic functions of health and emergency services in cities like New York, Boston, Seattle, etc…. So things like shutting down to flatten the curve made sense. It didn't work because people didn't ****ing do it. They went out and did whatever they wanted to. The vaccines worked. They saved lives. It's not an argument it's just a fact. Places with higher vaccine uptake had far lower rates of mortality and infection.

Sapper,

In addition to the pandemic and vaccine mandates, a lot of the anger at Faucci is because of his lack of transparency on the origin of the virus and his knowledge on the GoFR of genetic engineering.

dermdoc said:

---

And can you tell me why schools were shut down? Makes zero sense medically.

---

It made perfect sense medically given how children spread disease and the fact that vulnerable adults work at schools.

Angry Jonathan Zaludek said:

---

Sapper,

In addition to the pandemic and vaccine mandates, a lot of the anger at Faucci is because of his lack of transparency on the origin of the virus and his knowledge on the GoFR of genetic engineering.

---

So the anger is that he didn't reify the conspiracy theories?

dermdoc said:

---

I don't consider that a high mortality rate. But I will be honest that as a doc I don't trust any of the data on Covid..

---

1 to 3% from an epidemiological standpoint is extremely high.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Angry Jonathan Zaludek said:

---

Sapper,

In addition to the pandemic and vaccine mandates, a lot of the anger at Faucci is because of his lack of transparency on the origin of the virus and his knowledge on the GoFR of genetic engineering.

---

So the anger is that he didn't reify the conspiracy theories?

---

Trump was the champion of the vax and he's driving our coffins into the ground as we speak and you have the nerve to talk about conspiracy theories lol? Dude you have always been the worst poster on here. Trump still brags about it along with advancing Operation Stargate. How can you be so ignorant? Do you think life is just a sitcom or something?

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

I don't consider that a high mortality rate. But I will be honest that as a doc I don't trust any of the data on Covid..

---

1 to 3% from an epidemiological standpoint is extremely high.

---

Wrong.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Angry Jonathan Zaludek said:

---

Sapper,

In addition to the pandemic and vaccine mandates, a lot of the anger at Faucci is because of his lack of transparency on the origin of the virus and his knowledge on the GoFR of genetic engineering.

---

So the anger is that he didn't reify the conspiracy theories?

---

Reify the conspiracy theories?

He was making money hand over fist off GoF and then used his power to erase the very clear and obvious path the leads Covid right back to him.

The dude is evil.

---

Agree. He fooled me. At least Birx showed some remorse.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Angry Jonathan Zaludek said:

---

Sapper,

In addition to the pandemic and vaccine mandates, a lot of the anger at Faucci is because of his lack of transparency on the origin of the virus and his knowledge on the GoFR of genetic engineering.

---

So the anger is that he didn't reify the conspiracy theories?

---

Reify the conspiracy theories?

He was making money hand over fist off GoF and then used his power to erase the very clear and obvious path the leads Covid right back to him.

The dude is evil.

ETA: 10 of the 12 epidimiolgists on Faucci's infamous Januray 2020 phone call initially thought lab leak was the most likely theory.

The fact that it went from "most likely theory" to bannable "conspiracy theory" in a matter of weeks doesn't paint a very nice picture.

The fact that you are still calling it a "conspiracy theory" in 2026 is just...its very disappointing, Sapper. Be better.

---

At the beginning, when there was very limited information, it seemed very possible. When more information came out it seemed far less likely. Given the information we have now it is still extremely unlikely.

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

I don't consider that a high mortality rate. But I will be honest that as a doc I don't trust any of the data on Covid..

---

1 to 3% from an epidemiological standpoint is extremely high.

---

Wrong.

---

You know that the tranmission rate is a part of this. Covid overwhelmed the healthcare system not just due to symptoms but due to mortality and accompanying damage to organ systems in those who survived. The mortality rate of Spanish Flu was 2-5%. By all means, read what happened to Philadelphia and tell me if that was a low or moderate problem.

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

I don't consider that a high mortality rate. But I will be honest that as a doc I don't trust any of the data on Covid..

---

1 to 3% from an epidemiological standpoint is extremely high.

---

Wrong.

---

You know that the tranmission rate is a part of this. Covid overwhelmed the healthcare system not just due to symptoms but due to mortality and accompanying damage to organ systems in those who survived. The mortality rate of Spanish Flu was 2-5%. By all means, read what happened to Philadelphia and tell me if that was a low or moderate problem.

---

Never denied anything in that post. You posted earlier that Covid had a high mortality rate. By all medical definitions, it did not.

It is just as bad to overplay Covid as it is to downplay it.