*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (15 Viewers)

[jobarules]

Oh look, another conspiracy theory turned into FACT...

Landmark Study Vindicates Everyone Who Touted Natural Immunity to COVID-19

For years, the powers that be, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the White House, and the press, dismissed the idea of taking natural immunity into account when debating vaccine mandates and vaccine passports.

They were wrong, so much so that even the mainstream media are having to admit it.

Past Covid infection as protective as vaccination against severe illness and death, study finds

The immunity generated from an infection was found to be “at least as high, if not higher” than that provided by two doses of an mRNA vaccine.

www.nbcnews.com

The elites were wrong, and they destroyed countless lives in the process. Worse, they wanted to keep how wrong they were a secret. This kind of study could have been done two years ago to bring clarity to the situation. In fact, Israel did a similar study way back in 2021 that gave nearly the same results. It was ignored while the [Federal Govt] and its press allies continued to push the need for vaccine mandates and vaccine passports.

How many people lost their jobs over that decision? How many people missed time with family members they’ll never get back because those family members died alone? How many people were booted out of the military for failing to get a vaccine they didn’t need? The number of horrible outcomes brought on by [Fed Govt], Fauci, and others refusing to acknowledge natural immunity is too long to list. The harm was immeasurable.

This is so obvious and just needed common sense to realize yet we had several people in here screaming bloody murder that is wasnt the case.

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

 

[ericttspikes]

LMFAO where was the "nuance" here. People dont like the heat when it is pointed at them (and yes tamales was me).

Succinctly: I think it would have been wrong for society to ignore COVID from jump. Not sure what you're thinking should have done in retrospect, but doing nothing and letting the chips fall was not an option.

I dont disagree. However there was a lot of "judgmental" people in the beginning and alot of them ended up being wrong and those same people now saying people shouldnt be so judgy. Its BS and hypocritical.

What were people wrong about? It was a lot easier to collectively wear masks. You know, all pull together, Kumbaya type thing. Then people pissed and moaned and the pendulum has swung in the other direction.

Despite any internal thoughts I have today that it's the right thing to do "to protect others" I just don't need the hassle to be the only guy wearing one and having to deal with the "what's up with the mask, Covid's over" people. F it. My wife has Covid right now and I have to go to a volleyball tournament and feel the pressure not to mask despite my close contact and me not feeling great. Oh well. Testing negative so far though.

Dude

Seriously?

The mask isnt the issue here. If you dont feel great and your wife has covid put 2+2 together. I dont care what those stupid tests say. You have covid. Stay home

Thanks Dr. Tamales, but I tested negative with a PCR NAAT test this morning, and my real doctor said my symptoms were more than likely allergies and based on last close contact there was no problem going.

edited to add; my original point was that when masks weren't as stigmatized as they are now and more people were wearing them, I'd of felt way more comfortable erring on the side of caution with my symptoms "more than likely being allergies" and my wife still isolating despite the negative test, but that ship has sailed.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Hopefully we can move past the 2,893 mask conversation. You want to wear one, wear one … you don’t, then don’t!

Seriously, anyone who gets worked up, laughs or is sad for someone, based on this subject, needs to rethink what is important in life.

What makes you think the people who are arguing about masks will ever move on? They've had 2+ years to move on - the innate desire to be right or be proven correct isn't going away anytime soon.

Someone upthread said it better, but I just have grown up and don’t feel the need to judge, laugh or ridicule others anymore. Everyone has their own story. For those that didn’t wear one before when it was mandated, I assumed they had their own story … for those that continue to wear one now, the same thing applies. I just don’t get the need to point and laugh at people anymore or the need to pat myself on the back that I was right.

Call me crazy but I prefer to live in the present, not rehash history for the sake of “I told you so”, and let others live their lives.

To answer your question more directly, they won’t. Not until they mature and come to the realization that none of these type of arguments really matter.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Sorry if I didn't believe you. I honestly havent seen dozens of people wearing masks if I add up the total Ive seen over the last month.

All good. I find it shocking that you haven't seen dozens of people wearing masks though. Different worlds and all I suppose

I was surprised by this as well but it is all based on individual circumstances. When I WFH and don’t venture very far, I can go weeks without seeing a dozen mask wearers. If I go to the office downtown and run across 500 - 1,000 people, then I see over a dozen before lunch. It’s all relative and we shouldn’t be surprised by either scenario.

 

[LawFitz]

Not until they mature and come to the realization that none of these type of arguments really matter.

It's not about 'I told you so.' The reason to go back and revisit so many of these formerly heavily debated issues that are now being cleansed by sunlight is to demonstrate how we've been deceived by Big Pharma, Big Govt and their beholden MSM. And to remind folks of how they themselves operated when previously confronted with conflicting accounts from the main narratives, in the hope that they will be more mature going forward when similar debates continue to arise.

Here's a test... Let's see how many here have matured since attacking me at every stage of the last three years since I started posting about Covid-vaccine hesitancy... Here's a very recently released report that details evidence of vaccine harm and causation of death... Warning: it's horrifying, but something we all NEED to see.

30 Detailed Autopsies Suggest COVID Vaccines Are Going To Kill Vast Numbers Of People

Autopsies Reveal Medical Atrocities of Genetic Therapies

Dr. Arne Burkhardt is one of eight international pathologists, physicians and scientists who were asked to perform a second autopsy, requested by friends and family of the deceased who were not satisfied with the results of the first autopsy.

Thirty autopsies and three biopsies were evaluated; 15 cases with routine histopathology (Step 1), three with advanced methods (Step 2), and some of the remaining 15 are included as illustrative cases.

Death occurred seven days to 180 days following the first or the second Spike-Mediated Gene Therapy (SMGT) [aka Covid Vaccines] with COMIRNATY in eight, Moderna in two, AstraZeneca in two, Janssen in one and Unknown in two.

Place of death was known in 17 cases:

• Nine Non-hospital: five at home, one on the street, one in a car, one at work, one in an elder care facility
• Eight Hospital: four ICU, four died having been in hospital less than two days

Special stains were used to identify Spike and Nucleocapsid Proteins, with the following differential:

• COVID-19 (C-19) = + Spike + Nucleocapsid.
• SMGT = + Spike – Nucleocapsid.

Causation by SMGT: Very probable in five cases, probable in seven, unclear in two and no connection in one.

Lesions were on multiple organs including: Brain, Heart, Kidney, Liver, Lungs, Lymph Node, Salivary Gland, Skin, Spleen, Testis, Thyroid and Vascular.

 

[jobarules]

Not until they mature and come to the realization that none of these type of arguments really matter.

It's not about 'I told you so.' The reason to go back and revisit so many of these formerly heavily debated issues that are now being cleansed by sunlight is to demonstrate how we've been deceived by Big Pharma, Big Govt and their beholden MSM. And to remind folks of how they themselves operated when previously confronted with conflicting accounts from the main narratives, in the hope that they will be more mature going forward when similar debates continue to arise.

Here's a test... Let's see how many here have matured since attacking me at every stage of the last three years since I started posting about Covid-vaccine hesitancy... Here's a very recently released report that details evidence of vaccine harm and causation of death... Warning: it's horrifying, but something we all NEED to see.

30 Detailed Autopsies Suggest COVID Vaccines Are Going To Kill Vast Numbers Of People

Autopsies Reveal Medical Atrocities of Genetic Therapies

Dr. Arne Burkhardt is one of eight international pathologists, physicians and scientists who were asked to perform a second autopsy, requested by friends and family of the deceased who were not satisfied with the results of the first autopsy.

Thirty autopsies and three biopsies were evaluated; 15 cases with routine histopathology (Step 1), three with advanced methods (Step 2), and some of the remaining 15 are included as illustrative cases.

Death occurred seven days to 180 days following the first or the second Spike-Mediated Gene Therapy (SMGT) [aka Covid Vaccines] with COMIRNATY in eight, Moderna in two, AstraZeneca in two, Janssen in one and Unknown in two.

Place of death was known in 17 cases:

• Nine Non-hospital: five at home, one on the street, one in a car, one at work, one in an elder care facility
• Eight Hospital: four ICU, four died having been in hospital less than two days

Special stains were used to identify Spike and Nucleocapsid Proteins, with the following differential:

• COVID-19 (C-19) = + Spike + Nucleocapsid.
• SMGT = + Spike – Nucleocapsid.

Causation by SMGT: Very probable in five cases, probable in seven, unclear in two and no connection in one.

Lesions were on multiple organs including: Brain, Heart, Kidney, Liver, Lungs, Lymph Node, Salivary Gland, Skin, Spleen, Testis, Thyroid and Vascular.

For me it's a little bit about "I told ya so". When you get called a moron for 2 years straight because you don't "follow the science" and then it turns out you were right about almost everything then yeah I'm not gonna let that slide.

 

[LawFitz]

Not until they mature and come to the realization that none of these type of arguments really matter.

It's not about 'I told you so.' The reason to go back and revisit so many of these formerly heavily debated issues that are now being cleansed by sunlight is to demonstrate how we've been deceived by Big Pharma, Big Govt and their beholden MSM. And to remind folks of how they themselves operated when previously confronted with conflicting accounts from the main narratives, in the hope that they will be more mature going forward when similar debates continue to arise.

Here's a test... Let's see how many here have matured since attacking me at every stage of the last three years since I started posting about Covid-vaccine hesitancy... Here's a very recently released report that details evidence of vaccine harm and causation of death... Warning: it's horrifying, but something we all NEED to see.

30 Detailed Autopsies Suggest COVID Vaccines Are Going To Kill Vast Numbers Of People

Autopsies Reveal Medical Atrocities of Genetic Therapies

Dr. Arne Burkhardt is one of eight international pathologists, physicians and scientists who were asked to perform a second autopsy, requested by friends and family of the deceased who were not satisfied with the results of the first autopsy.

Thirty autopsies and three biopsies were evaluated; 15 cases with routine histopathology (Step 1), three with advanced methods (Step 2), and some of the remaining 15 are included as illustrative cases.

Death occurred seven days to 180 days following the first or the second Spike-Mediated Gene Therapy (SMGT) [aka Covid Vaccines] with COMIRNATY in eight, Moderna in two, AstraZeneca in two, Janssen in one and Unknown in two.

Place of death was known in 17 cases:

• Nine Non-hospital: five at home, one on the street, one in a car, one at work, one in an elder care facility
• Eight Hospital: four ICU, four died having been in hospital less than two days

Special stains were used to identify Spike and Nucleocapsid Proteins, with the following differential:

• COVID-19 (C-19) = + Spike + Nucleocapsid.
• SMGT = + Spike – Nucleocapsid.

Causation by SMGT: Very probable in five cases, probable in seven, unclear in two and no connection in one.

Lesions were on multiple organs including: Brain, Heart, Kidney, Liver, Lungs, Lymph Node, Salivary Gland, Skin, Spleen, Testis, Thyroid and Vascular.

For me it's a little bit about "I told ya so". When you get called a moron for 2 years straight because you don't "follow the science" and then it turns out you were right about almost everything then yeah I'm not gonna let that slide.

I understand the emotion, and appreciate your honesty about it. For me, I don't care about I told you so. I care about opening people's eyes about the lies and the dangers - even now the complete denial is amazingly strong. I care about society never having experimental vaccines mandated again. I care about figuring out the actual truths about the dangers of mRNA vax tech. People dying left and right and guns smoking all around and yet the ridicule and contempt remains where you would think at this point, there would be in place a willingness to consider what had previously been unthinkable. Sad but true, it's easier to fool a man that to convince him he's been fooled.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

Did you read beyond the headline? What this article states is not what Cav was saying in this or the separate vaccine thread.

Still, experts stress that vaccination is the preferable route to immunity, given the risks of Covid, particularly in unvaccinated people.​

​

“The problem of saying ‘I’m gonna get infected to get immunity’ is you might be one of those people that end up in the hospital or die,” Murray said. “Why would you take the risk when you can get immunity through vaccination quite safely?”​

 

[jobarules]

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

Did you read beyond the headline? What this article states is not what Cav was saying in this or the separate vaccine thread.

Still, experts stress that vaccination is the preferable route to immunity, given the risks of Covid, particularly in unvaccinated people.​

​

“The problem of saying ‘I’m gonna get infected to get immunity’ is you might be one of those people that end up in the hospital or die,” Murray said. “Why would you take the risk when you can get immunity through vaccination quite safely?”​

There is not a single person in this entire thread that ever said they would rather get naturally infected than get the vaccine. The entire debate was centered around if you already HAD an infection.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

Did you read beyond the headline? What this article states is not what Cav was saying in this or the separate vaccine thread.

Still, experts stress that vaccination is the preferable route to immunity, given the risks of Covid, particularly in unvaccinated people.​

​

“The problem of saying ‘I’m gonna get infected to get immunity’ is you might be one of those people that end up in the hospital or die,” Murray said. “Why would you take the risk when you can get immunity through vaccination quite safely?”​

There is not a single person in this entire thread that ever said they would rather get naturally infected than get the vaccine. The entire debate was centered around if you already HAD an infection.

I'm pretty there were some "I'll take my chances with my natural immune system" posts. I'm not going to go searching. But regardless, it's weird to take a victory lap over something that was 2 years ago, when data at the time showed natural immunity to be hit and miss. That was not opinion. I suspect that this study will be critiqued pretty heavily, as I've already seen it headlining on several news outlets. And obviously the natural immunity angle wasn't the silver bullet answer either. It didn't stop Omicron, nor reinfections post-Omicron.

 

[jobarules]

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

Did you read beyond the headline? What this article states is not what Cav was saying in this or the separate vaccine thread.

Still, experts stress that vaccination is the preferable route to immunity, given the risks of Covid, particularly in unvaccinated people.​

​

“The problem of saying ‘I’m gonna get infected to get immunity’ is you might be one of those people that end up in the hospital or die,” Murray said. “Why would you take the risk when you can get immunity through vaccination quite safely?”​

There is not a single person in this entire thread that ever said they would rather get naturally infected than get the vaccine. The entire debate was centered around if you already HAD an infection.

I'm pretty there were some "I'll take my chances with my natural immune system" posts. I'm not going to go searching. But regardless, it's weird to take a victory lap over something that was 2 years ago, when data at the time showed natural immunity to be hit and miss. That was not opinion. I suspect that this study will be critiqued pretty heavily, as I've already seen it headlining on several news outlets. And obviously the natural immunity angle wasn't the silver bullet answer either. It didn't stop Omicron, nor reinfections post-Omicron.

Good grief

 

[jobarules]

Sad but true, it's easier to fool a man that to convince him he's been fooled.

This quote is SPOT ON

 

[The Commish]

Hopefully we can move past the 2,893 mask conversation. You want to wear one, wear one … you don’t, then don’t!

Seriously, anyone who gets worked up, laughs or is sad for someone, based on this subject, needs to rethink what is important in life.

As good a as it was in 2020-21. I'll never understand why people are so triggered by masks.

Because people like me spent the better part of two years begging people to please mind their own business, and we were accused of murdering everyone's grandmother. The hypochondriacs who now want to play the "I was just joking" card can get bent. A little social opprobrium is absolutely a-okay here.

Really IK? Who gives a **** what other people are saying...especially now? I didn't care then and I don't care now. Do what you want with respect to masks. Congrats on being the other side of the coin you claim to loathe.

Though I will say the last "I was just joking" comment I saw in this thread had absolutely NOTHING to do with what you're suggesting and was a commentary on how disgusting public transportation is. Not only is it chuckle-worthy, it's also spot-on.

 

[The Commish]

Hopefully we can move past the 2,893 mask conversation. You want to wear one, wear one … you don’t, then don’t!

Seriously, anyone who gets worked up, laughs or is sad for someone, based on this subject, needs to rethink what is important in life.

As good a as it was in 2020-21. I'll never understand why people are so triggered by masks.

So if I looked through all your posts in this thread (Im not doing that by the way) I wont find any posts from you that said "WEAR YOUR MASKS PEOPLE" during that time frame?

You're going to get several different comments from me that changed as the information changed. Most (if not all) were qualified with some variation of "it's your decision". Probably doesn't fit nicely into your black/white world, but oh well.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Call me crazy but I prefer to live in the present, not rehash history for the sake of “I told you so”, and let others live their lives.

I used to be the this way, but I've changed my mind especially on this topic. People who, for example, hand-waved away concerns about learning loss caused by prolonged school closures and in-school masking should not be allowed to move on without acknowledging that they got this very wrong. People who were in policy-making positions who made those sorts of calls should be removed from their offices and never allowed to exercise authority over other people ever again. I am weary of being governed by people who make stupid decisions over and over again without consequence. The freedom to confidently say "I told you so" is a necessary first step toward accountability.

 

[fatness]

From LF's article:

The immunity generated from an infection was found to be “at least as high, if not higher” than that provided by two doses of an mRNA vaccine, the authors wrote.

“We know that the immune response continues to mature over the course of about six months, both for vaccines and for infections,” he said.

So to keep the immune response high, get a booster or get COVID every 6 months?

 

[fatness]

Hopefully we can move past the 2,893 mask conversation.

Only 870 years to go!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

 

[Dr_Zaius]

But regardless, it's weird to take a victory lap over something that was 2 years ago, when data at the time showed natural immunity to be hit and miss.

I think a large part of the reason for the victory lap and/or animosity from the natural immunity crowd is that they largely weren't allowed by employers, venues, and governments to "take their chances" with natural immunity. In most bureaucratic cases it wasn't considered to be any different than being immunologically naive. I know several people who had lab confirmed covid infections, and this was not enough to get them out of employer mandates. I can see how that would stick in one's craw.

I'm sure there are some outliers of people were actively looking to get covid rather than the vaccine, but I think the people who got covid and wanted to make the personal choice to rely on that immunity rather than getting the vaccine have a legitimate beef. Maybe not necessarily with the people in this thread, but it's not like they can complain to Fauci, so they're venting where they can.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

It's almost as if I addressed that point in my post.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

It's almost as if I addressed that point in my post.

So just to clarify, your point is that kids wearing masks in school was more damaging than people hailing ivermectin in turn causing deaths? Because that's how it reads.
Also, last time you posted something similar about schools, I asked you for what evidence you had of that, and you never replied. I'm not saying there's not any, but I would still like to see what you're basing that off of.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

It's almost as if I addressed that point in my post.

So just to clarify, your point is that kids wearing masks in school was more damaging than people hailing ivermectin in turn causing deaths? Because that's how it reads.
Also, last time you posted something similar about schools, I asked you for what evidence you had of that, and you never replied. I'm not saying there's not any, but I would still like to see what you're basing that off of.

The people who took ivermectin harmed themselves. The people who shut down schools and masked little kids harmed others. I can live with people making bad decisions if their decisions don't affect me. I can't abide people who make bad decisions that impose their costs on others. (Edit: That's why I was with you guys on masks up until vaccination, and am still strongly pro-vaccine).

The learning loss thing was all over the news a few months ago. Here's the first thing that came up on Google: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/briefing/pandemic-learning-loss.html

 

[jobarules]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

It's almost as if I addressed that point in my post.

So just to clarify, your point is that kids wearing masks in school was more damaging than people hailing ivermectin in turn causing deaths? Because that's how it reads.
Also, last time you posted something similar about schools, I asked you for what evidence you had of that, and you never replied. I'm not saying there's not any, but I would still like to see what you're basing that off of.

From a societal perspective ABSOLUTELY. This is not even debatable.

 

[Doug B]

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will.

EDIT:

"That's why I was with you guys on masks up until vaccination, and am still strongly pro-vaccine"

Que?

 

[Scoresman]

Did they actually find that wearing masks in school was harmful?

 

[Doug B]

The people who shut down schools and masked little kids harmed others. I can live with people making bad decisions if their decisions don't affect me. I can't abide people who make bad decisions that impose their costs on others. (Edit: That's why I was with you guys on masks up until vaccination, and am still strongly pro-vaccine).

The learning loss thing was all over the news a few months ago. Here's the first thing that came up on Google: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/briefing/pandemic-learning-loss.html

I can agree that the items in blue go together -- I saw remote learning crash and burn in my own household.

The part in red is a separate thing, and I'm not seeing where outright harm was done. Probably a case-to-case thing based on facility-level implementation and other factors.

 

[LawFitz]

Robby Starbuck

@robbystarbuck


Fauci’s NIH now lists IVERMECTIN as an antiviral therapy to treat COVID. The most recent study in Brazil of 88,012 people found Ivermectin cut the chance of COVID death by 92%. Now’s a good time to think about the censorship, pharmacy bans on it and hate people got for using it.

Wow the brainwashing regarding Ivermectin was so strong that even now you guys are ripe with misinformation about what is truly a miracle drug. Amazing.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Another way to put it is that the ivermectin people were wrong, but they were wrong in a way that didn't inflict much harm on others. They bore most of those costs themselves. Anti-vaxxers are wrong IMO, but again they're wrong in a way that mostly (not entirely) just affects them.

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will. They were not shutting down schools. They were not making other people's 7 year-olds wear masks all day. They weren't shutting down playgrounds, harassing people at beaches, etc. That was the folks in this thread who somehow imagined that they were the good guys in this story. They did much more long-term damage to the US, especially our young people, than the ivermectin "do your research" people ever did. I'm not ready to move on from that quite yet.

People took ivermectin based strictly off of misinformation and literally DIED.

It's almost as if I addressed that point in my post.

So just to clarify, your point is that kids wearing masks in school was more damaging than people hailing ivermectin in turn causing deaths? Because that's how it reads.
Also, last time you posted something similar about schools, I asked you for what evidence you had of that, and you never replied. I'm not saying there's not any, but I would still like to see what you're basing that off of.

From a societal perspective ABSOLUTELY. This is not even debatable.

Of course it is. We are debating it now. And my reason for wanting to see IK's evidence for his claim, is that while I think personally also think there may be some level of validity to it, all the evidence I've seen actually points to the contrary. That's why I was legit asking for what he was basing his statement on.

The NYT piece is about remote learning, not masking.

 

[Doug B]

The NYT piece is about remote learning, not masking.

I'm curious as to why these are being conflated.

 

[Atomic Punk]

Robby Starbuck
@robbystarbuck


Fauci’s NIH now lists IVERMECTIN as an antiviral therapy to treat COVID. The most recent study in Brazil of 88,012 people found Ivermectin cut the chance of COVID death by 92%. Now’s a good time to think about the censorship, pharmacy bans on it and hate people got for using it.

Wow the brainwashing regarding Ivermectin was so strong that even now you guys are ripe with misinformation about what is truly a miracle drug. Amazing.

I tried googling but can’t find a link for this. Got anything I can read up on Fauci/NIH approval?

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Robby Starbuck
@robbystarbuck


Fauci’s NIH now lists IVERMECTIN as an antiviral therapy to treat COVID. The most recent study in Brazil of 88,012 people found Ivermectin cut the chance of COVID death by 92%. Now’s a good time to think about the censorship, pharmacy bans on it and hate people got for using it.

Wow the brainwashing regarding Ivermectin was so strong that even now you guys are ripe with misinformation about what is truly a miracle drug. Amazing.

I tried googling but can’t find a link for this. Got anything I can read up on Fauci/NIH approval?

I'll help:
Here's the tweet from September 2022: https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1566087211442999299

here's the study (on some site called Cureus??): https://www.cureus.com/articles/111...ly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects#!/

Here's the page (according to tweet replies IVM was at one time listed on the page in a paragraph of text as "under review" and has since been removed):

Antivirals, Including Antibody Products | COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

These sections summarize the data on antiviral agents, including remdesivir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies.

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov

 

[LawFitz]

So is it acceptable now to ask what happened to Damar Hamlin? Commotio Cordis is highly unlikely, so what was it that caused this young man to cardiac arrest?

He himself seems to have an idea but is very reluctant to share. Interesting.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

 

[The Commish]

It was only a matter of time....so gross....can't believe this **** is allowed here.

 

[Schmeabs]

It was only a matter of time....so gross....can't believe this **** is allowed here.

What are you talking about?

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I hate dealing with the nested quotes but @Nathan R. Jessep you may be looking for this NIH page - https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/miscellaneous-drugs/ivermectin/

In short,

The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in clinical trials

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

I hate dealing with the nested quotes but @Nathan R. Jessep you may be looking for this NIH page - https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/miscellaneous-drugs/ivermectin/

In short,

The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in clinical trials

Thanks. The page I posted was the link that LF's tweeter had posted. The page was updated since that tweet in Sept. '22, but replies indicated it was only showing on the page then in a paragraph of text.

To date, there have been exactly zero reputable studies showing any benefit for ivermectin as a treatment or prophylactic for Covid-19. The couple of large scale studies that showed any promise (and hell, who wouldn't want to see a cheap, existing solution to C19??) have all been redacted or completely withdrawn because of biases or inaccuracies brought to light upon peer review. A couple of those seemed to be stating things that were completely made up. It's not a conspiracy by "big pharma."

 

[Atomic Punk]

I hate dealing with the nested quotes but @Nathan R. Jessep you may be looking for this NIH page - https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/miscellaneous-drugs/ivermectin/

In short,

The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in clinical trials

Thanks this is exactly what I was looking for. @LawFitz what are your thoughts about this versus what you posted previously?

 

[jamny]

So I decided to pay attention to mask wearing percentage here in Boise. We walked through the city, walking over 2 miles along the riverwalk to a packed restaurant for dinner, walked the 2 miles back and through the city again to get some coffee and then home.
I didn't see a single mask. Even surprised me.

 

[Schmeabs]

So I decided to pay attention to mask wearing percentage here in Boise. We walked through the city, walking over 2 miles along the riverwalk to a packed restaurant for dinner, walked the 2 miles back and through the city again to get some coffee and then home.
I didn't see a single mask. Even surprised me.

Awesome. I hardly see them anymore in Oregon.

 

[Scoresman]

So I decided to pay attention to mask wearing percentage here in Boise. We walked through the city, walking over 2 miles along the riverwalk to a packed restaurant for dinner, walked the 2 miles back and through the city again to get some coffee and then home.
I didn't see a single mask. Even surprised me.

Seems like this was outside the whole time or in a restaurant. That’s not surprising. I wouldn’t wear a mask there either. Try the grocery store. Or a doctors office.

In contrast, I just placed a pickup order for pizza and the confirmation screen said masks required.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

So I decided to pay attention to mask wearing percentage here in Boise. We walked through the city, walking over 2 miles along the riverwalk to a packed restaurant for dinner, walked the 2 miles back and through the city again to get some coffee and then home.
I didn't see a single mask. Even surprised me.

Seems like this was outside the whole time or in a restaurant. That’s not surprising. I wouldn’t wear a mask there either. Try the grocery store. Or a doctors office.

In contrast, I just placed a pickup order for pizza and the confirmation screen said masks required.

It’s funny to see all the signage that never got updated: “Masks required”, “Please maintain a distance of six feet” etc.

Gotta say, from the very beginning I thought the whole six feet thing seemed ridiculous, as if five feet was dangerous and seven was fine.

 

[Terminalxylem]

The NYT piece is about remote learning, not masking.

I'm curious as to why these are being conflated.

I don’t believe there is any conclusive data showing masks harm children. As far as I can tell, some adults are projecting their disdain for face coverings to kids, who don’t seem to mind them, by and large.

Remote learning is another issue, but it’s more a function of resource allocation, as poor kids in bad school districts appear the most impacted. Since states with worse schools tended to resume in-person teaching earlier, it will be interesting to see how the educational playing field changes moving forward.

 

[Terminalxylem]

@IC FBGCav you have been vindicated.

Did you read beyond the headline? What this article states is not what Cav was saying in this or the separate vaccine thread.

Still, experts stress that vaccination is the preferable route to immunity, given the risks of Covid, particularly in unvaccinated people.​

​

“The problem of saying ‘I’m gonna get infected to get immunity’ is you might be one of those people that end up in the hospital or die,” Murray said. “Why would you take the risk when you can get immunity through vaccination quite safely?”​

There is not a single person in this entire thread that ever said they would rather get naturally infected than get the vaccine. The entire debate was centered around if you already HAD an infection.

I'm pretty there were some "I'll take my chances with my natural immune system" posts. I'm not going to go searching. But regardless, it's weird to take a victory lap over something that was 2 years ago, when data at the time showed natural immunity to be hit and miss. That was not opinion. I suspect that this study will be critiqued pretty heavily, as I've already seen it headlining on several news outlets. And obviously the natural immunity angle wasn't the silver bullet answer either. It didn't stop Omicron, nor reinfections post-Omicron.

In people infected with SARS-CoV-2 who develop antibodies, natural immunity (collectively, across all strains) appears to be roughly comparable to the initial vaccines. But not all infected people develop antibodies (a credit to our nonspecific defenses) - those people won’t have as consistent protection against future invasive disease as vaccine recipients. Moreover, it’s not really valid to compare natural immunity induced by omicron to people who haven’t received the full vaccination series, including the bivalent booster.

There’s quite a bit of heterogeneity in the studies included in that meta analysis, including how infection was defined. To really compare apples to apples, you’d need to perform population level surveillance employing both nucleic acid amplification tests and antibodies, to account for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic infection and prior covid, stratified by number of vaccine doses and timing since last infection/vaccine. I haven’t scrutinized the Lancet paper to know if such a study was included in their analysis, but I‘ve never seen anything along those lines.

Of course the confirmation bias crowd is already taking victory laps based on the headline alone, because it feels like “common sense”, while simultaneously denying the existence of those insisting natural immunity is preferable to vaccines.

ETA Reading the meta analysis more closely, Table 4 attempts to lay out the data as I stipulated above. It’s unclear if they include anyone with the bivalent booster, or more than two shots in their graphs, however. It’s also interesting their booster data is truncated to less than 20 weeks - the original booster has been out over a year, and bivalents were approved in September 2022.

 

[AAABatteries]

Those folks were not trying to force everyone to take an experimental vaccine against their will.

This didn’t happen for a couple of reasons. You may be having trouble moving on because your premise is flawed.

 

[AAABatteries]

So I decided to pay attention to mask wearing percentage here in Boise. We walked through the city, walking over 2 miles along the riverwalk to a packed restaurant for dinner, walked the 2 miles back and through the city again to get some coffee and then home.
I didn't see a single mask. Even surprised me.

I don’t go out much since I’m WFH most of the time now but it’s fairly rare to see a masks nowadays. I’d guess 1% maybe.

Here’s the thing though - I moved on from masks and paying attention to them. It could be there’s more people than I think wearing them and I just don’t notice.

 

[[icon]]

I understand wearing one in a hospital or doctors office. WTF wants to get sick?

Haven't been in here in a while because it's a dumpster fire

This is a very interesting statement from someone who thinks masks don't work

 

[[icon]]

There's a LOT of **** the experts got wrong.

A LOT. Here's another that's been evident for a while, but the brainwashing on this was deep and powerful, unfortunately...

https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1566087211442999299

Robby Starbuck
@robbystarbuck


Fauci’s NIH now lists IVERMECTIN as an antiviral therapy to treat COVID. The most recent study in Brazil of 88,012 people found Ivermectin cut the chance of COVID death by 92%. Now’s a good time to think about the censorship, pharmacy bans on it and hate people got for using it.

Do you actually read/vet source before you share them or just blindly re-share if it fits your agenda?

I only ask because the one you shared is pretty clearly fake news. His screen grab claims something that isn't true, ivermectin is NOT mentioned as a treatment on the NIH page that he links to, like he claims.

 

[LawFitz]

There's a LOT of **** the experts got wrong.

A LOT. Here's another that's been evident for a while, but the brainwashing on this was deep and powerful, unfortunately...

https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1566087211442999299

Robby Starbuck
@robbystarbuck


Fauci’s NIH now lists IVERMECTIN as an antiviral therapy to treat COVID. The most recent study in Brazil of 88,012 people found Ivermectin cut the chance of COVID death by 92%. Now’s a good time to think about the censorship, pharmacy bans on it and hate people got for using it.

Do you actually read/vet source before you share them or just blindly re-share if it fits your agenda?

I only ask because the one you shared is pretty clearly fake news. His screen grab claims something that isn't true, ivermectin is NOT mentioned as a treatment on the NIH page that he links to, like he claims.

It was listed on that site at the time of the tweet and they later removed it to continue your brainwashing. Before Covid, they considered Ivermectin a ground breaking wonder drug, and deployed it worldwide to humans in the billions without issue.

Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan: the human use perspective - PMC

Discovered in the late-1970s, the pioneering drug ivermectin, a dihydro derivative of avermectin—originating solely from a single microorganism isolated at the Kitasato Intitute, Tokyo, Japan from Japanese soil—has had an immeasurably beneficial ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Suddenly post-Covid it's just a horse dewormer. Yeah, right. IVM worked wonders on Covid in India and Brazil among masses. It also worked wonders on Covid here in the USA, but sadly, only for the few of us that were aware to take it.

 

[LawFitz]

@LawFitz[/USER] what are your thoughts about this versus what you posted previously?

See my last post, just above.