the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Dmitri wrote:Dunno if this was posted here already, but just in case it wasn't:
.
https://www.wfla.com/community/health/c ... udy-finds/

Well like a good scientist, in light of new evidence, I say this changes everything.

Please, if you don't believe in vaccines, definitely, positively, take ivermectin, it's you're only choice, really. You should probably double-up just to be safe.

Dmitri wrote:Dunno if this was posted here already, but just in case it wasn't:
.
https://www.wfla.com/community/health/c ... udy-finds/

Aw, anyone who won't take Ivermectin because of a silly study is a submissive sheeple with no balls.

So I just looked it up properly, and couldn't find any definitive corroboration.

And snopes.com says it's "unproven".

So I guess it's a "wait and see" scenario.

Although so far I haven't gone to see a vet for my medical problems... I don't know what I was thinking. It sounds so right, somehow. Unleash yer inner animal!!

oragami_itto wrote:

Trick wrote:

oragami_itto wrote:
On the other hand are those that believe the virus was created in a Chinese lab by the CIA in order to.. I'm not quite clear on that part... Force people to take a vaccine and wear a mask on their face. Which seems counterproductive because it blocks face recognition scanners.

the cia part was probably from me last time i was on here, i confess i mentioned them for a bit extra effect but i think we all agree they are a sneaky institution.

the chinese lab(s) do have international cllaborations and very much so with entities in the US and EU/Britain. its easy info to find for you so no need to make tinfoilhat joke about that...

But when you say that it was gain of function research and that a leak from that lab is what caused the COVID-19 pandemic then you're just inventing facts to fit your paranoia.

i didnt say such, you are confusing me with someone else......paranoia what !?

Dmitri wrote:So I just looked it up properly, and couldn't find any definitive corroboration.

And snopes.com says it's "unproven".

So I guess it's a "wait and see" scenario.

Although so far I haven't gone to see a vet for my medical problems... I don't know what I was thinking. It sounds so right, somehow. Unleash yer inner animal!!

Whew. I guess we need more testing. Volunteers for a study are needed.

Trick wrote:

oragami_itto wrote:

But when you say that it was gain of function research and that a leak from that lab is what caused the COVID-19 pandemic then you're just inventing facts to fit your paranoia.

i didnt say such, you are confusing me with someone else......paranoia what !?

Sorry for the confusion, I was using the more general "you" to refer to people that do that, not you specifically.

aw, you guys are like crappie on a chum slick with your clickbait appetites

looking it up and actually reading the study woulda saved a visit to snopes.

Swift talkin' about your sloppy thinking right here:

Besides, as the vilest Writer has his Readers, so the greatest Liar has his Believers; and it often happens, that if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect…

Yep, someone posts something, and then actually checks. Nefarious. Should have read the study (Like I did) before checking Snopes. Right.

Anyway, Snopes says the claim is "unproven," the source is questionable, and there is no confirmation. Good enough for me. Like I said, research volunteers are needed. I'm serious. If the argument is that more studies are needed, step up.

It does bring up an interesting thing about sources. Do we trust Snopes only when it confirms what we believe? If it's "sometimes I trust them and sometimes I don't," then what Snopes says is meaningless. In this case, then, the study may be correct. Same conclusion.

And, like I said, if you've got the balls, like Joe Rogan, then it doesn't matter what anyone says. Just go get the pills. I still think it's damned funny that any study found sterility as a side effect. Yeah, the FDA doesn't list it. But, how can we trust the gubmint. Maybe it's part of a conspiracy to sterilize males.

the greatest liar has his believers

Let's try looking at some truth:

You're less likely to die of COVID-19, or experience serious after effects, if you've had the vaccine.
You're less likely to spread COVID-19 and other saliva borne viruses if you wear a mask covering your mouth and nose.
There are no robust clinical studies that demonstrate any efficacy of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

Where is the lie?

One of my wife's acquaintances who never left her Texas hometown, had seven kids, and swallows right wing propaganda unquestioningly is now fighting for her life with COVID-19. She's gotten on Facebook despite her illness to beg everyone she knows to get the vaccine while they still can.

Then there's this guy.

Misdirection and sloppy thinking trying to strawman the point I was making.

Swift was quoted in regard to clickbait headlines and the known effect they have on the minds of sloppy, lazy thinkers...duh...

Isn't spreading misinformation in our new, covid-19 world supposed to be bad and irresponsible, and only something the right-wingers/anti-vax/paste-eaters do? Seems like MSM is going out of their way do exactly what they warn their audience to be wary of in that regard. And then along come the stooges who post links to those 'news stories'...

BruceP wrote:Misdirection and sloppy thinking trying to strawman the point I was making.

Swift was quoted in regard to clickbait headlines and the known effect they have on the minds of sloppy, lazy thinkers...duh...

Isn't spreading misinformation in our new, covid-19 world supposed to be bad and irresponsible, and only something the right-wingers/anti-vax/paste-eaters do? Seems like MSM is going out of their way do exactly what they warn their audience to be wary of in that regard. And then along come the stooges who post links to those 'news stories'...

What misdirection? Let's get straight to the point. Find the lie, win a prize.

You're less likely to die of COVID-19, or experience serious after effects, if you've had the vaccine.
You're less likely to spread COVID-19 and other saliva borne viruses if you wear a mask covering your mouth and nose.
There are no robust clinical studies that demonstrate any efficacy of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

BruceP wrote:looking it up and actually reading the study woulda saved a visit to snopes.

I do regret not checking it before posting, like I usually do.
And, "saved a visit to snopes" makes no sense whatsoever in this context.

if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it

That only applies to easily-suggestible people who don't check sources habitually. I'm not one of them.

Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late

No it isn't. With all due respect to Mr Swift, -- that's just BS.

Dmitri wrote:I do regret not checking it before posting, like I usually do.
And, "saved a visit to snopes" makes no sense whatsoever in this context

It actually does make sense. Sorry, but using snopes or any other 'fact check' website is the laziest of 'research' methods when one has doubts or questions about something. They're almost all politically corrupted to the point where it's farcical...like satire.

Dmitri wrote:
That only applies to easily-suggestible people who don't check sources habitually. I'm not one of them

Yeah...'easily-suggestible people' like Graham, and the guy who thinks red herring and a straw man is a valid argument versus the point that was made in quoting Swift. And others...

Thanks for getting it, btw.

Dmitri wrote:
No it isn't. With all due respect to Mr Swift, -- that's just BS.

I can give you dozens of examples of the damage done before the truth even got its boots on. But I'm not going to because it's tedious, and I'm lazy

What straw man, bruce? Let's speak directly and plainly.

Ivermectin is cheap and proven safe for use in humans. It is easy to source and manufacture.

If the proof of its effectiveness to treat COVID-19 has been demonstrated, what would motivate someone in a position to permit or deny its administration to keep this life saving drug from a patient that they are slowly watching succumb to this disease? What is the payoff? Who is benefiting?

If the drug has not been proven to be effective, what would motivate someone to convince others to take it in lieu of treatment which has been rigorously tested? What is the payoff? Who is benefiting?

In the first case, I don't see anyone benefiting. I have trouble assuming the level of nefarious intention such a situation would imply. I suppose if you assume the government is happiest when it's killing you I guess it makes a certain kind of sense, but history has shown the killing is just a side effect of power and wealth consolidation. The people making those calls aren't the ones that have drained 1.2 trillion from US citizens this last year and a half.

In the second case, the benefit is direct. The consolidation of influence. Eroding trust in public institutions to present oneself as the only worthy medium of information. The perspective isn't guided by science, it's informed solely by political expediency. Whatever the opponent claims controls the reactionary stance taken to rally the faithful behind. Muddy the waters with enough misinformation and it becomes impossible to even determine the truth anymore, just trust what the talking head tells you and make sure you get to the polls in November so the people that pay them can keep their hands on the checkbooks.