Chinese "Devil Virus" - anyone worried?

[dantes]

I dunno, you would see more doctors coming out and saying ivermectin works. The vaccines are more expensive to produce than tablets as well. Also, why aren't the generic companies coming out and saying it works?

If I go another few days and I haven't got the rona after what I've been through the past few days then I'm declaring myself immune to it.

The generic companies are not fools my child. They must still bear the great expense of getting FDA approval for their product and manufacturing facility, so they focus on things they can put their own twist on. Like a generic vaccine that contains alcohol, the generic scientists will come up with a way to achieve the same efficacy using an alternative islamaphillic solvent. That technology protects their product and gives them a competitive edge, then they will spend their money upon approval knowing their future revenues are protected. The generic companies without that edge, are just sweat shops. It makes no difference if they produce ivermectin tablets, or paracetamol tablets. They don't care what works or what ailments our lord has inflicted upon the faithless people. Their edge is simply in employing slave labour to widen their profit margin.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Merck are about to come out with a Covid treatment pill now though, aren't they?

 

[LeTallecWiz]

My child, renew your faith in our lord and the truth will be spoken unto you by his prophets.

My father, the holy scientist, thanks for continually believing in us.

 

[Halmeister]

I dunno, you would see more doctors coming out and saying ivermectin works. The vaccines are more expensive to produce than tablets as well. Also, why aren't the generic companies coming out and saying it works?

If I go another few days and I haven't got the rona after what I've been through the past few days then I'm declaring myself immune to it.

The people that are coming out in support of Ivermectin are being lambasted, their careers are at risk if they stray away from the narrative. I imagine a lot also see that and think, "fuck it. I'll just tow the line."

I'm not sure about the economics of it, but I'm sure the vaccines will offer greater profit margins. Also, I imagine another goal of the pharmaceutical companies is to produce a treatment pill that effectively does the same job as Ivermectin (if it is indeed effective), change the name and ramp the price up of that. Can't do that if Ivermectin is already available and much cheaper. Obviously this is speculation, but I think it's rooted in logic with circumstantial evidence that could back it up.

 

[Rosco]

Ivermectin is a generic drug now. The patent is open market and is very cheap to make, and anyone in theory could make it now and sell it. It doesn't make as much money as the vaccines. That's the theory put forward anyway.

Plus, there's the angle that effective treatments for the disease will render the emergency laws granted to governments unnecessary, which would effect policy they want to implement and these vaccine mandates.

I don't know if any of this actually true, and to be honest, there's probably no way of ever knowing for sure, but I'm probably leaning towards this being the case. The clear and obvious smear campaign against Ivermectin was certainly bizarre. As Gerry said, though, I've seen loads of stuff from one side saying Ivermectin is crushing Covid, then the other side taking the exact opposite position. It's so hard to know what the truth is anymore in this world.

Sports is always ahead of mainstream medicine.

The NFL is using ivermectin and the other drugs that are effective in treating it and their players are coming back very quickly from Covid.

 

[Halmeister]

Sports is always ahead of mainstream medicine.

The NFL is using ivermectin and the other drugs that are effective in treating it and their players are coming back very quickly from Covid.

Interesting. I've Googled that and all I can see is Aaron Rodgers saying that, though. That said, from the very little I know about him, I wouldn't be surprised if he was telling the truth.

 

[Aidan O' Neill]

I don't think so, I just haven't see any that says it does any good. I think Malone just says it has potential, and there hasn't been enough effort into seeing if it does. The fact that Merck, who make it, who would obviously be the ones that would make most from it, don't seem to think there's value in it probably says something.

Could be that Merck already give it away in some African countries to help combat river blindness and then couldn't justify trying to profit from it for COVID, costing themselves potential profit from their upcoming COVID pill?

 

[Halmeister]

Could be that Merck already give it away in some African countries to help combat river blindness and then couldn't justify trying to profit from it for COVID, costing themselves potential profit from their upcoming COVID pill?

Yeah Ivermectin is already handed out in places in Africa and Asia. Not good for the balance sheet if a drug effective in battling a worldwide pandemic is readily available for free.

 

[Rosco]

Yeah Ivermectin is already handed out in places in Africa and Asia. Not good for the balance sheet if a drug effective in battling a worldwide pandemic is readily available for free.

It's just a coincidence that all those countries who use ivermectin for other reasons don't have a covid pandemic despite having no vaccines.

 

[Halmeister]

It's just a coincidence that all those countries who use ivermectin for other reasons don't have a covid pandemic despite having no vaccines.

I think that could be a factor, yeah. There are other variables, too, though.

Less testing, younger population, less obesity, more vitamin D etc.

 

[Brizzle]

Good to see the tin foil hats are still out in this thread

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Could be that Merck already give it away in some African countries to help combat river blindness and then couldn't justify trying to profit from it for COVID, costing themselves potential profit from their upcoming COVID pill?

Yeah, maybe. I think it's getting close to a stage where too many people need to be coordinated and agreed on this, which just makes it less likely. I think it's much more likely that ivermectin just isn't the answer.

 

[Rosco]

Yeah, maybe. I think it's getting close to a stage where too many people need to be coordinated and agreed on this, which just makes it less likely. I think it's much more likely that ivermectin just isn't the answer.

Just like the lab leak wasn't the answer at the outset too.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Just like the lab leak wasn't the answer at the outset too.

Who said that it wasn't? That one would have a very small number of people involved to cover up, I don't know if it'll ever be proven either way tbh.

 

[dantes]

Yeah, maybe. I think it's getting close to a stage where too many people need to be coordinated and agreed on this, which just makes it less likely. I think it's much more likely that ivermectin just isn't the answer.

Why do you struggle with such needless uncertainties and doubts? They weigh heavily upon your weary mind my child. Just come into the lord's light and you will have all the answers you seek.

 

[Rosco]

Who said that it wasn't? That one would have a very small number of people involved to cover up, I don't know if it'll ever be proven either way tbh.

On here ? Definitely Frogfish and I'm guessing the usual suspects like Hansern and Stevie who are just too dumb to do anything but repeat shite from "reliable sources".

In the world, the people who financed and caused the outbreak denied the lab leak theory. And all the scientific journals followed suit by publishing articles supporting their cover up.

 

[Rosco]

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

On here ? Definitely Frogfish and I'm guessing the usual suspects like Hansern and Stevie who are just too dumb to do anything but repeat shite from "reliable sources".

In the world, the people who financed and caused the outbreak denied the lab leak theory. And all the scientific journals followed suit by publishing articles supporting their cover up.

From what I remember, most sources said, there's no evidence that it came from a lab leak, but they were trying to send people to investigate, but China were resisting it. I don't know if anyone could reliably have said, it definitely was a lab leak, or it definitely wasn't. Just that we didn't know, and as far as I've seen, we still don't really know.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Is that about Rogan, or Trump?

 

[Halmeister]

From what I remember, most sources said, there's no evidence that it came from a lab leak, but they were trying to send people to investigate, but China were resisting it. I don't know if anyone could reliably have said, it definitely was a lab leak, or it definitely wasn't. Just that we didn't know, and as far as I've seen, we still don't really know.

The thing about the lab leak was the overt shutting down of any discussion of it. People who suggested it were removed from Twitter, had their videos pulled down from YouTube, and were publicly decried and criticised. It was weird and shady as fuck.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

The thing about the lab leak was the overt shutting down of any discussion of it. People who suggested it were removed from Twitter, had their videos pulled down from YouTube, and were publicly decried and criticised. It was weird and shady as fuck.

Yeah, there's definitely weird stuff going on with shutting down conversations. Part of the problem is that there is a huge amount of actual misinformation about, if you actually look on the likes of Reddit, Facebook and other places, there's dozens of things each day, which are believed by all those people who "do their own research", and it gets hard to actually tell which is plausible and which is a total lie. Out of the hundreds, of often totally contradictory things said, it's too hard to know which to pay attention to and which not to, as most of them are not scrutinised before being shared elsewhere.

The same is happening on the other side too, albeit with more qualified and substantiated backing, but it has all the issues mentioned already around, who is gaining what from it.

 

[Rosco]

From what I remember, most sources said, there's no evidence that it came from a lab leak, but they were trying to send people to investigate, but China were resisting it. I don't know if anyone could reliably have said, it definitely was a lab leak, or it definitely wasn't. Just that we didn't know, and as far as I've seen, we still don't really know.

Another revisionist history from Gerry.

You talk an amazing amount of shit Gerry.

 

[Rosco]

Is that about Rogan, or Trump?

That would be you

 

[Halmeister]

Yeah, there's definitely weird stuff going on with shutting down conversations. Part of the problem is that there is a huge amount of actual misinformation about, if you actually look on the likes of Reddit, Facebook and other places, there's dozens of things each day, which are believed by all those people who "do their own research", and it gets hard to actually tell which is plausible and which is a total lie. Out of the hundreds, of often totally contradictory things said, it's too hard to know which to pay attention to and which not to, as most of them are not scrutinised before being shared elsewhere.

The same is happening on the other side too, albeit with more qualified and substantiated backing, but it has all the issues mentioned already around, who is gaining what from it.

Definitely. Only one side is actively being silenced, though.

 

[Rosco]

Pfizer : vaccine is 100% effective at preventing covid

CDC: if you're vaccinated you can't carry the virus.

Fauci: if you're vaccinated you're a dead end for the virus.

World leaders: get vaccinated and it will end covid.

Gerry: nobody ever said the vaccine would prevent transmission and no vaccine does.

 

[Halmeister]

Don't forget Biden chatting shit, too.

 

[Halmeister]

What I can't get my head around at the minute is people saying the booster and more shots will stop it. We're getting out of this. There'll just be another variant in 6 months again, and again they'll be pushing another vaccine/booster. It's like people keep having their minds wiped.

I'm talking mainly about Joe Public, of course. The leaders and experts know they're chatting shit. It just baffles me how people keep thinking the same measures that didn't work before will work this time.

There definitely needs to be more focus on adjusting lifestyles and healthcare so that people aren't as susceptible to the disease, as well as promoting effective treatment. In conjunction with the vaccines for those that need/want it. But there's hardly any talk of any of that, and that's where I start to get sceptical about motives. Some people think that's tinfoil hat, but whatever, it couldn't be more logical to me.

 

[Rosco]

Definitely. Only one side is actively being silenced, though.

Yup. The Pfizer CEO's tweet lying about the vaccine effectiveness was never flagged as vaccine misnformation and he was never banned.

This isn't about truth

 

[Halmeister]

Joe Biden literally said the words, "if you get the vaccine, you won't catch it, you won't get sick and you won't spread it."

I'm far from a fan of Trump, but imagine if he said something so egregiously wrong on the other side. He probably did, in fairness. Is he still banned off Twitter?

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

Pfizer : vaccine is 100% effective at preventing covid

CDC: if you're vaccinated you can't carry the virus.

Fauci: if you're vaccinated you're a dead end for the virus.

World leaders: get vaccinated and it will end covid.

Gerry: nobody ever said the vaccine would prevent transmission and no vaccine does.

All of those lack context.


For example the Pfizer quote I think you're talking about was a trial in South Africa where the Beta variant was active at the time, which showed it was 100% effective. Which turned out to be true in the real world too, it's no longer about.

Fauci was talking about the massively reduced risk of transmitting once vaccinated in May last year, just before Delta took off, and he said "effectively".

Things changed a lot with new variants and changing behaviours, just because something isn't true now, doesn't mean it wasn't true when said, especially when you give all the context around it.