Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You may as well ask: Why are liberals so fanatical against voodoo treatment not supported by science.
.
Why is everything besides the vaccine the equivalent to voodo treatment. Wouldn't you call a conservative who put all his eggs on one basket close minded?
Opposition to the Covid vaccine crosses politics. Sad that politicians and media that feeds off them politicized Covid and then vaccine. Even sadder that some folk have bought into the politicalization of Covid and vaccine to the point some politicians are fund raising off their opposition.
According to this, NIH says there is insufficient evidence that Ivermectin is effective and for this reason NIH does not recommend for or against it.
I don’t understand a reluctance to take an FDA- approved vaccine that was created for SARS CoV-19, yet embrace a drug developed to deworm animals to treat Covid or Hydroxychloroquine which has not proven to be effective preventing or curing Covid. It sure did Trump no good and he certainly was not treated with it.
And just 3 months after being hospitalized with Covid, Trump chose to be vaccinated.
What an odd statement (the bold). How could it have done him any good if he didn't take it?
Now, the thing that gets me is the statement from the NIH that they don't recommend for OR AGAINST it. That last part seems to have been left out of the memo as the AMA is trying to get pharmacist to not fill prescriptions for it.
The vaccines seem to be over 90% effective in preventing infection in the first place. We are about 53% fully vaccinated (this includes people too young to vaccinate) as a country, with about 74% of adults receiving at least one dose.
Using the 53% number, that means approximately 175M Americans are fully vaccinated, about 155M are not. Of those 155M, about 75M are children under 12.
So we have 175M fully vaccinated, and 80M partially or unvaccinated.
Lets say 20% of the unvaccinated group will not receive the vaccination because they believe the hype over alternative treatments. That is about 16M people.
Based on that, we can calculate death counts for each group.
Vaccinated people can expect a total of 315,00 deaths (worst case scenario, assumes only 90% efficacy and a 1.8% death rate), or 1 in every 555 people.
Unvaccinated people, using only the 16M who do not get vaccinated because they prefer unproven alternative treatments, can expect 288,000 deaths (remember this on a much smaller population), or one in every 55 people.
Even assuming 1/2 of alternative treatments are just as effective as the vaccine, that still means 1 in very 110 unvaccinated people die.
But it gets worse than that really. Remember that vaccinated people slow the spread of the virus. Because they get infected less often, they infect fewer people. Unvaccinated people do nothing to slow the spread.
Really, this is simple math. Vaccinations reduce the rate of infection, and of deaths. Not being vaccinated run a high risk of infection, alternative treatments have no proven efficacy, and have higher death rates.
Alternative treatments are like a death tax on the ignorant. But you do what you want.
You know it's not one or the other. You can take both. Just stop making it NONE for the unvaccinated.
Good points. If I were still in practice, most likely I would be prescribing ivermectin to select outpatients. It is safe, and might benefit some patients in that scenario. But they can never replace the vaccines. The vaccines are the only humane and timely way of keeping large populations safe and through the Pandemic.
No one is suggesting they REPLACE the vaccine. Why this binary thinking? We aren't asking you to choose one or the other, you are TELLING us which one to take. No choice.
Why is everything besides the vaccine the equivalent to voodo treatment. Wouldn't you call a conservative who put all his eggs on one basket close minded?
Not if the basket were to be highly effective, well researched, with readily available science, and supported by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community. I would call that person, whether conservative or not, prudent.
I know many conservatives who have gotten vaccinated against COVID. I do not think they are close minded.
Do you think that I am closeminded because I understand the earth is a globe and not flat? Am I close minded because I understand that the earth has a gravitational pull on objects and if I let something go it will fall down? Am I closeminded if I trust that eating arsenic in sufficient quantity will kill me? Do I really need to live my life anticipating things to float when I release them, or eating arsenic just in case it is actually good for me?
Quote:
Originally Posted by clutchcargo777
You know it's not one or the other. You can take both. Just stop making it NONE for the unvaccinated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clutchcargo777
No one is suggesting they REPLACE the vaccine. Why this binary thinking? We aren't asking you to choose one or the other, you are TELLING us which one to take. No choice.
Realistically though, Ivermectin and HCQ are not being touted as supplements to vaccination, they are being advocated as alternatives to vaccination. If a person is vaccinated, their chances of catching COVID are dramatically reduced, symptoms are dramatically reduced, chances of hospitalization are dramatically reduced, and the need to treat with secondary medications virtually vanishes.
If they sign a waiver saying they won't clog hospitals if they need help from not wearing one, I'll agree. Someone choosing not to take a preventative measure, but then using public resources to fix their own mistake is the height of selfishness. That's choosing individuality for the benefits, but not for the consequences.
Are you planning to deny medical services to people who attempt suicide?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii
Let me be clear. As soon as a hospital fills up, anyone who is in an ICU because they made the choice to not get vaccinated get kicked first. People who make poor decisions should take responsibility for their decisions. People not trusting science by not getting vaccinated, then running to a hospital when that decision goes poorly is NOT something I respect.
Again, so no treatment for those who try to commit suicide? Suicide, by definition, is 100% a choice to harm oneself.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
OTOH, there are a lot of people (like me) who are highly susceptible to this disease and who would much rather have people get vaccinated instead of possibly spreading it around. If and when the treatments are proven to work and the protocols have been figured out, then go ahead and use them instead of a vaccine. But while you are sick, please quarantine yourself so as not to spread the disease to the more vulnerable until the treatments are available to all of us. I hear they're working on a tablet of some sort instead of a vaccination. They are working on a lot of different things, but let's admit it--this entire thing is a mess and if you're not vaccinated, at least be respectful enough to wear a GOOD mask when you are around other people.
Anyone who has Covid should quarantine regardless of their vaccination status. Keep in mind that the vaccines will likely greatly reduce your symptoms but won't eradicate Covid, meaning that you can still spread Covid despite being vaccinated for it. Until a treatment or vaccine or something can actually stop Covid in its tracks, we will continue to see cycles of outbreaks followed by lulls until another variant comes around.
Frankly I am of the opinion that we need to stop acting like we're somehow ahead of Covid and just let the virus run its course. If an actual cure is discovered then that would be awesome, but at some point we need to rip off the bandaid.
Are you planning to deny medical services to people who attempt suicide?
Again, so no treatment for those who try to commit suicide? Suicide, by definition, is 100% a choice to harm oneself.
I understand the point you are making. The slippery slope could include not only attempted suicides, but overweight people, alcoholics, smokers, extreme sports participants or motorcyclists. All of these things increase risk and, over the population, increase the load on our medical system.
I do see some differences though. A vaccination is a simple thing that does not require a lifestyle change or require you to give up any activity. Also, our medical system is sized to take attempted suicides, etc into account, so any one of these things, or all of them taken together, does not stress the medical system in statewide or regional areas. COVID is different. Vaccination means that it is easily avoided by most, at no significant cost or detriment.
For the record, I am uncertain as to what ought to be done here. I am very uneasy at the though of refusing medical services to anybody, but on the other hand, when 'anybody' includes a huge population of self-destructive numbskulls, I become less sympathetic.
Why can’t they just take the darn vaccine? Then there would be no need for these alternative treatments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
