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.
Ivermectin is approved for human use under medical supervision for certain infestations of lice, mites, round worms and other parasites. It is NOT an antiviral. Humans using vet doasges for large animals is ignorant and dangerous for any reason. If I want to be mislead I'll follow you.
Libs suffer from low self-reliance, so they compensate by banding together in groups to avoid having to stand alone...a big fear of theirs.
Anything contrary to group-think is seen as the enemy. Its like a Red Ant colony...step on it and swarms of Red Ants climb up foot to bite you.
So, any Covid treatment that is not the one trumpeted by the Queen Ant, is seen as the enemy, and will be attacked by the collective ant colony.
Its not about reasoning, or even science, its about the group (Libs) sticking together to protect its fragile members, so they don't have to stand alone...its the Libs natural reaction to their own raw emotion of fear.
The media & DNC signals to the Lib colony what they should fear, and who/what they should attack, & then they comply.
Pubs in this thread are trying to use logic, & reasoning, while the Libs only respond to emotional fear through group think, & collectivism.
There is sensible controversy there.
My high risk wife got #3 recently. Especially as our daughter's wedding was coming up.
High risks having had the Pfizer should get #3.
Low risks and those with other jab brands can wait.
Check with your own doc.
No controversy. Either you follow the science or you don't. The Science has spoken.
There is sensible controversy there.
My high risk wife got #3 recently. Especially as our daughter's wedding was coming up.
High risks having had the Pfizer should get #3.
Low risks and those with other jab brands can wait.
Check with your own doc.
Yep. That's what my own doctor suggested, so I got the Pfizer #3 last week. The rest of the family got Moderna, so they are likely fine for the time being.
Exactly. It is then a misinterpretation of the medical being political. The Dems simply parrot the medical opinions and recommendations.
Then BlakeJones Posted.....
The Medical has been Captured by the political. Just last week, the CDC president Rochelle Walensky overruled the board of advisors which are the medical experts. They recommended against booster shots, and she said, SORRY, uncle Joe is "The Science"
CDC director overrules panel on Pfizer boosters https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/cdc-...ry?id=80192431
To which you replied....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose
There is sensible controversy there.
.
You do realize you've contradicted yourself here, don't you?
The Medical has been Captured by the political. Just last week, the CDC president Rochelle Walensky overruled the board of advisors which are the medical experts. They recommended against booster shots, and she said, SORRY, uncle Joe is "The Science"
This is an open admission that the politicians are to be followed, not the science. There was a short time when the science and politicians seemed to be running parallel. Not anymore. Expect that slogan to quietly disappear.
This should be front page headlines, but it isn't.
No controversy. Either you follow the science or you don't. The Science has spoken.
This decision isn't just science, but includes randomness, statistics and probability. Also costs, and national and global health and social concerns
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.