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.
Turns out that the miracle mRNA vaccines are becoming the "voodoo treatment." They are failing.
The Pfizer is waning. We all knew from day #1 with the vaccines that their duration of efficacy could not be known, and that most likely boosters in the fall. And here we are. I have no doubts that the other vaccines will also wane. And especially as the Delta is tending to bypass the vaccines, boosters are now needed for the high risks. My wife got hers last week. Boosters will soon be offered for the more general public. And an edited booster more directed at the Delta possibly in 100 days.
I'm not against alternative therapies for covid. In fact I was horrified at the outset of the pandemic when Dr. F. said a vaccine was more than a year away! It should be 10 years away if it's going to be safe!
So bring on the alt therapies. They may help save lives.There is always more than one way to accomplish a goal and please don't lump all liberals into the same category. We're as diverse in opinion and preference as anyone else. You'd be surprised if you actually talked to a lot of us.
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.
"It is NOT an antiviral."
Wrong.
It definitely IS an antiviral.
It should be used only under a doctor's care.
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.
I'm going to press you a bit on this. Don't take it as an attack - I want your medical opinion and the reasoning behind it.
There are two types of "vaccines" now. One is an actual vaccine and contains some portion of the living thing we're concerned about, or a reasonable enough facsimile that our bodies respond with the same immune response - J&J. The other type is the new (to being tested/used on humans) mRNA therapy being called a vaccine, but doesn't contain any portion of the living thing we're concerned about and has completely different mechanics in how it produces the immune response they're going for.
Is there any disagreement on the fundamentals of what I wrote above? Hopefully not. I'll continue. (This is why I don't like trying to have a serious discussion in a message forum - timely interaction is necessary for a productive conversation).
A traditional vaccine works by teaching the body how to respond to an invader. When it encounters the invader after an immunity has been developed, it's able to defend against it quickly, before the associated disease is able to set in. Virus enters and is killed before it's able to significantly replicate and initiate disease.
Up to this point, I'm expecting that there's no major issues with the facts I've presented. Let me know if you think there are. Please don't go after technicalities though unless they're meaningful - not a doctor.
Here's where I want the logic behind your statement.
The new mRNA therapies are being sold in the public narrative as symptom reducers. They won't stop you from getting the disease; they just stop the symptoms from becoming life threatening. That sounds to me more like a treatment than a vaccine. The disease is allowed to set in. It's expected to. That's not a vaccine, that's a pre-infection treatment. Do you disagree, and if so, why?
Ivermectin isn't being touted as a cure. It's being used as a prophylactic and to reduce the severity of symptoms. The practical functionality it's providing seems to me to be about the same as what we're being told that the mRNA shots provide. Do you disagree, and if so, why?
If everything above checks out logically, then what's the logic in taking the vaccine, when all it's expected to do is reduce symptoms, which I can possibly or even likely get from the Ivermectin cocktail that I don't have to consume unless/until necessary?
There is no question social media has resulted in some people self - radicalizing, certainly not limited to religion.
What's interesting is that you tend to only see it happening to one side, based on your history here. Usually, that means that you're the one who's becoming radicalized. Just sayin'. You don't seem all that radical in contrast to some here, but that doesn't mean it's not happening, and if you don't see it except in your opponents...
I'm going to press you a bit on this. Don't take it as an attack - I want your medical opinion and the reasoning behind it.
There are two types of "vaccines" now. One is an actual vaccine and contains some portion of the living thing we're concerned about, or a reasonable enough facsimile that our bodies respond with the same immune response - J&J. The other type is the new (to being tested/used on humans) mRNA therapy being called a vaccine, but doesn't contain any portion of the living thing we're concerned about and has completely different mechanics in how it produces the immune response they're going for.
Is there any disagreement on the fundamentals of what I wrote above? Hopefully not. I'll continue. (This is why I don't like trying to have a serious discussion in a message forum - timely interaction is necessary for a productive conversation).
A traditional vaccine works by teaching the body how to respond to an invader. When it encounters the invader after an immunity has been developed, it's able to defend against it quickly, before the associated disease is able to set in. Virus enters and is killed before it's able to significantly replicate and initiate disease.
Up to this point, I'm expecting that there's no major issues with the facts I've presented. Let me know if you think there are. Please don't go after technicalities though unless they're meaningful - not a doctor.
Here's where I want the logic behind your statement.
The new mRNA therapies are being sold in the public narrative as symptom reducers. They won't stop you from getting the disease; they just stop the symptoms from becoming life threatening. That sounds to me more like a treatment than a vaccine. The disease is allowed to set in. It's expected to. That's not a vaccine, that's a pre-infection treatment. Do you disagree, and if so, why?
Ivermectin isn't being touted as a cure. It's being used as a prophylactic and to reduce the severity of symptoms. The practical functionality it's providing seems to me to be about the same as what we're being told that the mRNA shots provide. Do you disagree, and if so, why?
If everything above checks out logically, then what's the logic in taking the vaccine, when all it's expected to do is reduce symptoms, which I can possibly or even likely get from the Ivermectin cocktail that I don't have to consume unless/until necessary?
Thanks for your time and insight.
They are both new technology vaccines that use a bit different approaches to do essentially the same thing. That is present the spike protein as an antigen to our bodies so we then produce antibodies against it. The J&J uses an inactivated adenovirus to present the spike, the mRNA's are instructions to our bodies to create and present the spike.
Ivermectin is a medication treatment, not a vaccine. The end result could be similar, that is in preventing or mitigating disease, but are entirely different approaches. Ivermectin would be more difficult to apply to large populations, and over a longer time frame than the vaccines. And its efficacy remains sketchy, vs the proven vaccines.
None are a cures by themselves. The vaccines we knew from day #1 that due to the typical mutations of coronaviruses that boosters would be needed at some point. And here we are.
IMO there is no reason not to try ivermectin in select outpatients who are coming down with the disease, vaccinated or not.
I chose to vaccinate after talking with my physician and learning that there are adverse side effects of getting COVID
Um, the mRNA shots don't prevent you from getting covid.
You're still going to get it. You could have already had it and not even know. Regardless, if you live long enough, you're going to get covid. There's no avoiding it. It's endemic now and more transmissible than most bugs. You WILL get it eventually, and the vaccine doesn't stop it.
When you do, maybe the vaccine will make the difference between you having long term issues and not. We'll never actually know, but if so, that's awesome. But it's not going to stop you from getting the disease.
The same people in the media that maligned Trump and praised Biden last year, are now in the business of promoting the vaccine and condemning everything else. Those people who "won" the election for Biden did not just disappear after the election. They're still weaving tales using cooked numbers. They've simply turned their efforts to something else.
They are both new technology vaccines that use a bit different approaches to do essentially the same thing. That is present the spike protein as an antigen to our bodies so we then produce antibodies against it. The J&J uses an inactivated adenovirus to present the spike, the mRNA's are instructions to our bodies to create and present the spike.
Ivermectin is a medication treatment, not a vaccine. The end result could be similar, that is in preventing or mitigating disease, but are entirely different approaches. Ivermectin would be more difficult to apply to large populations, and over a longer time frame than the vaccines. And its efficacy remains sketchy, vs the proven vaccines.
None are a cures by themselves. The vaccines we knew from day #1 that due to the typical mutations of coronaviruses that boosters would be needed at some point. And here we are.
IMO there is no reason not to try ivermectin in select outpatients who are coming down with the disease, vaccinated or not.
To the chicken who parrots talking points in rep comments, provide UNBIASED facts.
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.
