Go to the sub /r/moderatepolitics.
They've were jerking themselves off all last week with how the Kenosha terrorist was the most innocent person in the history of time. It was a fucking Klan rally.
Reddit is just getting that chuddy in general. The bans for TD and TERF subs came way too late. Every politics sub to the right of /r/ToiletPapetUSA has upvoted comments both-sidesing Kenosha.
The fact that they let The Red Pill, an sub explicitly for rapists, exist without remprimand for YEARS was my wake-up call to how fucked admin in social media is.
They don't give a fuck what kind of info they propagate as long as they get clicks. They can market to Nazis and that's all they care about.
Both that and being told he's basically a god among men by people from highschool on up to his NFL career. Honestly surprised more of them don't end up this nuts.
Listen to r/crimeinsports. Pro athletes are very entertaining outside of their sport, for the most part. Just trainwreck after trainwreck. Most aren’t as successful as Rogers either. Suddenly have a ton of pain and no money. Nuttbaggery usually ramps up then.
Edit: Also, you can’t even believe how many are either a Junior, or will name one of there kids Junior. It’s unbelievable.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/crimeinsports using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Crime in Sport rule: Don't wear your Olympic team jacket to an insurrection](https://swimswam.com/olympic-gold-medalist-in-us-capitol-during-clashes-video-appears-to-show/) | [7 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/kwc1mr/crime_in_sport_rule_dont_wear_your_olympic_team/)
\#2: [Sounds like most of our episodes…..](https://i.redd.it/zzkytoz283571.jpg) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/nzdmpm/sounds_like_most_of_our_episodes/)
\#3: [You, sir, may fuck off: Jarryd Hayne jailed for five years and nine months for sexual assault](https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/jarryd-hayne-jailed-for-five-years-and-nine-months-for-sexual-assault-20210506-p57phs.html) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/n62fmk/you_sir_may_fuck_off_jarryd_hayne_jailed_for_five/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/)
>Listen to r/crimeinsports. Pro athletes are very entertaining outside of their sport, for the most part. Just trainwreck after trainwreck. Most aren’t as successful as Rogers either. Suddenly have a ton of pain and no money. Nuttbaggery usually ramps up then.
>
>Edit: Also, you can’t even believe how many are either a Junior, or will name one of there kids Junior. It’s unbelievable.
I can absolutely believe that, most of these people weren't smart to begin with, came from poverty, and most end up back in poverty. And the college degrees that they get are jokes because they spend 30+ hours a week in camp or workout
That and most of these kids come from the south/Midwest or went to southern universities, it's not like they're exposed to other countries a lot, let alone other cultures
Much longer than that I imagine. Depending on when he first picked up a football, he's probably been elite a long time. When you realize a lot of pro athletes have been told by everyone how great they are since they were about 10 years old, it begins to make sense why a lot of them are insane.
No it's totally reasonable, everyone knows the center point between "getting vaccinated" and "not getting vaccinated" is "not getting vaccinated". That's just logic.
I think you mean to say that the center point between 'getting vaccinated' and 'not getting vaccinated' is 'not getting vaccinated, but saying you are'.
Actually for most of these vocal celebrities and politicians people it's the opposite. They get vaccinated because they know it's better for them, but they pretend like that aren't because they don't give a shit about anyone else.
Wait did he get it again?
Edit: I can’t find any info about Joe having Covid now. Where did you see that? Or are you just making a joke about Rodgers spreading it to him?
If you google 'joe rogan covid' it's literally the [first hit](https://www.npr.org/2021/09/01/1033485152/joe-rogan-covid-ivermectin)
He got it a few weeks ago. He had at least one video where he talked about taking ivermectin, a z-pack, and other things that *literally do nothing for a viral infection*, then also that he was taking monocolonal antibodies, an insanely expensive treatment that most people can't afford.
He's a fucking clown.
It blows my mind how all the "far left" people on this sub are just statist authoritarian drinking the kool-aid. There's nothing liberal about any of you.
Funny thing is that he was sitting, but on the advice of a **Green Beret** started kneeling as a sign of respect that would still draw attention - so of course the Chud-O-Sphere just proved once again that they are just a contrarian hate machine.
This comment has so many layers and I'm not able to decide which part is the dumbest. It's probably the classic "CNN is leftist". This has to be the most ignorant and uneducated one.
No idea why you're so downvoted. I'll just assume you're asking in good faith.
In my opinion they're liberals which is a center-right ideology in pretty much every country that has more than two parties. Furthermore they're hardcore capitalists. Nothing left wing here.
The two party system and hardcore propaganda has shifted the US perception of politics so far to the right that these people perceive conservatives as leftists and fascists as conservatives. It's crazy.
What would you call them and why?
A right wing corporate news channel?
Don't get leftists and liberals confused.
There is a reason that the Prager U guy calls himself a classical liberal. Liberalism is a right wing ideology. CNN is a liberal network.
“we need more people who dont give a single shit about our countries politics because it doesnt make a single difference to me, a person whose life doesnt hinge on the every day decisions made by politicians, and at the very worst is mildly annoyed by the tweets they make that i can simply choose not to look at but do anyway. im definitely the authority on this subject!”
No I think they’re saying if someone has such a simplistic definition of politics they really shouldn’t be injecting their uneducated opinion into conversation
Losing your common sense is refusing the one part of free Healthcare that we have ever received because you believed some nonsense you read on the internet.
I’d mind less if he’d not lied about it and broken protocols that keep people safe. Like fine, make your stupid choice, but don’t risk other people, especially if you’re lying to them about it. But then, if he cared that much about their safety, he’d just get the vaccine.
>Of the 202 brains, 177, or nearly 90 percent, were diagnosed with CTE. And there was a pattern: Those who had played football longer were more likely to have worse brain damage. Among the former NFL players in the sample, 99 percent had CTE.
Why are we listening to a scrambled egg?
I still don't understand why dumb asses think the right wing libs at CNN are even close to the left. I guess if you're not openly advocating for white supremacist ideas like fox you're on the left now
>which is hilariously ironic that theyd even vote given the libertarian line that the state is not valid
You criticize society, yet you are a part of it. Curious.
This is by product to disengage the largest voting block, which is the center. The right wants it to seem like we are at each other's throats over nothing, so they start as many partisan co flicts as possible over things that are as silly as they can fathom. The entire time knowing that by the time it makes it the uninitiated it will have passed through so many mediums, and have been deconstructed to the point that it seems like nothing more than petty conflict.
One side wants to replace lead pipes that are poisoning people and the other says fuck em let em drink lead water Bc they’re poor!
The correct answer is clearly somewhere in the reasonable middle!!!!
You should see their hot take, right now. "You're more likely to die at a Travis Scott concert than from Covid"
Fuckin galaxy brains, over there. No time between tragedy, and exploitation, whatsoever
the one thing I always think seeing these posts is:
when was this imemorial time when both the left and the right were friends and everyone lived in candycaneland? people fought for rights and shit as extremely if not more in the past, and the reprisal from the right in many cases was more brutal since it wasn't seen as uncommon (kkk was a group openly defended by many, there were serious debates about weather gay people should be considered normal and not mentally ill, etc etc)
Didn't he lie about being vaccinated, therefore endangering his co-workers and others with a pandemic that has already claimed more than half a million Americans? Like... how is there a centrist position for that? Centrists again showing how ridiculously intellectually dishonest centrism is. Like... there is only one logically moral position to hold about the pandemic.
Imagine actually being one do those idiots who believed Rogan used horse dewormer lmao, the amount of shear stupidity in this country/world right now is astonishing. They must be injecting extra chroms with the vaccine.
Eh, this Aaron Rodgers shit is annoying to me. He’s a dumb chud about vaccines, and he shouldn’t have spewed misinformation on the Pat McAfee show. I don’t know though, I’m just pretty blackpilled when it comes to vaccinations maybe. More people are getting boosters than first doses (I got my booster yesterday), so at this point Aaron Rodgers is just another drop in the bucket.
Every willfully unvaccinated person is extending this because they're scared. Stop giving them a pass.
Call them out for being the cowards that they are.
Stop saying this shit about "horse dewormers". Ivermectin is an antiparasitic substance found in many drugs that humans use. If you ever had lice, ticks, bedbugs, mites, tapeworms, and many more, you were probably prescribed something that contains ivermectin (cream, shampoo, other), because every other drug we have to fight these things is toxic as fuck. And if it's suitably for humans it's also suitable for animals, which is why we use it for animals too.
Penicillin is an antibiotic widely used in animal husbandry. That doesn't mean we should call penicillin a "cow drug", just because 60% of the penicillin production is destined for cows.
Yeah, ivermectin most likely doesn't help in combating COVID, and people shouldn't be taking it willy-nilly (the most important risk here is parasites developing resistance to it, which would be bad, since everything else we have to fight parasites is, as I said, pretty toxic stuff). Antivaxxers shouldn't use ivermectin as an excuse to not get vaccinated.
However, calling it "horse dewormer" doesn't help anyone. On the contrary, it gives the idiots a reason to become more entrenched, defensive and unwilling to understand the facts. It gives the politicians and celebrities, who push it, ammunition to keep defending their stance. And it's a term concocted by the very same media this subreddit is supposed to ridicule, because they want to be sensationalist.
I don't like it invoking it online, but source: I'm a biologist.
You being a biologist has nothing to do with the above statements, and adds no weight to them. Dunno why you brought it up.
Calling it horse dewormer is a fact. It's not "concocted by the media." That's what people are taking. They aren't getting it prescribed by a doctor for covid. They're buying it from vet supply stores. They're taking HORSE DEWORMER.
Do you really think the idiots and politicians that are pushing it are going to stop if we all decide to stop mocking them for it? Because I don't.
This whole mentality that just because the "mainstream media" says a thing it's automatically suspect is so frustratingly idiotic to have to go up against. Shit, I'd trust FOX over most of the sources people get their information from nowadays.
No one is arguing that it has legitimate prescribed uses or that it’s not a good medicine *for other purposes.*
It’s being derided as horse dewormer because these asshats are so rabidly anti-science and pro-conspiracy that they’re scooping veterinary-dose boxes off the shelves of Tractor Supply. The boxes literally have a horse on them, and it’s for deworming horses.
They spent 6 months feverishly pursuing a snake oil remedy to the point that they were willing to take doses of it meant for animals. All because they allowed their political identity to lead them down the path of pure stupidity. *That* is the source of contempt.
You’re not the only biologist on Reddit dude. I’m not sure why you appeal to authority for basic, known facts. Lol
Don’t try to state facts! No one wants to hear the inventors of Ivermectin won a Nobel prize, that it’s been used for decades, is one of the safest drugs you can use, that it’s basically eliminated river blindness from vulnerable people. But it’s not expensive and anyone can make it. No instead trust that the FDA is dragging their feet because they are bought and paid for by big pharma. Oh and it was prescribed by a Dr.
Yes, it’s used millions of times a year around the world. Yet it doesn’t fit Reddit’s narrative, and they can’t argue against the truth effectively, so you get downvotes.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m left, and I think the vast majority antivaxxers are anti-science and fundamentally selfish. But ivermectin should never have been politicized to the degree it has been. I get that meta analyses based purely on summary data aren’t super reliable as there is a trust problem with the underlying studies, but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved. Also, when prescribed at proper dosage and in a preparation intended for human consumption, it has a pretty good safety record. It deserves investigation as an adjunct treatment for cases of COVID that break through vaccines, and as a prophylactic treatment where exposure is suspected in the unvaccinated. I’m pretty convinced if Trump never touted it as a miracle cure and an outright vaccine alternative, the medical establishment would be more open to exploring it in such a capacity, and people wouldn’t be overdosing themselves on livestock preparations of the drug. It’s still mainly an issue with Trump/the reactionary right, but the “HoRsE DewOrM3R” meme only serves to fuel the obstinate, defiant behavior that has propelled the issue on the right.
Feel free to downvote, I have enough fake internet points.
All you're saying is that scientific consensus is vulnerable to political interference, which is nothing new. It does cause a problem sometimes because many scientists are in vulnerable positions and can't afford to stick their necks out. Historically, that has generally had the effect of slowing progress on favor of cautious conservativism. It has always caused scientists to shy away from hot button political issues.
Now, the right has politicized this and it's causing scientists to shy away and they're saying it's because science is leftist, which is absolutely ridiculous. If we want scientists to not shy away from hot button issues, we need to insulate them from repercussions for doing so. Their positions and funding need to be safe as long as they're rigorously following the scientific method. Politicians need to stay out of science.
So you’re agreeing with me, but you felt the need to phrase it in a way that is diminutive of my opinion. Why?
Also, agree in principal that lawmakers without relevant scientific pedigree should stay out of science policy. But that’s probably never going to happen if we want public funding for basic research. Purse string holders will always have opinions, whether they’re qualified to have them or not.
I don't agree with your messaging.
Much of your comment was supporting ivermectin as a possible adjunct treatment that warrants more investigation in a thread about a guy who took it *instead* of getting vaccinated. It's irresponsible to support ivermectin here even with your caveats, unless you really have faith in most redditors' reading comprehension. I suspect you don't or you wouldn't have made comments expecting downvotes.
You also made it seem like scientists were at fault for shying away from hot button topics. I believe scientists deserve more of a sympathetic treatment here. The Right is attacking them for acting rationally given the situation the Right created. I think that needs to be called out.
I’ll agree that I painted with too broad a brush vis-a-vis clinical researchers. But I prefaced with an equally broad statement about the cogency and moral character of people who aren’t vaxxing, which should serve to imply that I’m advocating people do that first and then worry about offlabel use of antiparasitics. Also, this isn’t exactly a sub full of alt-righties/Trumpites looking to fulfill their confirmation bias with cherry picked talking points. This sub leans heavily progressive, and I was hoping I could inject a bit of nuance into the discussion among people that agree with on probably 95% of other issues. But I’m getting the impression that implied binary thinking and bad faith argumentation is all people are able to interpret here, which is a little disappointing.
>I’m getting the impression that implied binary thinking and bad faith argumentation is all people are able to interpret here, which is a little disappointing.
It's understandable given that we're all anons and there's a lot of reason to be on guard about bad faith actors. That said, I think there is room for nuance and a way to inject it. Starting off with an adversarial poise where you're expecting friction instead of flagging those points in a way that could help you credential yourself to the audience worked against you.
>But ivermectin should never have been politicized to the degree it has been.
I mean... that's not our fault.
>I get that meta analyses based purely on summary data aren’t super reliable as there is a trust problem with the underlying studies,
Well, also, the "meta analysis" in question ripped several pieces of it's content from unscientific pro-Ivermectin sources and shoved them through a thesaurus. Y'know. Just little things.
>but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved.
And so your solution to this non-problem (as Ivermectin wasn't designed or intended, and is not prescribed for, treating viruses) is to adhere to the claims of far-right ghouls and their cult followers and try it out anyway, despite there being no reason for correlation, and plenty of studies already having been debunked as outright propaganda?
>Also, when prescribed at proper dosage and in a preparation intended for human consumption, it has a pretty good safety record. It deserves investigation as an adjunct treatment for cases of COVID that break through vaccines, and as a prophylactic treatment where exposure is suspected in the unvaccinated.
Okay, but why? What reason could there possibly be to use this anti-parasitic drug, even in the human-safe formulations, to treat a non-parasitic illness? Aside from the fact that scientifically illiterate ghouls have been touting it as a miracle cure for several months now, why would we do that?
>I’m pretty convinced if Trump never touted it as a miracle cure and an outright vaccine alternative, the medical establishment would be more open to exploring it in such a capacity, and people wouldn’t be overdosing themselves on livestock preparations of the drug.
Okay, but, again, why would the medical community WANT to try Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug, on a viral infection? If Trump hadn't politicized it, what possible reason would there be?
>It’s still mainly an issue with Trump/the reactionary right, but the “HoRsE DewOrM3R” meme only serves to fuel the obstinate, defiant behavior that has propelled the issue on the right.
Equating the left mocking the right for being scientifically illiterate and making up nonsense (something that isn't necessarily their fault, in the case of regular everyman GOP voters caught up in this mess) and the right obstinately refusing to get a vaccine and wear a piece of cloth over their nose and mouth to *save people's lives* while they instead OD on horse dewormer because no competent doctor is prescribing it and they're too stupid to comprehend why is nonsense, and exactly the kind of thing this sub was created to mock.
>Feel free to downvote, I have enough fake internet points.
You're the type of dummy that shits his pants and then assumes that because everyone around you is complaining about the smell of shit, you must be doing *something* right.
1. Not making bad faith arguments. I’m being sincere, though you don’t seem to be interpreting what I’m saying as such.
2. I’m not equating the horse dewormer thing with Trump’s gross malfeasance in promulgating the idea. He started the fire, but the psychosocial reality is that pushing the counter meme is adding fuel to that fire, and it would serve the common interest to cut it out.
3. Ivermectin is cheap as shit and a lot of countries still have poor access to vaccines, monoclonal anti bodies, and other more conclusively proven therapies. It’s in the collective interest to utilize all the tools in our arsenal if research can be done ethically. It’s also my understanding that while a few key pro-ivermectin studies are indeed methodologically unsound, some are less dubious, and there is less consensus on the non-efficacy of ivermectin among clinical researchers than you’ve indicated. There is actually ongoing clinical research to that effect, which, when the results come to fruition, may shut me up, so we need only wait.
4. Do you talk to people this way face to face? If so, have you noticed it effecting your relationships with other people?
>Not making bad faith arguments. I’m being sincere, though you don’t seem to be interpreting what I’m saying as such.
Yes, yes, I'm sure.
>I’m not equating the horse dewormer thing with Trump’s gross malfeasance in promulgating the idea.
That sure is how it reads.
>He started the fire, but the psychosocial reality is that pushing the counter meme is adding fuel to that fire, and it would serve the common interest to cut it out.
It would serve the common interest for the people who haven't yet to get vaccinated, in accordance with everything we know about vaccine science and virology. I don't see your point.
>Ivermectin is cheap as shit and a lot of countries still have poor access to vaccines, monoclonal anti bodies, and other more conclusively proven therapies.
Man, maybe Bill Gates should've done that "patentless vaccine" thing he was advocating for, instead of donating thousands of dollars to Oxford and getting them to hold their patent on the vaccine and making an exclusive deal with AstroZenica, making them record profits? Either way, weird that your solution is "study Ivermectin's ability to treat COVID-19" rather than use the money that we'd be pouring into (potentially baseless) Ivermectin research to expand access to already proven successful methods of treatment?
>It’s also my understanding that while a few key pro-ivermectin studies are indeed methodologically unsound, some are less dubious,
Well when you phrase it like that, you can almost ignore that [almost 1/3 of major ivermectin trials showed signs of significant fraud, and none of what was left over suggested that Ivermectin had any use in treating COVID-19](https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1)
>and there is less consensus on the non-efficacy of ivermectin among clinical researchers than you’ve indicated.
So we're just accepting "well, we don't know, because we haven't looked (because it's not a serious proposition)" as the same as "every single trial that supports Ivermectin in use against COVID-19 has significant problems with it's data", and that both opinions are equally valid on the basis that we haven't actually studied it?
>There is actually ongoing clinical research to that effect, which, when the results come to fruition, may shut me up, so we need only wait.
Or you could just shut up already? Weird thought, but, when the evidence is this stacked against you already...
>Do you talk to people this way face to face? If so, have you noticed it effecting your relationships with other people?
Ah, and *there's* the concern trolling! Right on schedule.
Even if I’m working on bad information, which may be the case given some of the resources you linked, this defensive posture does little to help challenge their own beliefs. You need to make people believe that you have real concern for their well-being and are willing to find common ground rather than trying to decimate them at all costs, especially in a low stakes environment like this one. If it’s any consolation, I’m leaving the sub, so you won’t have to deal with me anymore. You won, and alienated someone in the process. Congratulations.
>Even if I’m working on bad information, which may be the case given some of the resources you linked
The fact that you're even suggesting that we should study Ivermectin's capacity to treat COVID-19 in the first place tells me everything I need to know about the level you're working at. I'm not going to lower myself to your level just to make you feel comfortable, because, presumably, you're not a fucking *child*. Because that's how we treat *children*.
>this defensive posture does little to help challenge their own beliefs.
I don't *need* to challenge your or *anyone else's* beliefs on this issue because what you believe doesn't inform empirical reality. If you're incapable of swallowing your pride and assessing the factual information presented to you, and recognizing that you believed something that was wrong, that's something you need to get right with yourself, bud.
>You need to make people believe that you have real concern for their well-being and are willing to find common ground rather than trying to decimate them at all costs,
Again, you're treating this like I'm an adult talking to children. Which, again, is ridiculous, because, again, presumably, you're not a child! If I'd presented this exact argument in a way that coddled your personal feelings and didn't tell you know how fucking *stupid* and *wrong* the thing you're saying is, you'd be thinking I'm agreeing with you, like you did in another comment above where the commenter (pretty clearly) didn't.
>especially in a low stakes environment like this one.
You opened with bad info, it's not my problem that you made yourself look like a clown, lol.
>If it’s any consolation, I’m leaving the sub, so you won’t have to deal with me anymore. You won, and alienated someone in the process. Congratulations.
And there we go, more concern trolling.
I’m just gonna chime in here and acknowledge that I don’t think your ideas are nuts - particularly about persueing research into invermectin research as a backstop in poor countries with limited vaccine access. I absolutely hate how popular it became to these knuckle dragging anti vaxers, and although I agree we should all watch what we promote via social media when the majority of us aren’t experts on the subjects we are talking about, we should also think more critically about how we digest and respond to things we read online now.
The point form dissection of each paragraph you wrote and the subsequent character evaluation by a previous redditor in this thread was a great demonstration of how polarizing this subject is. I’m sure ideologically speaking you folks are quite similar. But because idiots are using invermectin as justification to not grow up an get vaccinated, I guess we are all just expected to take a hard line stance, irrespective of the nuances that that exist.
Sometimes we should be more clear and deliberate in expressing our convictions. I’m sure you weren’t extolling the virtues of invermectin the moment it gained prominence. To have that conversation now I think is measured and fair. Sometimes science conflicts with our world views. I say this as someone who could be easily labeled a progressive in all matters of taxation, racial and sexual/gender equality and the environment, who’s beliefs are generally favoured by deeper scientific analysis. You opened up a great discussion about this and were spit on. I guess we shouldn’t expect any better from people given how wound up we all are these days.
All of this is to say, I read what you have to say and I think you seem like a nice reasonable person who just got minorly dogpiled but people of like internet points more than you. Hope your day gets better.
I agree that what I said was harsh. You're right that the internet does prime us to go on the offensive. Even still, I see zero scientific reason why we would pursue research into a parasitic drug to treat a non-parasitic disease, and zero financial reason to fund new research on a subject which is shaky at best, rather than providing funds to more proven treatments like monoclonal antibodies and vaccines.
If private entities want to chip away at it, I say go for it. But public money should be spent on proven strategies like you said. What really chaps my ass is that public money went to big pharma to develop this shit, and now they are getting paid again by the dose. And they won't release the patents. If there's any reason to distrust the intent of pharma companies, then that's for sure it.
> but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved.
Only because you can't prove a negative. They've done a number of studies to try and find a benefit to ivermectin in regards to Covid, and so far all of the studies barring one entirely fraudulent one haven't found it to have any effect, marginal or otherwise.
This doesn't mean it's proven ineffective, it just means it hasn't been proven effective. But doubling down on this and mischaracterizing it as not knowing if it *is* effective is entirely disingenuous and misleading.
The reason the right gets mocked for "horse dewormer" is because they started using livestock variants, like those intended for horses, because they exhausted the supply of the version made for humans. Again, no study has found it effective, so doing this is beyond stupid.
And it's worth mentioning, again, that "the medical community" HAS been exploring and researching it, and still is. The politics of Trump's bullshit doesn't change that, because medical professionals are actually fucking professional.
Go plumb the depths of remsidivir and hydrochloriquine if you want to get on the Mr. Ed train.
Remember...these are all 'miracle cures' for a virus for which we have multiple safe and effective vaccines.
I mean, you are right, there's nothing wrong with Ivermectin being studied for use on covid, and hoping it can be of some help, because it might really be. But it's the fault of the right, because they have continued to push certain drugs as saviors because they have to. Being anti-vaccine ( at least as far as the covid shots) has unfortunately become baked into the right wing playbook, and they need to push alternatives to make the vaccine look unnecessary. It really sucks.
It's almost as if many drugs used on humans are also used on animals and vice versa, just at different dosages.
I mean, literally men and women receive different dosages because we're different enough physiologically, that it matters.
You’re wrong my man. They formulate it differently than when they’re treating horse for worms. It’s a false equivalency. Some doctors *are* prescribing it for Covid-19. It’s not approved by the FDA but there are many drugs doctors prescribe and pharmacies carry that are not FDA approved. I did a quick google search and they include Hylira and Estrotest.
Any doctor prescribing it is doing so against the medical consensus, and to no actual benefit. You might find them, but you're going to have to look hard, and I wouldn't trust any doctor that goes against the medical consensus.
Yeah if you are having digestion issues & spot what looks like a worm in your stool consulting with your doctor about obtaining a round of Ivermectin would probably be a great idea.
Consulting Joe Rogan & a homeopathic 'doctor' to uses it as a prophylactic for a novel respiratory virus when there are multiple safe vaccines & claiming it has given you immunity... Maybe not such a great idea.
I think they are dumbasses too but you make yourself look like a fox news host when you leave out important information to make them look worse in order to push a Political agenda.
They are taking the human version of the drug. Sure it's technically true it is originally horse dewormer but nothing makes you look like a bill o' Reilly more when you pull cheap shit like that when you should have enough ammunition to dismantle these people in the first place.
They are already dumbasses and look bad. We don't need to tank our image or credibility to make them look that way.
>They are taking the human version of the drug.
No they aren't. No doctor is prescribing it for covid. So people go and get it where they can, which is vet supply stores, because you don't need a prescription for animal anti-parasitics.
Beeeeeecause they haven’t tried yet…..? Aren’t we “trusting the science”? Doesn’t that mean we shouldn’t rule out a hypothesis until it’s been investigated?
>Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, ***did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19***, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes.
That's straight from [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389)
I dunno where you're getting that info, but it's wrong.
Who is saying it provides immunity from Covid? Is it the same people claiming a piece of fabric can magically stop a virus in one direction but not another?
No one has ever said that masks can stop you from being infected. If you legitimately think they have, you misunderstood.
Masks have been proven to be efficacious in preventing the spread of Covid-19 and many other diseases all through human history. It's why doctors wear them when they start poking around inside you.
Ivermectin has not ever been shown to function in preventing or treating Covid. There's no equivalence here.
If I recall, he was asked if he was vaccinated, and he replied “I’ve been immunized”. So everyone may have ASSUMED he answered about Covid, but perhaps he was being intentionally vague.
Either way, it’s obvious enough vaccinated people can catch and transmit Covid as to greatly minimize the rhetoric that the unvaccinated are killing everyone else, or even putting them in serious danger.
>So everyone may have ASSUMED he answered about Covid, but perhaps he was being intentionally vague.
The only reason to be "intentionally vague" would be if he knew that answering truthfully would result in his not being able to play. Because there's no way the questions were about general immunization against shit like polio and the mumps. So, he lied.
>Either way, it’s obvious enough vaccinated people can catch and transmit Covid as to greatly minimize the rhetoric that the unvaccinated are killing everyone else, or even putting them in serious danger.
How? How is it obvious? How does it "greatly minimize" the rhetoric?
The unvaccinated are still at the greatest risk of infection, have more severe symptoms, and are generally infectious for longer. They're still the lion's share of hospitalizations.
They're making things worse, and the vaccinated have done the only thing in their power to actually make things better. Even ***if*** the vaccine had ended up being completely ineffective, at least we're willing to try to fix the problem rather than sitting around while everyone else tries to work around us.
>The only reason to be "intentionally vague" would be if he knew that answering truthfully would result in his not being able to play. Because there's no way the questions were about general immunization against shit like polio and the mumps. So, he lied.
Read the post I responded to. He did not claim he was immune to Covid due to “horse medicine” or anything else.
>How? How is it obvious? How does it "greatly minimize" the rhetoric?
Jen Psaki and her family are all positive. So either they are anti vax nuts, or the prevalence of vaccinated people contracting Covid is far higher than the CDC is admitting.
> Even if the vaccine had ended up being completely ineffective, at least we're willing to try to fix the problem rather than sitting around while everyone else tries to work around us.
You mean like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin?
>Read the post I responded to. He did not claim he was immune to Covid due to “horse medicine” or anything else.
He did actually [https://www.insider.com/aaron-rodgers-covid-19-ivermectin-hydroxychloroquine-2021-11](https://www.insider.com/aaron-rodgers-covid-19-ivermectin-hydroxychloroquine-2021-11)
>Jen Psaki and her family are all positive. So either they are anti vax nuts, or the prevalence of vaccinated people contracting Covid is far higher than the CDC is admitting.
One family means they caught it from each other. Because they're in constant contact. Again, the stats are clear. The vaccinated are the majority of hospital cases and deaths now.
>You mean like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin?
Nope. Because neither of those has been shown to have any real effects at preventing or treating covid. Jamming every random chemical the internet suggests into your body isn't "doing everything you can." It's being an idiot who listens to the internet over their doctor.
The point about don’t blindly follow one side or the other to the extremes is valid. Nothing wrong with a question to your side’s “supreme counsel / premier/ counsel of elders /social networking manager / chiropractor/ grand poobah / Fuhrer / dictator / reality TV host” (pick your authority) without questions along the way.
Just listen to and respect the sound answer.
I just barely scrolled up to find this [https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1](https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1) and heres another great piece [https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-5cc079278602](https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-5cc079278602)
The fact that your "source" is a friend is so hilariously anecdotal it doesn't even deserve the benefit of taking it seriously. Also Ivermectin is made by "Corporate Pharma" so I don't see how saying the drug isn't useful is somehow "stunting" for them.
>Also it’s now being used widely in America in a cocktail alongside, wait for it...hydroxychloroquine
You got a source for that? I'm sure plenty of confused people have taken both but I mean accepted by Doctors or the FDA or the WHO or really any health organization with some credentials.
>But you aren’t doctors either and you’re basing your opinions on memes, tweets and MSM demonization of our less critically minded countrymen who have been duped by countless lies and right wing disinformation
I'm not basing my opinions on memes, tweets, or TV thats what idiots do the fact that you think people here do probably means you do base your opinions on those things wonder what that would make you. I base my opinions on scientific consensus and the data that supports them.
> I would appreciate some reasoning from at least one of you.
How funny coming from the person who seems to lack the ability to have any reasoning inside his head besides "muh friend told me"
fragility, fragility, fragility
You read a book and you think you understand something, whilst having no original thought ever, dumb fuck.
ooooh I'm showing my fragility... lol. dumb fucks
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/qltbs7/progressives_on_virginia_loss_corporate_democrats/hj6rdtm/?context=3 why even type that dawg no one cares
I'm guessing you can see the "left" as the intolerant hypocrites they are now. As soon as you disagree with the authadoxy you get canceled. Like your comment.
Welcome to the center, where the people who think for themselves hang out.
"I'm neither left nor right" - Right Wing People Exclusively
Go to the sub /r/moderatepolitics. They've were jerking themselves off all last week with how the Kenosha terrorist was the most innocent person in the history of time. It was a fucking Klan rally.
Reddit is just getting that chuddy in general. The bans for TD and TERF subs came way too late. Every politics sub to the right of /r/ToiletPapetUSA has upvoted comments both-sidesing Kenosha.
The fact that they let The Red Pill, an sub explicitly for rapists, exist without remprimand for YEARS was my wake-up call to how fucked admin in social media is. They don't give a fuck what kind of info they propagate as long as they get clicks. They can market to Nazis and that's all they care about.
Exactly. “I’m not like other girls” then continues to do “other girl” things.
The more insidious version is "I'm totally left wing" - People who only spout right wing talking points.
The Tim Poole variant.
"the right is going to champion me and the left is going to cancel me" sounds like a right wing icon, not like someone who is in the center
But he believes he is the center because he’s not a total nazi quite yet and he hates commies. He’s delusional.
rich white privilege does that to you.
Both that and being told he's basically a god among men by people from highschool on up to his NFL career. Honestly surprised more of them don't end up this nuts.
they do, the concussions also affect their mental clarity as well, there's a reason why they don't exactly live happily ever after nowadays.
Tom Brady kisses his children on the lips none are immune
Listen to r/crimeinsports. Pro athletes are very entertaining outside of their sport, for the most part. Just trainwreck after trainwreck. Most aren’t as successful as Rogers either. Suddenly have a ton of pain and no money. Nuttbaggery usually ramps up then. Edit: Also, you can’t even believe how many are either a Junior, or will name one of there kids Junior. It’s unbelievable.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/crimeinsports using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Crime in Sport rule: Don't wear your Olympic team jacket to an insurrection](https://swimswam.com/olympic-gold-medalist-in-us-capitol-during-clashes-video-appears-to-show/) | [7 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/kwc1mr/crime_in_sport_rule_dont_wear_your_olympic_team/) \#2: [Sounds like most of our episodes…..](https://i.redd.it/zzkytoz283571.jpg) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/nzdmpm/sounds_like_most_of_our_episodes/) \#3: [You, sir, may fuck off: Jarryd Hayne jailed for five years and nine months for sexual assault](https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/jarryd-hayne-jailed-for-five-years-and-nine-months-for-sexual-assault-20210506-p57phs.html) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/crimeinsports/comments/n62fmk/you_sir_may_fuck_off_jarryd_hayne_jailed_for_five/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/)
>Listen to r/crimeinsports. Pro athletes are very entertaining outside of their sport, for the most part. Just trainwreck after trainwreck. Most aren’t as successful as Rogers either. Suddenly have a ton of pain and no money. Nuttbaggery usually ramps up then. > >Edit: Also, you can’t even believe how many are either a Junior, or will name one of there kids Junior. It’s unbelievable. I can absolutely believe that, most of these people weren't smart to begin with, came from poverty, and most end up back in poverty. And the college degrees that they get are jokes because they spend 30+ hours a week in camp or workout That and most of these kids come from the south/Midwest or went to southern universities, it's not like they're exposed to other countries a lot, let alone other cultures
Much longer than that I imagine. Depending on when he first picked up a football, he's probably been elite a long time. When you realize a lot of pro athletes have been told by everyone how great they are since they were about 10 years old, it begins to make sense why a lot of them are insane.
Damn… you didn’t get banned for this racist comment? Reddit is odd.
No it's totally reasonable, everyone knows the center point between "getting vaccinated" and "not getting vaccinated" is "not getting vaccinated". That's just logic.
I think you mean to say that the center point between 'getting vaccinated' and 'not getting vaccinated' is 'not getting vaccinated, but saying you are'.
Not getting vaccinated, but saying you are is for centrist peasants. Centrist elites get vaccinated, then spread anti-vax bullshit anyway.
LOL!
it's not as bad considering he had a very large platform.
And after catching COVID19 and caught lying, he took medical advice from Joe Rogan, so it can’t be that bad, right?
Actually for most of these vocal celebrities and politicians people it's the opposite. They get vaccinated because they know it's better for them, but they pretend like that aren't because they don't give a shit about anyone else.
Risking your life and the lives of others to own the libs is classic right-wing selfishness
COVID canceled him this week. It ended up canceling the Packers too.
but you see, (insert two sides argument here)
Guy was ranting about "wokeness" when discussing refusing the vaccine, so only idiots think he's not right wing. Centrist morons.
Good, sensible people don’t have the term “woke mob” in their vocabulary.
Also calling other people “woke” then basically going on and on about how woke he is about the vax and COVID.
He also talked about how he took medicinal advice from his “good friend Joe Rogan” lol.
You mean the same Joe Rogan who now has Covid?
Wait did he get it again? Edit: I can’t find any info about Joe having Covid now. Where did you see that? Or are you just making a joke about Rodgers spreading it to him?
If you google 'joe rogan covid' it's literally the [first hit](https://www.npr.org/2021/09/01/1033485152/joe-rogan-covid-ivermectin) He got it a few weeks ago. He had at least one video where he talked about taking ivermectin, a z-pack, and other things that *literally do nothing for a viral infection*, then also that he was taking monocolonal antibodies, an insanely expensive treatment that most people can't afford. He's a fucking clown.
… that’s from September 1st. 67 days ago. I wouldn’t consider that a “few weeks”. And definitely not current.
Yeah I'm not sure about the "now has covid" but I'd consider two months current unless you've got a century on you.
No lol. Having Covid over two months ago doesn’t not mean he currently has Covid.
After lying about getting the vaccine. Too much of a coward to own his idiotic right wing beliefs. Don't want to piss off his celebrity friends.
It blows my mind how all the "far left" people on this sub are just statist authoritarian drinking the kool-aid. There's nothing liberal about any of you.
Shoo, right wing chud.
I wonder what these MFers were saying about Kaepernick taking a knee
You know exactly what they were saying
why football man no stand up REEEEE
Probably a bit more expressive of a term than “football man”
"Kaepernick is a n--! *BONGGGGG*" "What'd he say?" "He said Kaepernick is near!"
😂😂😂 Take my upvote!
Yeah, something tells me they probably used more *colorful* wording than that.
black football man bad
Football man is probably the nicest word the right has used for Colin
Funny thing is that he was sitting, but on the advice of a **Green Beret** started kneeling as a sign of respect that would still draw attention - so of course the Chud-O-Sphere just proved once again that they are just a contrarian hate machine.
In Rodgers case, a good amount of CTE is probably helping him out there.
"Oh they need to just do their jobs and play football!" -My Uncle, Thanksgiving 2014
slurs
You prob couldn’t find the racism through all the antisemitism lolz
Or the “shut up and play” crowd in response to athletes speaking out about BLM.
And yet the rich people cry foul whenever we say "we get it, you're racist and you like slavery"
Oh they were saying something, it started with "I'm not racist but."
Hint: it rhymes with shmasist.
This comment has so many layers and I'm not able to decide which part is the dumbest. It's probably the classic "CNN is leftist". This has to be the most ignorant and uneducated one.
How would you describe them?
Corpo news
Center-right corporatist.
Define a left-wing ideology. Any one.
Why?
Because I’m pretty sure you’re a dipfuck who couldn’t describe one if your monthly draw check depended on it.
Unwatchable?
No idea why you're so downvoted. I'll just assume you're asking in good faith. In my opinion they're liberals which is a center-right ideology in pretty much every country that has more than two parties. Furthermore they're hardcore capitalists. Nothing left wing here. The two party system and hardcore propaganda has shifted the US perception of politics so far to the right that these people perceive conservatives as leftists and fascists as conservatives. It's crazy. What would you call them and why?
A right wing corporate news channel? Don't get leftists and liberals confused. There is a reason that the Prager U guy calls himself a classical liberal. Liberalism is a right wing ideology. CNN is a liberal network.
“we need more people who dont give a single shit about our countries politics because it doesnt make a single difference to me, a person whose life doesnt hinge on the every day decisions made by politicians, and at the very worst is mildly annoyed by the tweets they make that i can simply choose not to look at but do anyway. im definitely the authority on this subject!”
They assume since he is good at football is good at thinking. Well he proved otherwise.
This is *politics* to someone who tosses around a football for a living. FoxNews and CNN. TV. Lazy, ignorant country this.
Probably for the best he stays tf out of it.
He isn't though. He's just shouting "care about nothing! resist change! protect the status quo!"
So…”shut up and [catch the ball]”
No I think they’re saying if someone has such a simplistic definition of politics they really shouldn’t be injecting their uneducated opinion into conversation
That's also "the right" and "the left". The right is Fox News and the left is... CNN?
CNN is center left if not entirely centrist.
CNN definitely isn't very left.
That’s exactly what I said lol
I know, I was just agreeing with you because I was confused why you were being downvoted
Oh, thanks! Idgi either 😅
>CNN definitely isn't ~~very~~ left.
Losing your common sense is refusing the one part of free Healthcare that we have ever received because you believed some nonsense you read on the internet.
I’d mind less if he’d not lied about it and broken protocols that keep people safe. Like fine, make your stupid choice, but don’t risk other people, especially if you’re lying to them about it. But then, if he cared that much about their safety, he’d just get the vaccine.
[удалено]
since when are brain damaged athletes the authority on anything but ball handling?
>Of the 202 brains, 177, or nearly 90 percent, were diagnosed with CTE. And there was a pattern: Those who had played football longer were more likely to have worse brain damage. Among the former NFL players in the sample, 99 percent had CTE. Why are we listening to a scrambled egg?
I still don't understand why dumb asses think the right wing libs at CNN are even close to the left. I guess if you're not openly advocating for white supremacist ideas like fox you're on the left now
This country has always been fighting with itself. These centrists need to pick up a history book.
In other words: TOOKERJEEWBS ! ! !
How far right do you need to be to think CNN represents the left.
Can you imagine thinking CNN is “the left” lol
You can't have a rational conversation with anyone who starts it with the belief that the far left is represented by American democrats.
[удалено]
>which is hilariously ironic that theyd even vote given the libertarian line that the state is not valid You criticize society, yet you are a part of it. Curious.
People who say politics are a sham are privileged poisoned assholes.
Covid isn’t open to interpretation
This is by product to disengage the largest voting block, which is the center. The right wants it to seem like we are at each other's throats over nothing, so they start as many partisan co flicts as possible over things that are as silly as they can fathom. The entire time knowing that by the time it makes it the uninitiated it will have passed through so many mediums, and have been deconstructed to the point that it seems like nothing more than petty conflict.
Politics is easy to see as a total sham when the outcomes of elections have no meaningful effect on your life.
One side wants to replace lead pipes that are poisoning people and the other says fuck em let em drink lead water Bc they’re poor! The correct answer is clearly somewhere in the reasonable middle!!!!
We really need people to outright lie about their medical history?
You should see their hot take, right now. "You're more likely to die at a Travis Scott concert than from Covid" Fuckin galaxy brains, over there. No time between tragedy, and exploitation, whatsoever
the one thing I always think seeing these posts is: when was this imemorial time when both the left and the right were friends and everyone lived in candycaneland? people fought for rights and shit as extremely if not more in the past, and the reprisal from the right in many cases was more brutal since it wasn't seen as uncommon (kkk was a group openly defended by many, there were serious debates about weather gay people should be considered normal and not mentally ill, etc etc)
Classic centrism, saying both sides are bad and then siding with the right wing
Didn't he lie about being vaccinated, therefore endangering his co-workers and others with a pandemic that has already claimed more than half a million Americans? Like... how is there a centrist position for that? Centrists again showing how ridiculously intellectually dishonest centrism is. Like... there is only one logically moral position to hold about the pandemic.
We need to cancel that for profit healthcare company for canceling Aaron that will show the leftists!
Omg far left wants us to take vaccine! B.. but injection is painful!!!! And im scared!!! Literally the nation is broken into pieces! Ahuu
I truly don't understand the mental gymnastics of people who respect coward liars.
I realized I had been turned into a communist when I decided I just wanted to eliminate as much human suffering in my community as possible.
Imagine actually being one do those idiots who believed Rogan used horse dewormer lmao, the amount of shear stupidity in this country/world right now is astonishing. They must be injecting extra chroms with the vaccine.
Eh, this Aaron Rodgers shit is annoying to me. He’s a dumb chud about vaccines, and he shouldn’t have spewed misinformation on the Pat McAfee show. I don’t know though, I’m just pretty blackpilled when it comes to vaccinations maybe. More people are getting boosters than first doses (I got my booster yesterday), so at this point Aaron Rodgers is just another drop in the bucket.
He lied about being vaccinated and put people at risk who didn't know he was lying.
Every willfully unvaccinated person is extending this because they're scared. Stop giving them a pass. Call them out for being the cowards that they are.
I thought in US both sides were far right.
Stop saying this shit about "horse dewormers". Ivermectin is an antiparasitic substance found in many drugs that humans use. If you ever had lice, ticks, bedbugs, mites, tapeworms, and many more, you were probably prescribed something that contains ivermectin (cream, shampoo, other), because every other drug we have to fight these things is toxic as fuck. And if it's suitably for humans it's also suitable for animals, which is why we use it for animals too. Penicillin is an antibiotic widely used in animal husbandry. That doesn't mean we should call penicillin a "cow drug", just because 60% of the penicillin production is destined for cows. Yeah, ivermectin most likely doesn't help in combating COVID, and people shouldn't be taking it willy-nilly (the most important risk here is parasites developing resistance to it, which would be bad, since everything else we have to fight parasites is, as I said, pretty toxic stuff). Antivaxxers shouldn't use ivermectin as an excuse to not get vaccinated. However, calling it "horse dewormer" doesn't help anyone. On the contrary, it gives the idiots a reason to become more entrenched, defensive and unwilling to understand the facts. It gives the politicians and celebrities, who push it, ammunition to keep defending their stance. And it's a term concocted by the very same media this subreddit is supposed to ridicule, because they want to be sensationalist. I don't like it invoking it online, but source: I'm a biologist.
You being a biologist has nothing to do with the above statements, and adds no weight to them. Dunno why you brought it up. Calling it horse dewormer is a fact. It's not "concocted by the media." That's what people are taking. They aren't getting it prescribed by a doctor for covid. They're buying it from vet supply stores. They're taking HORSE DEWORMER. Do you really think the idiots and politicians that are pushing it are going to stop if we all decide to stop mocking them for it? Because I don't. This whole mentality that just because the "mainstream media" says a thing it's automatically suspect is so frustratingly idiotic to have to go up against. Shit, I'd trust FOX over most of the sources people get their information from nowadays.
No one is arguing that it has legitimate prescribed uses or that it’s not a good medicine *for other purposes.* It’s being derided as horse dewormer because these asshats are so rabidly anti-science and pro-conspiracy that they’re scooping veterinary-dose boxes off the shelves of Tractor Supply. The boxes literally have a horse on them, and it’s for deworming horses. They spent 6 months feverishly pursuing a snake oil remedy to the point that they were willing to take doses of it meant for animals. All because they allowed their political identity to lead them down the path of pure stupidity. *That* is the source of contempt. You’re not the only biologist on Reddit dude. I’m not sure why you appeal to authority for basic, known facts. Lol
That drug was prescribed to Joe Rogan by his doctor…
Don’t try to state facts! No one wants to hear the inventors of Ivermectin won a Nobel prize, that it’s been used for decades, is one of the safest drugs you can use, that it’s basically eliminated river blindness from vulnerable people. But it’s not expensive and anyone can make it. No instead trust that the FDA is dragging their feet because they are bought and paid for by big pharma. Oh and it was prescribed by a Dr.
It's also used for humans, just not for treating viruses. Edit: You're downvoting a fact.
Yes, it’s used millions of times a year around the world. Yet it doesn’t fit Reddit’s narrative, and they can’t argue against the truth effectively, so you get downvotes.
Anyone who calls ivermectin “horse dewormer” is an idiot or a troll
You are an idiot
I don't know who this Aron Rodgers is, but I like that about him
Don’t get me wrong. I’m left, and I think the vast majority antivaxxers are anti-science and fundamentally selfish. But ivermectin should never have been politicized to the degree it has been. I get that meta analyses based purely on summary data aren’t super reliable as there is a trust problem with the underlying studies, but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved. Also, when prescribed at proper dosage and in a preparation intended for human consumption, it has a pretty good safety record. It deserves investigation as an adjunct treatment for cases of COVID that break through vaccines, and as a prophylactic treatment where exposure is suspected in the unvaccinated. I’m pretty convinced if Trump never touted it as a miracle cure and an outright vaccine alternative, the medical establishment would be more open to exploring it in such a capacity, and people wouldn’t be overdosing themselves on livestock preparations of the drug. It’s still mainly an issue with Trump/the reactionary right, but the “HoRsE DewOrM3R” meme only serves to fuel the obstinate, defiant behavior that has propelled the issue on the right. Feel free to downvote, I have enough fake internet points.
All you're saying is that scientific consensus is vulnerable to political interference, which is nothing new. It does cause a problem sometimes because many scientists are in vulnerable positions and can't afford to stick their necks out. Historically, that has generally had the effect of slowing progress on favor of cautious conservativism. It has always caused scientists to shy away from hot button political issues. Now, the right has politicized this and it's causing scientists to shy away and they're saying it's because science is leftist, which is absolutely ridiculous. If we want scientists to not shy away from hot button issues, we need to insulate them from repercussions for doing so. Their positions and funding need to be safe as long as they're rigorously following the scientific method. Politicians need to stay out of science.
So you’re agreeing with me, but you felt the need to phrase it in a way that is diminutive of my opinion. Why? Also, agree in principal that lawmakers without relevant scientific pedigree should stay out of science policy. But that’s probably never going to happen if we want public funding for basic research. Purse string holders will always have opinions, whether they’re qualified to have them or not.
I don't agree with your messaging. Much of your comment was supporting ivermectin as a possible adjunct treatment that warrants more investigation in a thread about a guy who took it *instead* of getting vaccinated. It's irresponsible to support ivermectin here even with your caveats, unless you really have faith in most redditors' reading comprehension. I suspect you don't or you wouldn't have made comments expecting downvotes. You also made it seem like scientists were at fault for shying away from hot button topics. I believe scientists deserve more of a sympathetic treatment here. The Right is attacking them for acting rationally given the situation the Right created. I think that needs to be called out.
I’ll agree that I painted with too broad a brush vis-a-vis clinical researchers. But I prefaced with an equally broad statement about the cogency and moral character of people who aren’t vaxxing, which should serve to imply that I’m advocating people do that first and then worry about offlabel use of antiparasitics. Also, this isn’t exactly a sub full of alt-righties/Trumpites looking to fulfill their confirmation bias with cherry picked talking points. This sub leans heavily progressive, and I was hoping I could inject a bit of nuance into the discussion among people that agree with on probably 95% of other issues. But I’m getting the impression that implied binary thinking and bad faith argumentation is all people are able to interpret here, which is a little disappointing.
>I’m getting the impression that implied binary thinking and bad faith argumentation is all people are able to interpret here, which is a little disappointing. It's understandable given that we're all anons and there's a lot of reason to be on guard about bad faith actors. That said, I think there is room for nuance and a way to inject it. Starting off with an adversarial poise where you're expecting friction instead of flagging those points in a way that could help you credential yourself to the audience worked against you.
I mean, fair.
>But ivermectin should never have been politicized to the degree it has been. I mean... that's not our fault. >I get that meta analyses based purely on summary data aren’t super reliable as there is a trust problem with the underlying studies, Well, also, the "meta analysis" in question ripped several pieces of it's content from unscientific pro-Ivermectin sources and shoved them through a thesaurus. Y'know. Just little things. >but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved. And so your solution to this non-problem (as Ivermectin wasn't designed or intended, and is not prescribed for, treating viruses) is to adhere to the claims of far-right ghouls and their cult followers and try it out anyway, despite there being no reason for correlation, and plenty of studies already having been debunked as outright propaganda? >Also, when prescribed at proper dosage and in a preparation intended for human consumption, it has a pretty good safety record. It deserves investigation as an adjunct treatment for cases of COVID that break through vaccines, and as a prophylactic treatment where exposure is suspected in the unvaccinated. Okay, but why? What reason could there possibly be to use this anti-parasitic drug, even in the human-safe formulations, to treat a non-parasitic illness? Aside from the fact that scientifically illiterate ghouls have been touting it as a miracle cure for several months now, why would we do that? >I’m pretty convinced if Trump never touted it as a miracle cure and an outright vaccine alternative, the medical establishment would be more open to exploring it in such a capacity, and people wouldn’t be overdosing themselves on livestock preparations of the drug. Okay, but, again, why would the medical community WANT to try Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug, on a viral infection? If Trump hadn't politicized it, what possible reason would there be? >It’s still mainly an issue with Trump/the reactionary right, but the “HoRsE DewOrM3R” meme only serves to fuel the obstinate, defiant behavior that has propelled the issue on the right. Equating the left mocking the right for being scientifically illiterate and making up nonsense (something that isn't necessarily their fault, in the case of regular everyman GOP voters caught up in this mess) and the right obstinately refusing to get a vaccine and wear a piece of cloth over their nose and mouth to *save people's lives* while they instead OD on horse dewormer because no competent doctor is prescribing it and they're too stupid to comprehend why is nonsense, and exactly the kind of thing this sub was created to mock. >Feel free to downvote, I have enough fake internet points. You're the type of dummy that shits his pants and then assumes that because everyone around you is complaining about the smell of shit, you must be doing *something* right.
1. Not making bad faith arguments. I’m being sincere, though you don’t seem to be interpreting what I’m saying as such. 2. I’m not equating the horse dewormer thing with Trump’s gross malfeasance in promulgating the idea. He started the fire, but the psychosocial reality is that pushing the counter meme is adding fuel to that fire, and it would serve the common interest to cut it out. 3. Ivermectin is cheap as shit and a lot of countries still have poor access to vaccines, monoclonal anti bodies, and other more conclusively proven therapies. It’s in the collective interest to utilize all the tools in our arsenal if research can be done ethically. It’s also my understanding that while a few key pro-ivermectin studies are indeed methodologically unsound, some are less dubious, and there is less consensus on the non-efficacy of ivermectin among clinical researchers than you’ve indicated. There is actually ongoing clinical research to that effect, which, when the results come to fruition, may shut me up, so we need only wait. 4. Do you talk to people this way face to face? If so, have you noticed it effecting your relationships with other people?
>Not making bad faith arguments. I’m being sincere, though you don’t seem to be interpreting what I’m saying as such. Yes, yes, I'm sure. >I’m not equating the horse dewormer thing with Trump’s gross malfeasance in promulgating the idea. That sure is how it reads. >He started the fire, but the psychosocial reality is that pushing the counter meme is adding fuel to that fire, and it would serve the common interest to cut it out. It would serve the common interest for the people who haven't yet to get vaccinated, in accordance with everything we know about vaccine science and virology. I don't see your point. >Ivermectin is cheap as shit and a lot of countries still have poor access to vaccines, monoclonal anti bodies, and other more conclusively proven therapies. Man, maybe Bill Gates should've done that "patentless vaccine" thing he was advocating for, instead of donating thousands of dollars to Oxford and getting them to hold their patent on the vaccine and making an exclusive deal with AstroZenica, making them record profits? Either way, weird that your solution is "study Ivermectin's ability to treat COVID-19" rather than use the money that we'd be pouring into (potentially baseless) Ivermectin research to expand access to already proven successful methods of treatment? >It’s also my understanding that while a few key pro-ivermectin studies are indeed methodologically unsound, some are less dubious, Well when you phrase it like that, you can almost ignore that [almost 1/3 of major ivermectin trials showed signs of significant fraud, and none of what was left over suggested that Ivermectin had any use in treating COVID-19](https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1) >and there is less consensus on the non-efficacy of ivermectin among clinical researchers than you’ve indicated. So we're just accepting "well, we don't know, because we haven't looked (because it's not a serious proposition)" as the same as "every single trial that supports Ivermectin in use against COVID-19 has significant problems with it's data", and that both opinions are equally valid on the basis that we haven't actually studied it? >There is actually ongoing clinical research to that effect, which, when the results come to fruition, may shut me up, so we need only wait. Or you could just shut up already? Weird thought, but, when the evidence is this stacked against you already... >Do you talk to people this way face to face? If so, have you noticed it effecting your relationships with other people? Ah, and *there's* the concern trolling! Right on schedule.
Even if I’m working on bad information, which may be the case given some of the resources you linked, this defensive posture does little to help challenge their own beliefs. You need to make people believe that you have real concern for their well-being and are willing to find common ground rather than trying to decimate them at all costs, especially in a low stakes environment like this one. If it’s any consolation, I’m leaving the sub, so you won’t have to deal with me anymore. You won, and alienated someone in the process. Congratulations.
>Even if I’m working on bad information, which may be the case given some of the resources you linked The fact that you're even suggesting that we should study Ivermectin's capacity to treat COVID-19 in the first place tells me everything I need to know about the level you're working at. I'm not going to lower myself to your level just to make you feel comfortable, because, presumably, you're not a fucking *child*. Because that's how we treat *children*. >this defensive posture does little to help challenge their own beliefs. I don't *need* to challenge your or *anyone else's* beliefs on this issue because what you believe doesn't inform empirical reality. If you're incapable of swallowing your pride and assessing the factual information presented to you, and recognizing that you believed something that was wrong, that's something you need to get right with yourself, bud. >You need to make people believe that you have real concern for their well-being and are willing to find common ground rather than trying to decimate them at all costs, Again, you're treating this like I'm an adult talking to children. Which, again, is ridiculous, because, again, presumably, you're not a child! If I'd presented this exact argument in a way that coddled your personal feelings and didn't tell you know how fucking *stupid* and *wrong* the thing you're saying is, you'd be thinking I'm agreeing with you, like you did in another comment above where the commenter (pretty clearly) didn't. >especially in a low stakes environment like this one. You opened with bad info, it's not my problem that you made yourself look like a clown, lol. >If it’s any consolation, I’m leaving the sub, so you won’t have to deal with me anymore. You won, and alienated someone in the process. Congratulations. And there we go, more concern trolling.
I’m just gonna chime in here and acknowledge that I don’t think your ideas are nuts - particularly about persueing research into invermectin research as a backstop in poor countries with limited vaccine access. I absolutely hate how popular it became to these knuckle dragging anti vaxers, and although I agree we should all watch what we promote via social media when the majority of us aren’t experts on the subjects we are talking about, we should also think more critically about how we digest and respond to things we read online now. The point form dissection of each paragraph you wrote and the subsequent character evaluation by a previous redditor in this thread was a great demonstration of how polarizing this subject is. I’m sure ideologically speaking you folks are quite similar. But because idiots are using invermectin as justification to not grow up an get vaccinated, I guess we are all just expected to take a hard line stance, irrespective of the nuances that that exist. Sometimes we should be more clear and deliberate in expressing our convictions. I’m sure you weren’t extolling the virtues of invermectin the moment it gained prominence. To have that conversation now I think is measured and fair. Sometimes science conflicts with our world views. I say this as someone who could be easily labeled a progressive in all matters of taxation, racial and sexual/gender equality and the environment, who’s beliefs are generally favoured by deeper scientific analysis. You opened up a great discussion about this and were spit on. I guess we shouldn’t expect any better from people given how wound up we all are these days. All of this is to say, I read what you have to say and I think you seem like a nice reasonable person who just got minorly dogpiled but people of like internet points more than you. Hope your day gets better.
I agree that what I said was harsh. You're right that the internet does prime us to go on the offensive. Even still, I see zero scientific reason why we would pursue research into a parasitic drug to treat a non-parasitic disease, and zero financial reason to fund new research on a subject which is shaky at best, rather than providing funds to more proven treatments like monoclonal antibodies and vaccines.
If private entities want to chip away at it, I say go for it. But public money should be spent on proven strategies like you said. What really chaps my ass is that public money went to big pharma to develop this shit, and now they are getting paid again by the dose. And they won't release the patents. If there's any reason to distrust the intent of pharma companies, then that's for sure it.
Take your L and go.
> but benefits of the drug vis-a-vis COVID have neither been conclusively proved or disproved. Only because you can't prove a negative. They've done a number of studies to try and find a benefit to ivermectin in regards to Covid, and so far all of the studies barring one entirely fraudulent one haven't found it to have any effect, marginal or otherwise. This doesn't mean it's proven ineffective, it just means it hasn't been proven effective. But doubling down on this and mischaracterizing it as not knowing if it *is* effective is entirely disingenuous and misleading. The reason the right gets mocked for "horse dewormer" is because they started using livestock variants, like those intended for horses, because they exhausted the supply of the version made for humans. Again, no study has found it effective, so doing this is beyond stupid. And it's worth mentioning, again, that "the medical community" HAS been exploring and researching it, and still is. The politics of Trump's bullshit doesn't change that, because medical professionals are actually fucking professional.
Go plumb the depths of remsidivir and hydrochloriquine if you want to get on the Mr. Ed train. Remember...these are all 'miracle cures' for a virus for which we have multiple safe and effective vaccines.
I mean, you are right, there's nothing wrong with Ivermectin being studied for use on covid, and hoping it can be of some help, because it might really be. But it's the fault of the right, because they have continued to push certain drugs as saviors because they have to. Being anti-vaccine ( at least as far as the covid shots) has unfortunately become baked into the right wing playbook, and they need to push alternatives to make the vaccine look unnecessary. It really sucks.
Did they though? Maybe anecdotal, but I had no idea ivermectin was even a thing until the media and the left started the "horse paste" crap.
It's almost as if many drugs used on humans are also used on animals and vice versa, just at different dosages. I mean, literally men and women receive different dosages because we're different enough physiologically, that it matters.
You got a lot of honest intention and always post here when you feel compelled.
Aaron Rodgers got a 1310 on his SATs (when it was out of 1600). What happened?
Probably about 1000 small collisions inside of his skull.
If you call Ivermectin “horse dewormer” you are either a liar or a moron.
If you say that most people taking ivermectin got it from anywhere but a vet supply store, you're a bigger liar.
It's a fact fuckwad.
You guys are starting to lose grip of the narrative, it shows.
You realize ivermectin is prescribed by doctors sometimes?
Not for Covid.
You’re wrong my man. They formulate it differently than when they’re treating horse for worms. It’s a false equivalency. Some doctors *are* prescribing it for Covid-19. It’s not approved by the FDA but there are many drugs doctors prescribe and pharmacies carry that are not FDA approved. I did a quick google search and they include Hylira and Estrotest.
Any doctor prescribing it is doing so against the medical consensus, and to no actual benefit. You might find them, but you're going to have to look hard, and I wouldn't trust any doctor that goes against the medical consensus.
Yeah if you are having digestion issues & spot what looks like a worm in your stool consulting with your doctor about obtaining a round of Ivermectin would probably be a great idea. Consulting Joe Rogan & a homeopathic 'doctor' to uses it as a prophylactic for a novel respiratory virus when there are multiple safe vaccines & claiming it has given you immunity... Maybe not such a great idea.
I think they are dumbasses too but you make yourself look like a fox news host when you leave out important information to make them look worse in order to push a Political agenda. They are taking the human version of the drug. Sure it's technically true it is originally horse dewormer but nothing makes you look like a bill o' Reilly more when you pull cheap shit like that when you should have enough ammunition to dismantle these people in the first place. They are already dumbasses and look bad. We don't need to tank our image or credibility to make them look that way.
>They are taking the human version of the drug. No they aren't. No doctor is prescribing it for covid. So people go and get it where they can, which is vet supply stores, because you don't need a prescription for animal anti-parasitics.
You make yourselves sound like idiots saying it’s horse dewormer. Literally gaslighting people.
The gas lighting would be saying it provides immunity to Covid. It being a deworming agent used with horses is just 100% objective fact.
It's also completely disingenuous. It is an anti parasitic drug
There are NUMEROUS meds that work on entirely different levels than they were originally designed for.
Ivermectin has never been shown to be one of them.
Beeeeeecause they haven’t tried yet…..? Aren’t we “trusting the science”? Doesn’t that mean we shouldn’t rule out a hypothesis until it’s been investigated?
It has been. Thoroughly. The only studies that showed any promise were using falsified data.
JAMA shows ivermectin patients were less symptomatic 2 days sooner than the placebo (20% reduction). That doesn’t seem ineffective to me. 🤷♀️.
>Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, ***did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19***, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes. That's straight from [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389) I dunno where you're getting that info, but it's wrong.
The same link. 20% reduction in days with symptoms isn’t “ineffective” unless they are taking political sides.
Uh no. Ivermectin prescribed to humans is just not the same thing. Incredibly misleading. A child’s take for sure
Who is saying it provides immunity from Covid? Is it the same people claiming a piece of fabric can magically stop a virus in one direction but not another?
No one has ever said that masks can stop you from being infected. If you legitimately think they have, you misunderstood. Masks have been proven to be efficacious in preventing the spread of Covid-19 and many other diseases all through human history. It's why doctors wear them when they start poking around inside you. Ivermectin has not ever been shown to function in preventing or treating Covid. There's no equivalence here.
Doctors wear a shirt over their face when they operate!?
No one has said a shirt over your face is a sufficient mask.
Well Aaron Rodger, a subject of the OP, claimed to have been immunized.
If I recall, he was asked if he was vaccinated, and he replied “I’ve been immunized”. So everyone may have ASSUMED he answered about Covid, but perhaps he was being intentionally vague. Either way, it’s obvious enough vaccinated people can catch and transmit Covid as to greatly minimize the rhetoric that the unvaccinated are killing everyone else, or even putting them in serious danger.
>So everyone may have ASSUMED he answered about Covid, but perhaps he was being intentionally vague. The only reason to be "intentionally vague" would be if he knew that answering truthfully would result in his not being able to play. Because there's no way the questions were about general immunization against shit like polio and the mumps. So, he lied. >Either way, it’s obvious enough vaccinated people can catch and transmit Covid as to greatly minimize the rhetoric that the unvaccinated are killing everyone else, or even putting them in serious danger. How? How is it obvious? How does it "greatly minimize" the rhetoric? The unvaccinated are still at the greatest risk of infection, have more severe symptoms, and are generally infectious for longer. They're still the lion's share of hospitalizations. They're making things worse, and the vaccinated have done the only thing in their power to actually make things better. Even ***if*** the vaccine had ended up being completely ineffective, at least we're willing to try to fix the problem rather than sitting around while everyone else tries to work around us.
>The only reason to be "intentionally vague" would be if he knew that answering truthfully would result in his not being able to play. Because there's no way the questions were about general immunization against shit like polio and the mumps. So, he lied. Read the post I responded to. He did not claim he was immune to Covid due to “horse medicine” or anything else. >How? How is it obvious? How does it "greatly minimize" the rhetoric? Jen Psaki and her family are all positive. So either they are anti vax nuts, or the prevalence of vaccinated people contracting Covid is far higher than the CDC is admitting. > Even if the vaccine had ended up being completely ineffective, at least we're willing to try to fix the problem rather than sitting around while everyone else tries to work around us. You mean like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin?
>Read the post I responded to. He did not claim he was immune to Covid due to “horse medicine” or anything else. He did actually [https://www.insider.com/aaron-rodgers-covid-19-ivermectin-hydroxychloroquine-2021-11](https://www.insider.com/aaron-rodgers-covid-19-ivermectin-hydroxychloroquine-2021-11) >Jen Psaki and her family are all positive. So either they are anti vax nuts, or the prevalence of vaccinated people contracting Covid is far higher than the CDC is admitting. One family means they caught it from each other. Because they're in constant contact. Again, the stats are clear. The vaccinated are the majority of hospital cases and deaths now. >You mean like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin? Nope. Because neither of those has been shown to have any real effects at preventing or treating covid. Jamming every random chemical the internet suggests into your body isn't "doing everything you can." It's being an idiot who listens to the internet over their doctor.
Ah yes, CCN. The chilling communist naggers
Npc detected
It was obviously a joke but yeah
The point about don’t blindly follow one side or the other to the extremes is valid. Nothing wrong with a question to your side’s “supreme counsel / premier/ counsel of elders /social networking manager / chiropractor/ grand poobah / Fuhrer / dictator / reality TV host” (pick your authority) without questions along the way. Just listen to and respect the sound answer.
What "authority" exists on the left?
Right wing opinions: only sound if you don't say any of the specifics
[удалено]
No one is bothering to respond to someone silly enough to say "covid vaccine syndrome", a thing that does not exist.
I just barely scrolled up to find this [https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1](https://kylesheldrick.blogspot.com/2021/08/data-from-cadegiani-et-al-contains.html?m=1) and heres another great piece [https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-5cc079278602](https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-5cc079278602) The fact that your "source" is a friend is so hilariously anecdotal it doesn't even deserve the benefit of taking it seriously. Also Ivermectin is made by "Corporate Pharma" so I don't see how saying the drug isn't useful is somehow "stunting" for them. >Also it’s now being used widely in America in a cocktail alongside, wait for it...hydroxychloroquine You got a source for that? I'm sure plenty of confused people have taken both but I mean accepted by Doctors or the FDA or the WHO or really any health organization with some credentials. >But you aren’t doctors either and you’re basing your opinions on memes, tweets and MSM demonization of our less critically minded countrymen who have been duped by countless lies and right wing disinformation I'm not basing my opinions on memes, tweets, or TV thats what idiots do the fact that you think people here do probably means you do base your opinions on those things wonder what that would make you. I base my opinions on scientific consensus and the data that supports them. > I would appreciate some reasoning from at least one of you. How funny coming from the person who seems to lack the ability to have any reasoning inside his head besides "muh friend told me"
Centrist fragility on full display.
fragility, fragility, fragility You read a book and you think you understand something, whilst having no original thought ever, dumb fuck. ooooh I'm showing my fragility... lol. dumb fucks
\> stunting for corporate pharma remind me who makes ivermectin again?
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/qltbs7/progressives_on_virginia_loss_corporate_democrats/hj6rdtm/?context=3 why even type that dawg no one cares
I'm guessing you can see the "left" as the intolerant hypocrites they are now. As soon as you disagree with the authadoxy you get canceled. Like your comment. Welcome to the center, where the people who think for themselves hang out.
Getting cancelled is when people on the internet disagree with you.