Vaccine

Happened again said:
There you go again..mansplaining to me what you think I wanted to discuss. I don't know what type of medical practicioner you go to that would tell you ivermectin will cure or prevent covid. Are some out there...sure, likely. Are there some that told you the vaccine would prevent and cure covid...yep - many, many more than those who told people ivermectin was the panacea. .see how that works silly goose.

Ivermectin was/is an easy target for vaccine advocates. But anyway, let's not re-hash history. Ivermectin isn't a dangerous drug, never has been...totally safe to prescribe, especially in conjunction with other things, plays well with others. What you should do is use the term malpractice in conjunction with every pediatrician on the planet who advocated for the vaccination of healthy children. Again, super duper easy for you to cruise through covid with the help of the made up, on the go vaccine schedule. Hell, you would of tolerated Ivermectin pretty well.
Click to expand...
Ooh -- "silly goose" -- I am so offended!

***would have***
 
Happened again said:
There you go again..mansplaining to me what you think I wanted to discuss. I don't know what type of medical practicioner you go to that would tell you ivermectin will cure or prevent covid. Are some out there...sure, likely. Are there some that told you the vaccine would prevent and cure covid...yep - many, many more than those who told people ivermectin was the panacea. .see how that works silly goose.

Ivermectin was/is an easy target for vaccine advocates. But anyway, let's not re-hash history. Ivermectin isn't a dangerous drug, never has been...totally safe to prescribe, especially in conjunction with other things, plays well with others. What you should do is use the term malpractice in conjunction with every pediatrician on the planet who advocated for the vaccination of healthy children. Again, super duper easy for you to cruise through covid with the help of the made up, on the go vaccine schedule. Hell, you would of tolerated Ivermectin pretty well.
Click to expand...
Here is a response from real medical practitioners --

"COVID-19 vaccination has substantially altered the course of the pandemic, saving tens of millions of lives globally. "

 
espola said:
Here is a response from real medical practitioners --

"COVID-19 vaccination has substantially altered the course of the pandemic, saving tens of millions of lives globally. "

Click to expand...
Look, I know I'm not going to influence your belief...and that is fine. The covid vaccine(s) did save lives silly goose - I've never said otherwise. I'm just not blind and linear like you. The vaccine(s) also had zero impact on saving lives. There is also a rich and documented history on excess serious risk of adverse effects.

You go ahead and plant your flag on articles written by people who benefit from vaccines being put into people's arms...have a it. Again, not an issue for you, your time on this earth is quite shorter than a vaccinated and boosted pediatric patient. Your world looks much different than theirs.

By the way, this article is junk...anything with the gates foundations endorsement is junk. The Lancet also suffered from ideology driven medicine and research...don't you remember the terrible articles they published that had to be retracted? I'll let you look it up..you can do it.
 
Happened again said:
Look, I know I'm not going to influence your belief...and that is fine. The covid vaccine(s) did save lives silly goose - I've never said otherwise. I'm just not blind and linear like you. The vaccine(s) also had zero impact on saving lives. There is also a rich and documented history on excess serious risk of adverse effects.

You go ahead and plant your flag on articles written by people who benefit from vaccines being put into people's arms...have a it. Again, not an issue for you, your time on this earth is quite shorter than a vaccinated and boosted pediatric patient. Your world looks much different than theirs.

By the way, this article is junk...anything with the gates foundations endorsement is junk. The Lancet also suffered from ideology driven medicine and research...don't you remember the terrible articles they published that had to be retracted? I'll let you look it up..you can do it.
Click to expand...
Your prejudice blinds you.
 
espola said:
Your prejudice blinds you.
Click to expand...
what part of my post do you disagree with? Your weird, wanna be sauve but limp responses have gone sour. Are you saying The Lancet's credibility has taken hit (much like many professional medical journals). Are you saying that big pharma companies didn't take out ads promoting their product, taking advantage of the fear mongering courtesy of your government-----especially in places like CA? Are you disagreeing that the covid vaccine wasn't evaluated based on traditional norms? What exactly do you believe in besides posting links to articles with corporate backing?

"Your prejudice blinds you" is such a silly statement. Look inward, the ones blinded are people like you.
 
Happened again said:
what part of my post do you disagree with? Your weird, wanna be sauve but limp responses have gone sour. Are you saying The Lancet's credibility has taken hit (much like many professional medical journals). Are you saying that big pharma companies didn't take out ads promoting their product, taking advantage of the fear mongering courtesy of your government-----especially in places like CA? Are you disagreeing that the covid vaccine wasn't evaluated based on traditional norms? What exactly do you believe in besides posting links to articles with corporate backing?

"Your prejudice blinds you" is such a silly statement. Look inward, the ones blinded are people like you.
Click to expand...

"anything with the gates foundations endorsement is junk. The Lancet also suffered from ideology driven medicine and research."

Prejudice by definition.
 
espola said:
"anything with the gates foundations endorsement is junk. The Lancet also suffered from ideology driven medicine and research."

Prejudice by definition.
Click to expand...
Ahh, I see....an opinion based on analysis of presented facts counters your religion and you call it prejudice. How fitting. Good thing freedom of speech is a thing or you would be in big trouble with comments like this. I don't need a link to an article written by someone inside the industry to give me courage to present opinion.

so you are saying the Lancet has maintained its prestige? And you are confident that Bill is a well intentioned person who cares about humanity?
 
Happened again said:
Ahh, I see....an opinion based on analysis of presented facts counters your religion and you call it prejudice. How fitting. Good thing freedom of speech is a thing or you would be in big trouble with comments like this. I don't need a link to an article written by someone inside the industry to give me courage to present opinion.

so you are saying the Lancet has maintained its prestige? And you are confident that Bill is a well intentioned person who cares about humanity?
Click to expand...
The Lancet, like any respectable journal, recognizes its errors and publishes retractions and corrections where necessary.

What do you have against Bill Gates besides his behavior at Microsoft?
 
espola said:
The Lancet, like any respectable journal, recognizes its errors and publishes retractions and corrections where necessary.
Click to expand...
Fair point. Like when they had to retract the article that claimed Hydroxychloroquine provided no benefit for Covid treatment and claimed it actually decreased survival rates?
RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis - The Lancet

I'm not a HCQ proponent, or critic, but it is interesting to note. Maybe the Lancet needs to do a better job of vetting studies before they publish them. Once the Jeannie is out of the bottle it's tough to put her/him back in.
 
watfly said:
Fair point. Like when they had to retract the article that claimed Hydroxychloroquine provided no benefit for Covid treatment and claimed it actually decreased survival rates?
RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis - The Lancet

I'm not a HCQ proponent, or critic, but it is interesting to note. Maybe the Lancet needs to do a better job of vetting studies before they publish them. Once the Jeannie is out of the bottle it's tough to put her/him back in.
Click to expand...
Does that mean HCQ works now?
 
watfly said:
Fair point. Like when they had to retract the article that claimed Hydroxychloroquine provided no benefit for Covid treatment and claimed it actually decreased survival rates?
RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis - The Lancet

I'm not a HCQ proponent, or critic, but it is interesting to note. Maybe the Lancet needs to do a better job of vetting studies before they publish them. Once the Jeannie is out of the bottle it's tough to put her/him back in.
Click to expand...
Further background on the HCQ retraction --

www.theguardian.com

Covid-19: Lancet retracts paper that halted hydroxychloroquine trials

Retraction made after Guardian investigation found inconsistencies in data
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top