Docs and scientists of letsrun, please read this article and tell me if what he is writing about Covid-19 treatment is fake news

rojo wrote:

So basically she's a lot like me on this. She's vaxxed but knows the media and hospitals/big pharma almost always have agendas (media wants to act like everything is a crisis, hospitals/big pharma want to make money) clouding their work.

As another poster already pointed out, everyone - including you - has an agenda. You have any idea how much Joe Rogan made when he sold the supplement company he co-founded to Unilever last year?

Don't you find it irritating when people assume every post you make on these boards is simply an attempt to drive clicks? As someone with close family members in both journalism and health care, I find your characterizations of those professions insulting and ridiculous. Do they sometimes get things wrong (e.g. early mask guidance)? Of course. Are there some jerks and profiteers in those professions, like any other profession? Of course. Are they part of some vast conspiracy to mislead the public and suppress news about effective treatments? For god's sake, get a grip.

Or better yet, take a trip to a good reference library, hit the microfiche, and read some newspapers from 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 50 years ago, 100 years ago, as far back as the stacks go. You'll read these same debates between "the establishment" and anti-establishment hucksters and charlatans peddling miracle cures that "they" don't want you to know about. The evidence is always so apparently clear-cut, but is rejected by the "authorities" who want to protect their monopoly on the truth. But somehow it never pans out. This year's soon-to-be-miracle is forgotten in a decade. (These days it happens even faster: your friend's wife has already given up on ivermectin and moved along to next set of miracle cures, even though she somehow remains convinced there was a conspiracy by the mainstream media to make it look bad.)

Of course, occasionally the wild anti-establishment ideas turn out to be correct. Not often, but occasionally -- like the guy who was convinced that ulcers were caused by a bacteria. And you know what happens then? Everyone is thrilled, and it's integrated into mainstream medical care. But if history tells you that for every 10,000 unproven medical claims supported by crappy "studies," at most 1 turns out to have substance (and that's a HUGELY generous assumption), your best bet is to assume these theories are false until proven otherwise.

Jefe in the CO wrote:

Hey Flagpole,

I know you're on record as saying that it's possible to get vaxxed and there would be no reason to believe that you'd ever get Covid. Have you changed your stance on this? Are you now on the Endemic bandwagon?

Anyway, here's another Doctor for you to throw up all over (except that he's a pro vaxxer):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QyV6trMPvs

I am NOT on record saying that and do not believe that and never have, so try again with another question.

Rojo,

You would think you'd know how your own message board works. I obviously did not write that question to myself, but I will answer you as if you asked me the questions under #2 above as you intended.

Yes, my wife, who is a genius by the way, has loved Fauci's work since the mid 80s, and she was super excited to work for him at the NIH. Yes, she believes he is brilliant...because he is. When she was in graduate school at Stanford, she worked on researching HIV (this was late '89-'94). That was Fauci's big thing at the time. Her lab, the other Ph.D. students in her lab, the professor who ran the lab, all looked up to Fauci, and they were all brilliant people. My brother, who has a Ph.D. in pharmacology and then got a law degree, so he works on drug patents, has long been a fan of Tony Fauci. My sister is a research scientist who had been working on using viruses to attack cancer cells until the pandemic hit, and now her lab is working on researching one specific aspect of this coronavirus (her lab's direction was changed via federal funding when TRUMP was in office by the way, so at least one good thing that came from that dark time). I know that most people aren't married to people who used to work for Fauci, but it seems weird to me that people didn't know who he was before this pandemic. He has been on the news countless times regarding other health-related issues for decades, was a mainstay during the rise of HIV, etc. BUT, I do understand that I know who he is, so I am drawn to the television when they say his name.

Some other things:

1) Nearly half of all Americans (before we had a vaccine) didn't heed the advice of Fauci and the CDC initially to wear masks and social distance, so you can't attack Fauci for moved goal posts. And, the pandemic continues because too many haven't gotten vaccinated at all, and some have decided they aren't doing the booster and have sworn off future vaccinations even if they got the initial 1 or 2 shots (depending on which vaccine they got). I know 5 people who got COVID at Christmas (all at the same gathering) who have the stance that they are not getting the booster or any future shots even though they all initially got vaccinated. One of them had a fever of 104. Fortunately they have all recovered...time will tell if they have any long-term negative effects.

2) Regarding no mask and then mask, the severity and swiftness of the virus spread changed the recommendation. That's not moving the goal posts. We are in an ever-evolving situation.

3) No one is "talking down to us". Is your ego so fragile that you won't listen to people who are experts in infectious diseases when you are not? If you get on an airplane and the lead mechanic tells the captain that everyone needs to deplane because a part is defective, do you feel talked down to? What makes you think that you have any intellectual say here about what is proper regarding this pandemic? You are not a scientist. You are not a doctor. You are not an immunologist. You are not an epidemiologist. Now, I am none of those things either which is why I respect the opinions of those who are, and I follow the majority advice which in this case is the overwhelming majority. There is no truth that you know that the medical experts (Fauci, etc.) don't know.

4) Did you get your kid (or kids...I don't know how many you have) the MMR vaccine or any other shots they needed? If so, why is that so different in your mind (I know you said you are triple vaxxed, but yet you show fear about it)? Vaccines are amazing things, but how they work is not a mystery...even the newer mRNA vaccines are not mysterious. Issues with vaccines typically come about within 6 months, and we simply are not seeing BIG problems there. Yes, there have been some clotting issues (VERY MINOR) and some myocarditis in some young people (again, VERY minor), but the effects of getting the virus are MUCH worse (including myocarditis as a greater percentage).

I'm listening to what you and Wise Old Man are saying (and to a large extent agreeing), but because of the hinky (and SO heavy-handed) way that the vaccines have been "marketed", the COMPLETE shut down of any discussion (that was/are reasonable questions), and the obvious sway that Pharma has, I am a fair bit more distrusting of the experts than you. Sorry.

At the very beginning, it seemed pretty scary and there were pretty wild speculations of how bad covid would be. We purchased a travel-trailer so that my immuno-compromised child could quarantine in it if need be. But, of course, it did not turn out to be nearly so bad, did it? And now, they are changing the way they are counting hospital admissions. Would it not be reasonable to assess that the smart set (while certainly being brilliant minds) do not actually know everything, and that mistakes could be made? Anyone would be insane to not admit this possibility as there have been many errors already! Therefore, I do not think it is quite as ridiculous for some to take a "first, do no harm" approach as some would make it out to be, especially when virtually ALL OF IT at this point has been made into a political issue.

Perhaps I could be faulted for not having a high degree of trust in government. But, generally speaking, I do not think the government really has my best interest at heart. I think government's first priority (as assessed by what it does) is to grow and amass power. So, if there was a real "need" for people to get vaccinated, they would very much want it and the gov't nor anyone else would need to "sell" it so hard (as it has been). And, I do think they clearly show you with their actions just how serious they think the pandemic is when they have their special occasions (in which they go maskless).

Finally, just a short side-comment - and I was never sold on Ivrmctn - but people were most definitely "talked down to" regarding it. It wasn't just news reports, it was the FDA itself that tweeted out "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it." and then wrote an article about the lethality of Ivrmctn (for an FDA approved - for people - drug that has an extremely low-risk safety profile.) You could never convince me that it was a good look for the FDA to take this approach, and if anything it led people to distrust the good scientists there even more. How does that not look disingenuous?

Hooboy up above mentioned how no one wants to fall for "charlatans peddling miracle cures", and to this I say, AMEN! The only issue is that it appears (to me) that all are hucksters to one degree or another. I am not at all convinced by Kori and his ilk (though I do believe some to be well-intentioned), but neither am I convinced by the unquestionable and infallible Gods of science like Fauci ("if you question me, you are really questioning science!" (lol)) and Collins. It is a little sad because I think ALL of us have lost credibility through this. This latest fad of shaming anti-vaxxers by celebrating when one dies or wanting to deny them care is just purely awful. Sure, the anti-vaxxers may be misguided (and could even be called morons or whatever), but I think the vast majority of people are truly wanting to survive, avoid the hospital / serious illness, and be around for their young ones.

I personally don't believe that anyone has all the answers yet - just their best informed guesses and assessments of the data they have (which is not nothing). Is that crazy for one to think? So, it is fairly off-putting (to me) when anyone on either side comes off as 100% certain that they are correct. But, hey, if they are 100% correct, then good for them! Then, perhaps they should consider working on their messaging a little, right?!

414227 wrote:

I personally don't believe that anyone has all the answers yet - just their best informed guesses and assessments of the data they have (which is not nothing). Is that crazy for one to think? So, it is fairly off-putting (to me) when anyone on either side comes off as 100% certain that they are correct.

I've never heard any scientific experts claim that they're "100% certain they are correct." That's pretty much a fundamental paradigm of science: all conclusions are tentative subject to further evidence. So you're absolutely right that no one has all the answers. But that doesn't mean that all imperfect opinions are equal. Some opinions are formed based on years of training and exhaustive study of the existing evidence; some aren't. Good intentions don't matter if (like Kory) you don't even understand the basics of how to do a meta-analysis.

hoo boy wrote:

414227 wrote:

I personally don't believe that anyone has all the answers yet - just their best informed guesses and assessments of the data they have (which is not nothing). Is that crazy for one to think? So, it is fairly off-putting (to me) when anyone on either side comes off as 100% certain that they are correct.

I've never heard any scientific experts claim that they're "100% certain they are correct." That's pretty much a fundamental paradigm of science: all conclusions are tentative subject to further evidence. So you're absolutely right that no one has all the answers. But that doesn't mean that all imperfect opinions are equal. Some opinions are formed based on years of training and exhaustive study of the existing evidence; some aren't. Good intentions don't matter if (like Kory) you don't even understand the basics of how to do a meta-analysis.

CORRECT!

414227, what you wrote there is a bunch of foolish crap.

Do you look with the same scrutiny at all of the additives and preservatives that are in the food you eat? Do you know the quality of the air you breathe no matter where you go? What about the carcinogens that may or may not be present in items you buy that you just touch?

Also 414227, people were taking Ivermectin preparations intended for livestock which is why those statements were made...they were toward people who were doing THAT.

It doesn't matter that Ivermectin, even the preparation intended for humans, is considered safe. It has a specific purpose, and that is not to treat viral infections, and its use as a COVID therapeutic is not supported.

Flagpole wrote:

Also 414227, people were taking Ivermectin preparations intended for livestock which is why those statements were made...they were toward people who were doing THAT.

It doesn't matter that Ivermectin, even the preparation intended for humans, is considered safe. It has a specific purpose, and that is not to treat viral infections, and its use as a COVID therapeutic is not supported.

0/10

"it’s legal and common for doctors to prescribe drugs for uses other than what is listed on the label, commonly known as off-label. 20% of all prescriptions are off-label."

"The fact that a condition or a dosage or a category of patient is not included on a label doesn’t mean that the drug is not appropriate for that use. It means only that the FDA has not approved that particular use of the drug."

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

hoo boy, I completely agree. Which I think highlights just how poorly the messaging and influencing campaign has been. If Kory doesn't understand the basics of how to do a meta-analysis, then it should be easy for superior ideas and expertise to rise above and dominate Kory's inferior ones without any need for there to be a "smear campaign". Unfortunately, our thought "leaders" immature approach only bolstered the credibility in many people's eyes of these fringe doctors and groups and lowered their own - and I can see why.

Flagpole, your response is a fairly good example of why people have lost trust. I'm pretty much on the same side as you - I just think that the messaging has been piss poor, and how you can possibly argue that given the results of the massive numbers of "anti-vaxxers" (a term that has been used as an otherizing pejorative).

So, let me see if I can possibly help you understand... People, in general, like to be treated with dignity and respect. They want to be allowed to make their own decisions, even if it may result in the wrong decision. Do you have children? If so, what, in your experience, has worked better in achieving the outcome you desire - 1) Johnny, you dumb mother-effer, you must do this or we're all going to die (when clearly they can see that this is false), and if you don't, we're going to come after your livelihood, OR 2) Johnny, I can see how/why you might see it like that. I appreciate your perspective, but here's another way to look at it (and then explain very persuasively and patiently). See the difference? In my experience, the second is much more effective. The fact that our side can not seem to grasp this basic concept seems to weakens our entire position (because if we can't even understand that, how are we to be trusted with understanding complex things?).

Finally, you are flat out wrong about Ivrmctn. All of it was smeared. After Rogan said that he included it in his "throw the kitchen sink at it" approach, the collective response was "he took the horse de-wormer?!?!?" It could have been a great opportunity for the health professionals to provide an effective teaching moment, but no.

So, I apologize if you find my thoughts on the matter to be "a bunch of foolish crap", beneath you, and unworthy of consideration. You have not quite convinced me yet, however, that much of the fault for the hesitancy around the vaccines can't be directly attributed to the godawful way that our side has attempted (and continues to attempt) to persuade the unconvinced. The us vs them paradigm is unhelpful (duh!).

But, hey, you do you... If you're a car salesman go with the approach "if you don't buy this, you're a stupid moron that doesn't deserve a car!" and let's see how it goes! Or, if you're a clergy-person, try the tried and true "You MUST believe or else not only you are going to hell, but so are your family members, and all of us!!!", and let's witness the conversions skyrocket.

I wouldn't have thought this would have been difficult, yet here we are. It is SO WEIRD why people aren't embracing vaccines as they obviously should, right? Try to use a little introspection here. Admit that the vaccine acceptance rate hasn't been what we would hope for, and instead of just blaming the rubes and vying to make the divide worse (a lazy, relatively thoughtless, and unproductive approach), mull over how you / we could do better and be more effective.

Indeed DanM, when challenged in a pandemic, I can't believe that some doctors would actually try different treatments in order to help people. Turrible turrible doctors, those. I know if I were at the end of my rope, I certainly wouldn't want one of them on my side. Nosiree! (lol)

414227 wrote:

If Kory doesn't understand the basics of how to do a meta-analysis, then it should be easy for superior ideas and expertise to rise above and dominate Kory's inferior ones without any need for there to be a "smear campaign".

I appreciate the reply, and I just want to pick up on this point, because it's basically the same one I was debating earlier in the thread.

*Why* do you think it should be "easy" for superior ideas to rise above and dominate inferior ones? In some situations, cause and effect are easy to see. If one person is arguing that gravity points upward, and another is arguing that gravity points downward, they can go outside and drop (or release) a ball, to see which direction it goes.

But many issues in the modern world are far more complex. Even for something as obvious as whether the world is round or flat, how does the "superior" idea (i.e. that it's round!) rise above and dominate the inferior one? Try to explain how we know the world is round... without relying on having to trust someone else (i.e. some expert)'s observations. Sure, astronauts have seen the curvature of the earth - if you believe anyone has actually gone to outer space! But that form of argument breaks down if you don't trust the same experts, e.g. one party thinks the CDC is literally making up health and mortality stats.

And medical treatment protocols are wayyy harder to evaluate than whether the earth is flat, because cause and effect are so separated and there are so many other factors that affect whether someone gets better or worse. That's why bogus medical cures have persisted for centuries. So simply providing "better" information, in an environment where many people don't trust even the very basic sources of information, isn't automatically convincing. In fact, in many ways, it's *easier* for bad ideas to spread, because those who spread them can choose their own facts in order to paint a compelling picture (like Kory, once again), rather than being bound by the messy ambiguity of the scientific process.

That, in the end, is why it's disappointing to see someone like Rojo start a thread like this. Because every bit of oxygen you give to charlatans leads another few people to think "Hmm, that's a good point, the earth didn't look very round last time I flew in an airplane."

Rojo, when you find yourself with a little opportunity to listen to an interview of Dr Kory try this:

https://rumble.com/vs7c9i-huge-number-of-vax-deaths-and-its-getting-worse-dr.-pierre-kory.html

Remember, science that refuses to listen to or consider contrary theories is no longer science.

414227 wrote:

way that the vaccines have been "marketed", the COMPLETE shut down of any discussion (that was/are reasonable questions),

Yeah, it's IMPOSSIBLE to find antivax rhetoric anywhere, eyeroll.

I am surprised that people are so upset that most mainstream news doesn't peddle antivaxx propaganda.

What reasonable questions have been silenced? We've been 'debating' vaccines and antivaxx moronic talking point on this site for over a year!

BioEngineer wrote:

Rojo, when you find yourself with a little opportunity to listen to an interview of Dr Kory try this:

https://rumble.com/vs7c9i-huge-number-of-vax-deaths-and-its-getting-worse-dr.-pierre-kory.html

Remember, science that refuses to listen to or consider contrary theories is no longer science.

There is zero evidence of 'vax deaths' and I am disappointed a "bioengineer" would fall for such a shameless grift.

Always telling that these quacks refuse to put any of their assertions in writing. They know it would be easily refuted and they'd lose their platform.

You can look at death counts by age in the graphs here on the CDC. Select 'weekly number of deaths by age" and you'll see that death counts did not trend up in the middle age groups until the Delta wave hit in mid-late summer.

Here's a good roundup of data from UK, which should show even more pronounced effects given the higher vax compliance.

Continual patterns...

https://swprs.org/professor-ehud-qimron-ministry-of-health-its-time-to-admit-failure/

Ok Flagpole, let me rephrase my assertion.

On another thread, several months ago, you were making the argument about why vaccines were so important:

- vaccines are safe and effective (even if the vaccines were approved in record time)

- my wife is brilliant

- I have access to multiple PhDs who know more than you

- Trump drove this anti vax movement and politicized it first (I actually agree with this as he only saw it as tool that would be used by the left to win the election...until he got Covid that is.)

Another poster responded:

- a majority of PhDs are hesitant

- we don't know enough about the long term effects of the vaccine to mandate them

- it's foolish to think we could magically create an effective vaccine to stop an airborne coronavirus

- we have to learn to live with this virus as it will become endemic and we're all going to get it

You responded:

- There is no way PhDs are hesitant as I know many PhDs and none of them are hesitant

- the vaccines are safe and effective against Covid (this was before the goal posts were moved from prevents transmissibility to

- There is no reason why anyone needs to contract the virus if they're vaccinated

Ring any bells?

I'm picking on you because your thought process has evolved like most everyone else during this pandemic but, for some reason, are too entrenched to say anything out loud that maybe you and your ilk were wrong about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

A true science based person has no problem admitting that what they originally believed to be correct could have been misguided given new information (this is why I give some credit to Harrambe who at least bent a little on natural infections being worth anything).

As 414227 so eloquently put it, vaccine hesitancy was created due to piss poor messaging by the government (Trump and Biden's) rather than idiocy by those who remained unvaxxed (regardless of their natural immunity status). You would think by now that our government and LRC posters would recognize that we, as a nation, don't all think and act the same, duh.

My 88 year old dad was hesitant but I convinced him to get vaxxed, thanks to many on this message board, mostly because if there are long term deleterious effects it won't matter for him. There is no way we are getting our kids, who've already had it, vaxxed and won't until we gather more information on the long term effects (which has been next to impossible to research by the way).

Jefe in the CO wrote:

As 414227 so eloquently put it, vaccine hesitancy was created due to piss poor messaging by the government (Trump and Biden's) rather than idiocy by those who remained unvaxxed (regardless of their natural immunity status). You would think by now that our government and LRC posters would recognize that we, as a nation, don't all think and act the same, duh.

Messaging wasn't great, I agree somewhat (although most messaging is just "get the vax, it works"). But anyone who looks at the vax data and thinks "the vax is dangerous and useless" is actually dumb.

Both can be true!

And for the record, I've always thought that natural infections gave decent immunity. I just didn't think that it negated the need for vaccines in prior-infected. There was a brief period where a few studies showed remarkable efficacy of prior infection against even mild disease in Delta, but subsequent observational data and immunological data concerning Omicron clearly moves us back into the vax-necessary camp for all.

Hybrid immunity has always been outstandingly better than either component, thus I remain firm that anyone turning down the vax is dumb.

Good post. Yes, I most definitely remember this conversation.

Boom goes the Dynamite wrote:

Continual patterns...

https://swprs.org/professor-ehud-qimron-ministry-of-health-its-time-to-admit-failure/

Quick, start the slandering before this editorial sees the light of day!

Can we now get everybody back in the room (Big Pharma excluded) and come up with better solutions/policies/messaging?

Yes, Harambe, I recognize that is where you would land and it is why we all (well maybe a slim majority) love you.