Umm, you’re the one being dishonest here. Youre using a trend from Feb to June and then ignoring the July to August trend. Quite predictable of you to act this way.
Texas peak hospitalized patients 7-day average: 13,700 Texas current hospitalized patients 7-day average: 13,500 Texas peak hospital admissions 7-day average: 1800 Texas currant hospital admissions 7-day average: 1600 Texas peak Covid Deaths 7-day average: 350 Texas current covid deaths 7-day average: 230 And cases are continuing to grow in Texas, meaning all these numbers will continue to grow https://covidactnow.org/us/texas-tx/?s=22651188 Things are bad in Tx, things are currently getting worse, hospitals, Dr's and nurses are overwhelmed across the state
SMH, no kid. Just no. I'm using CURRENT CDC information showing a trend in fatality rates by age that has continued SINCE February. You made a dazzling display of sophistry in an attempt to dismiss that data and I didn't let you get away with it. It's okay though, go on believing whatever you want to believe. think that the world is coming to an end and that we're all going to die or whatever, It really doesn't make any difference to me.
I don’t know what your issue is with saying that I think the world is falling when I literally said it wont go back to peak numbers. You are clearly projecting your own issues onto me. That’s a you thing. second, this all stemmed from you claiming the deaths were falling. I quickly showed that you were wrong and you ADMITTED to being wrong. Now, since your ego can’t take it you can’t help but double down on being wrong. and with the data, like I said, look back in two weeks to see that the number you’re referencing has changed. This is really simple. I’m sorry it’s so complicated for you. Data isn’t your thing. I get it.
Yeah I can’t figure out who is stupider, ppl who downplay covid or the ppl who argue with the ppl who downplay covid.
NYT the morning The bottom line Delta really has changed the course of the pandemic. It is far more contagious than earlier versions of the virus and calls for precautions that were not necessary a couple of months ago, like wearing masks in some indoor situations. But even with Delta, the overall risks for the vaccinated remain extremely small. As Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote on Friday, “The messaging over the last month in the U.S. has basically served to terrify the vaccinated and make unvaccinated eligible adults doubt the effectiveness of the vaccines.” Neither of those views is warranted.
https://theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new-details-emerge-about-coronavirus-research-at-chinese-lab/ NEW DETAILS EMERGE ABOUT CORONAVIRUS RESEARCH AT CHINESE LAB More than 900 pages of materials related to US.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept. NEWLY RELEASED DOCUMENTS provide details of U.S.-funded research on several types of coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China. The Intercept has obtained more than 900 pages of documents detailing the work of EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based health organization that used federal money to fund bat coronavirus research at the Chinese laboratory. The trove of documents includes two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as well as project updates relating to EcoHealth Alliance’s research, which has been scrutinized amid increased interest in the origins of the pandemic. The documents were released in connection with ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation by The Intercept against the National Institutes of Health. The Intercept is making the full documents available to the public. “This is a road map to the high-risk research that could have led to the current pandemic,” said Gary Ruskin, executive director of U.S. Right To Know, a group that has been investigating the origins of Covid-19. One of the grants, titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. The research also involved screening people who work with live animals. The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed. The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has aggressively dismissed. The bat coronavirus grant provided EcoHealth Alliance with a total of $3.1 million, including $599,000 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology used in part to identify and alter bat coronaviruses likely to infect humans. Even before the pandemic, many scientists were concerned about the potential dangers associated with such experiments. The grant proposal acknowledges some of those dangers: “Fieldwork involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs, while working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for fecal dust to be inhaled.” Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, said the documents show that EcoHealth Alliance has reason to take the lab-leak theory seriously. “In this proposal, they actually point out that they know how risky this work is. They keep talking about people potentially getting bitten — and they kept records of everyone who got bitten,” Chan said. “Does EcoHealth have those records? And if not, how can they possibly rule out a research-related accident?” According to Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University, the documents contain critical information about the research done in Wuhan, including about the creation of novel viruses. “The viruses they constructed were tested for their ability to infect mice that were engineered to display human type receptors on their cell,” Ebright wrote to The Intercept after reviewing the documents. Ebright also said the documents make it clear that two different types of novel coronaviruses were able to infect humanized mice. “While they were working on SARS-related coronavirus, they were carrying out a parallel project at the same time on MERS-related coronavirus,” Ebright said, referring to the virus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. Asked about the grant materials, Robert Kessler, communications manager at EcoHealth Alliance, said, “We applied for grants to conduct research. The relevant agencies deemed that to be important research, and thus funded it. So I don’t know that there’s a whole lot to say.” The grant was initially awarded for a five-year period — from 2014 to 2019. Funding was renewed in 2019 but suspended by the Trump administration in April 2020. The closest relative of SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid-19, is a virus found in bats, making the animals a focal point for efforts to understand the origins of the pandemic. Exactly how the virus jumped to humans is the subject of heated debate. Many scientists believe that it was a natural spillover, meaning that the virus passed to humans in a setting such as a wet market or rural area where humans and animals are in close contact. Biosafety experts and internet sleuths who suspect a lab origin, meanwhile, have spent more than a year poring over publicly available information and obscure scientific publications looking for answers. In the past few months, leading scientists have also called for a deeper investigationof the pandemic’s origins, as has President Joe Biden, who in May ordered the intelligence community to study the issue. On August 27, Biden announced that the intelligence inquiry was inconclusive. Biden blamed China for failing to release critical data, but the U.S. government has also been slow to release information. The Intercept initially requested the proposals in September 2020. “I wish that this document had been released in early 2020,” said Chan, who has called for an investigation of the lab-leak origin theory. “It would have changed things massively, just to have all of the information in one place, immediately transparent, in a credible document that was submitted by EcoHealth Alliance.” The second grant, “Understanding Risk of Zoonotic Virus Emergence in Emerging Infectious Disease Hotspots of Southeast Asia,” was awarded in August 2020 and extends through 2025. The proposal, written in 2019, often seems prescient, focusing on scaling up and deploying resources in Asia in case of an outbreak of an “emergent infectious disease” and referring to Asia as “this hottest of the EID hotspots.”
Watched the video. It annoys me that he seems to attribute his quick recovery to ivermectin rather than the combination of monoclonal antibodies, IV vitamin C, IV NAD, and ivermectin. He had access to resources that not everyone can have. I would have zero problem with him if If he had qualified his recovery by saying that he doesn't know if ivermectin was the key to his recovery, but he understood the risks of taking a drug for off label use and he took the doctor prescribed dosage of ivermectin along with other therapeutics under the supervision of a doctor. He absolutely should say that he took the human version of the drug and tell his listeners to not take the livestock version of the drug outside of doctor supervision. If I had covid and ivermectin was offered to me by a doctor then I'd definitely take it as well. There may be zero or minimal benefit, but the risk is also extremely small at the prescribed dosage of human form of the drug. I'd also take the monoclonal antibody treatment as well if it's offered to me. Taking livestock form of the drug without a doctor's supervision is idiocy IMO. Holding a show while still coughing and sniffling is also irresponsible IMO.
Yeah, it'd be nice if he cleared that up for people taking ivermectin from the tractor store vs a normal pharmacy. And if he also made it clear he has resources that most people can only dream of (direct access to drugs/IV treatments at home etc.). You'd think it be clear... but you're right - people are sometimes that ignorant to a topic, I also didn't look at CNN/other news reports on him, but if they aren't clear in their reporting it's not helping either.
He said (paraphrasing) "after taking the IVs and the monoclonal antibodies and the other stuff, [the next day] I felt pretty ****in good." Sure sounds like he is giving credit to the IVs and the monoclonal antibodies. I am curious in general though how to get the monoclonal antibody treatment. Last I checked on the Houston Methodist website, it was only given to those who are at-risk. Could be that their site is outdated but I was just wondering if anyone knew whether that was a treatment anyone could get or what.
Yeah, that's a good point too, I'm not sure if he did or not. I am thinking if he did it'd be good time to bring that up too. Ie he took all this stuff and had vaccine on top of it.
He spent a good couple of minutes talking about ivermectin and the debunked 'grand conspiracy theory' that pharmaceutical companies don't want to promote ivermectin because it would undermine the vaccine EUA. I think he should've given more time to monoclonal antibody treatement beyond '**** that Trump got' because that's actually a therapeutic that has been shown to help. He should've also just bring up vaccines. AFAIK You must still have a doctor's order to get monoclonal antibody treatment. I can't find a way to purchase it out of pocket.
He stuck to a plan that he laid out beforehand. He is attributing his quick recovery to the plan he had laid out for him by doctors. He said he had ivermectin for use in human beings prescribed by a doctor and recommended by multiple doctors. He said he didn’t take horse de wormer. How much more clear can he be? How long do you think he should be doing nothing for if he was never that sick and already is testing negative?
He can be clearer in telling his viewer that they should listen to their doctor and not take the livestock version of the drug or self-medicate. He can follow CDC's guideline on covid isolations, which is 10 days after symptoms first appeared, and 24 hours with no fever, and other covid symptoms are improving. It has only been 8 days since his symptoms first appeared.
Ok, but he did explicitly call out the other treatments and made a causal link to his quick recovery. I don't think he made it seem like it was all about ivermectin, because he explicitly said otherwise. As to whether he could have done more nuanced messaging - sure. But he's not someone you should be going to for nuanced disease treatment in the first place. I mean, immediately after this part here, they start talking about an old man who keeps showing people pictures of his taint.
The part that irresponsibly link ivermectin to his recovery to me is at 4:10 when he says "... try to make anybody who take this stuff look crazy. But what's crazy is look at how good I got. I got good pretty quick b****". That's a good point about nuanced messaging. He's a person with great influence on his listeners and I think he should be extremely careful of what he says whether he like it or not. Though maybe that's not his personality or brand. The Tokyo Medical Association chairman recommendation is also not as strong as he makes it sound. The doctor said "I believe the difference is clear. Of course, one cannot conclude that ivermectin is effective on the basis of these figures, but when we have all these elements, we cannot say that ivermectin is absolutely not effective, at least not me," he says. "We can do other studies to confirm its efficacy, but we are in a crisis situation. With regards to the use of ivermectin, it is obviously necessary to obtain the informed consent of the patients, and I think we're in a situation where we can afford to give them this treatment," The Japanese government's official guideline for covid treatment says that ivermectin has not been shown to be effective in meta studies. https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/000815065.pdf (page 54, in Japanese).
