BKR. Vaccine Hesitant

[Silverstarqueen]

We had an excellent review of studies on IM posted the other day, by a Dr. A. Hill. After he completed his review, he admitted that one of the studies had falsified data (discovered later), and his first review is therefore toast, and he is working on another one without the falsified data. So if he can't even vouch for IM, I'll wait till someone comes up with something more solid.

Not to worry, there are other studies in the works on IM, so they better be good. If another fudged study turns up, people are going to throw in the towel on IM altogether for study. I await with baited breath, any IM studies, that are large-ish and random controlled. This is not too much to ask. Good science takes time.

[Kelownamade]

We had an excellent review of studies on IM posted the other day, by a Dr. A. Hill. After he completed his review, he admitted that one of the studies had falsified data (discovered later), and his first review is therefore toast, and he is working on another one without the falsified data. So if he can't even vouch for IM, I'll wait till someone comes up with something more solid.

Not to worry, there are other studies in the works on IM, so they better be good. If another fudged study turns up, people are going to throw in the towel on IM altogether for study. I await with baited breath, any IM studies, that are large-ish and random controlled. This is not too much to ask. Good science takes time.

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug which frontline doctors have reported highly effective success and yet you champion an experimental vaccine where they did very poor science and basically everything they claimed was inaccurate? 96% effective oh wait 70% effective..... 40% effective.... oh and it's killed young children and 200 000 people reporting negative reactions and deaths but let's inject 12 year old who are not at risk. Illogical and in alignment with a society making nothing but poor decisions. Funny that you refuse to listen to the top analyst. I'm wondering who you are loyal to.....

[alanjh595]

I think it's harder for people to move on when they have been vaccine-injured.
The mind works to protect itself - by asserting over and over (even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary) that the vaccine was NECESSARY, SAFE, and EFFECTIVE.
Admitting that one has lined up and voluntary submitted themselves to an experimental drug for no good reason other than fear and propaganda, and then realizing that they are left with long-lasting side effects and no real protection must be difficult.

Just consider the "long-lasting side effects" of contracting the virus, being hospitalized, and on a ventilator in ICU, for an indeterminate time, face the real possibility of death. Oh yeah, while on a ventilator, the patient will be so heavily sedated that they have NO comprehension of what is happening in the space they are occupying........Like the family members and loved ones that not even allowed to view the near dead body, because it is in isolation.

What a great social statement they are portraying for their future generation/s.

What is the grave stone going to say? Died for his/her belief that they were immune? What a twit? Got the last word?

[Silverstarqueen]

So if you listen to this lady in the video (I am not likely to listen to the whole thing today), she said, once the Elgazzar study was removed from the data, the confidence interval (that is how confident could one be that IM is effective in reducing death), could be anywhere between 5% and 73%. Clearly we need more studies if it's that wide. IM is not ready for prime time, but good on those who are still running studies.
I'll still wait for Dr. Hill's meta-analysis just to get a second (or third, or fourth) opinion.

[Silverstarqueen]

We had an excellent review of studies on IM posted the other day, by a Dr. A. Hill. After he completed his review, he admitted that one of the studies had falsified data (discovered later), and his first review is therefore toast, and he is working on another one without the falsified data. So if he can't even vouch for IM, I'll wait till someone comes up with something more solid.

Not to worry, there are other studies in the works on IM, so they better be good. If another fudged study turns up, people are going to throw in the towel on IM altogether for study. I await with baited breath, any IM studies, that are large-ish and random controlled. This is not too much to ask. Good science takes time.

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug which frontline doctors have reported highly effective success and yet you champion an experimental vaccine where they did very poor science and basically everything they claimed was inaccurate? 96% effective oh wait 70% effective..... 40% effective.... oh and it's killed young children and 200 000 people reporting negative reactions and deaths but let's inject 12 year old who are not at risk. Illogical and in alignment with a society making nothing but poor decisions. Funny that you refuse to listen to the top analyst. I'm wondering who you are loyal to.....

Yes, I would demand better studies for a drug which has does NOT have 40 years of success in treating covid.
At least the same standards of success as the vaccines have shown. There are people who have shown side effects to IM too, so all that still has to be investigated.
And, I don't know how I feel about giving the vaccine to 12 year olds, I haven't mulled the data on that, but I do think there are children at risk who right now cannot get the vaccine until further safety trials are completed. If I were a parent, I'd be very anxious to get those results as soon as possible.
The Ramirez story was not suppressed, I found it quite easily online. Whatever issues he had with Gofundme, are not clear. The boy is gone, so what are they raising money for? I don't know. If he was still alive, but disabled for life he could probably get some people to donate to him, even if he did not make it a battle over pfizer .

[harblz]

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug

Simply existing and being safe does not mean that it is an effective treatment for covid.

doctors have reported highly effective success

Anecdotes and folklore are not sufficient to show that a drug is effective.

[Kelownamade]

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug which frontline doctors have reported highly effective success and yet you champion an experimental vaccine where they did very poor science and basically everything they claimed was inaccurate? 96% effective oh wait 70% effective..... 40% effective.... oh and it's killed young children and 200 000 people reporting negative reactions and deaths but let's inject 12 year old who are not at risk. Illogical and in alignment with a society making nothing but poor decisions. Funny that you refuse to listen to the top analyst. I'm wondering who you are loyal to.....

Yes, I would demand better studies for a drug which has does NOT have 40 years of success in treating covid.
At least the same standards of success as the vaccines have shown. There are people who have shown side effects to IM too, so all that still has to be investigated.
And, I don't know how I feel about giving the vaccine to 12 year olds, I haven't mulled the data on that, but I do think there are children at risk who right now cannot get the vaccine until further safety trials are completed. If I were a parent, I'd be very anxious to get those results as soon as possible.
The Ramirez story was not suppressed, I found it quite easily online. Whatever issues he had with Gofundme, are not clear. The boy is gone, so what are they raising money for? I don't know. If he was still alive, but disabled for life he could probably get some people to donate to him, even if he did not make it a battle over pfizer .

here's relevant data.
Frontline doctors are having success with ivermectin and the other products recommended in the protocol.
since the vaccines were administered cases and deaths have gone vertical.

There is no more data needed.

We already know the vaccine manufacturers are willing to lie for profit.

Time will tell. You are entitled to your opinion. I just cannot ignore the facts as well as the tyranny being used to push a dangerous product.

[Silverstarqueen]

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug

Simply existing and being safe does not mean that it is an effective treatment for covid.

doctors have reported highly effective success

Anecdotes and folklore are not sufficient to show that a drug is effective.

Well, IM was safe-ish at the dose approved for treatment of parasites.
It's NOT approved at higher doses, which are what seem to be called for in treating covid. Again lady in video says, some of the trials used lower doses than others. If it takes higher doses to prevent or treat IM then there has to be some studies on what happens at higher doses. This was the problem with people using the horse wormer, the stuff is designed for a 1000-1200 pound animal, and someone is trying to figure out how much to take, how often. They probably don't know the amount the body absorbs is different depending on what else is in their stomach at the time. What dose for a 110 pound woman as opposed to a 220 pound guy? The potential for a safety issue is definitely there.
At any rate, they still haven't identified in studies what is the correct doseage (was that for prevention or treatment?), so how much do people really want to take? Should they just guess?

All the questions and concerns about the vaccines, are they being applied to IM? Does it prevent transmission? would that be a game changer if people knew, because it seems to be a big deal with the vaccines to some. Since overweight people are at higher risk (so some say) of a serious case of covid, do they need a higher dose of IM, or not? What about people who are very slim? because with animals, you aren't supposed to use it on underweight animals, it can be quite dangerous for them.
So yes, it needs more study, way more study. Why is it countries which used IM more heavily, like Peru, had such a terrible death rate? I mean really, why, was there something going on we just don't know about?
Another concern is , what's the effect of using IM over time, does it lose effectiveness (one of the complaints with the vaccine). Because IM has shown less and less effect for some parasites when used over time. Also if used for covid, what if it turns out to be only mildly effective for covid, but it reduces it's effectiveness from overuse for killing parasites. This could be the only good medication for parasites for many countries, but what if that benefit is lost?

[nanita]

We had an excellent review of studies on IM posted the other day, by a Dr. A. Hill. After he completed his review, he admitted that one of the studies had falsified data (discovered later), and his first review is therefore toast, and he is working on another one without the falsified data. So if he can't even vouch for IM, I'll wait till someone comes up with something more solid.

Not to worry, there are other studies in the works on IM, so they better be good. If another fudged study turns up, people are going to throw in the towel on IM altogether for study. I await with baited breath, any IM studies, that are large-ish and random controlled. This is not too much to ask. Good science takes time.

I am speechless.

[Silverstarqueen]

wow you are quite something. Enlarged hearts are not common in young boys. You refuse to consider the expert doctors reporting it is saving their patients lives. I am done with you. It amazes me how immature and stubborn some people are. It's sad really. " I read papers bought and paid for by the vaccine manufacturers and they said that cheap drug doesn't work" Why did Tes Laureate say that the studies showed ivermectin was highly effective? You need to do some soul searching as you appear to be hypnotized or something. Maybe it's the heavy metal toxicity you injected? Have you tried to do a detox? Why don't you listen to an expert analyst of studies to see how incorrect your opinion is. If you manage to break your spell, I would be very proud of you. The sooner you accept the truth, the better. Last thing you want to do is continue taking boosters until you get an enlarged heart and we claim it was just your prior condition and had nothing to do with the experimental deadly vaccine you injected.

https://odysee.com/@BretWeinstein:f/TessLawrie:0

1 in 500.
That's the rate of inherited enlarged heart. Yes, it is a pre-existing condition, not all that rare.
The person can have no special symptoms, it can cause sudden cardiac arrest in young people.
Or, it can be there for most of their lives, and not discovered until later in life.
Maybe you can explain how the vaccine would cause a heart to enlarge so suddenly in just 5 days.
There are other possible causes, but still they take longer than 5 days to enlarge a heart.
So you are calling me immature and stubborn, you are the one resorting to the namecalling.

[Kelownamade]

wow you are quite something. Enlarged hearts are not common in young boys. You refuse to consider the expert doctors reporting it is saving their patients lives. I am done with you. It amazes me how immature and stubborn some people are. It's sad really. " I read papers bought and paid for by the vaccine manufacturers and they said that cheap drug doesn't work" Why did Tes Laureate say that the studies showed ivermectin was highly effective? You need to do some soul searching as you appear to be hypnotized or something. Maybe it's the heavy metal toxicity you injected? Have you tried to do a detox? Why don't you listen to an expert analyst of studies to see how incorrect your opinion is. If you manage to break your spell, I would be very proud of you. The sooner you accept the truth, the better. Last thing you want to do is continue taking boosters until you get an enlarged heart and we claim it was just your prior condition and had nothing to do with the experimental deadly vaccine you injected.

https://odysee.com/@BretWeinstein:f/TessLawrie:0

1 in 500.
That's the rate of inherited enlarged heart. Yes, it is a pre-existing condition, not all that rare.
The person can have no special symptoms, it can cause sudden cardiac arrest in young people.
Or, it can be there for most of their lives, and not discovered until later in life.
Maybe you can explain how the vaccine would cause a heart to enlarge so suddenly in just 5 days.
There are other possible causes, but still they take longer than 5 days to enlarge a heart.
So you are calling me immature and stubborn, you are the one resorting to the namecalling.

If heart enlargement is not rare, then even more reason to not mandate it. The vaccine has spike proteins which circulate ending up in the organs. Those spike proteins cause clotting. There are many unanswered questions which is why the studies on brand new technology should be done over 5 years to ensure confidence in society. We are both speculating and that's why this debate is not fair to society. We should have faith in the industry that they have done everything to ensure we aren't creating a bigger problem then we have now. It's seeming like that is the case. There should be no censorship of doctors, nurses, scientists, virologists etc. This alone is very upsetting. We both know the drug industry has major corruption and it's especially bad at the CEO level and investors. Let's agree to disagree and let things play out. You and I cannot influence anything and currently we are both using sources and those sources are not fact based. We have cases where science was fraudulent in order to push the goals not the facts.

[Kelownamade]

So you demand large studies for a 40 year old safe drug

Simply existing and being safe does not mean that it is an effective treatment for covid.

doctors have reported highly effective success

Anecdotes and folklore are not sufficient to show that a drug is effective.

Do you honestly think doctors at the top of their field don't know how to see the difference between effective and non effective drugs with such an aggressive and deadly illness? They are not fighting to lose their licenses and kill patients. They clearly have seen an amazing drug doing a great job and reported this. There is no reason to ban it if it's safe. Whether it's effective or not should not stop a doctor from prescribing it. That is basically saying that doctors are not trustworthy enough to make decisions on which drugs to use. That is their job. There is motive to ban and destroy it's reputation as if there is an effective drug available they cannot offer an experimental vaccine.

[liisgo]

Getting a vaccine does not prevent anyone from otherwise making healthy choices about lifestyle diet, etc. All those choices are part of healthy living. Some people don't make all perfect choices, every day, but most of the time they do. They can still get the vaccine. I don't see why there's the perception that only people who make no effort for their health are the ones getting the vaccine. And there are health conditions which we can't do a whole lot about, given a basic effort to exercise or eat healthy, and stay away from sick people. So the vaccine works pretty well for those people too, even if not 100%, if it helps some 80 year old who is a breast cancer survivor, live more years, then why not eh? instead of being mowed down prematurely from a virus infection that was preventable. Maybe they will still need a week in hospital, but the vaccine could get them out quicker, or avoid ICU. Since healthy people can also get a serious case of covid without a vaccine, the vaccine can also help them shorten the duration or prevent a hospital stay.
Even if all a person was headed for was a few weeks at home recovering, why not get the vaccine and cut it down to a few days, and less chance of long hauler syndrome too?
So for those of you who prefer taking the hard road, fine, you don't need a vaccine, but then surely you wouldn't need an ICU or hospital bed either would you? Why would anyone prefer a Russian roulette choice of possible ICU, rather than take a vaccine with rare chance of serious side effects?

I am not attacking your post here, but. I've made bold a few of your own lines here.
Your first line is exactly the failing of where we are heading in north america. We have completely turned away from teaching, supporting, providing media attention, etc. to help our whole society focus on a healthy lifestyle. Every single report states we are in endangering ourselves because of our lack of sternness towards self responsibility and the power of having a healthier society. Nothing is being said or done to acknowledge the dilemma we are creating by ignoring health.
I have not heard anyone ever say that those most vulnerable should not take the vaccine. They need too. But the failing is we are not doing anyone a favor by focusing everything on these vaccines. We need a more healthier focused society, period.
It has been proven and stated many times that most people getting covid are people with pre existing conditions, are weak or are vulnerable because of a jeopardized immunity. Not all, that would be foolish. But the reports clearly illustrate that your likely hood of heading to the hospital for this covid is 103 times higher if your un healthy. Again not all.
Being mowed down early with this infection then if health is now proven to be the leading cause of this exact condition then why is the same amount or more campaigning not helping the people?
And shortened duration for your hospital stay. If 88% of people needing hospital care are the ones with in the health risk group. We need to focus on them not demanding the 12% immediately get the vax.
Again, our society, our ways of an un healthy, un controlled, un supported approach, far too many being un healthy is going to continually put stress on our system and allow people to suffer.
And with in those attached reports it is stated more than once that our country is on the list of vulnerable countries because of the way we are treating our health expectations and our complete lack of acknowledging it.
I'll perfer to acknowledge that we have a problem and need to deal with it and its not just looking at a shot to do it.
And your last line, what is that? Why is it more important to some to focus on the 12% of people filling up our hospitals verses the other 88%? How are we going to help the next gen. the children from growing up into a healthy society verses ignoring the obvious and just focusing on giving people a shot as the new means of fighting every single flu that comes along? Seems alot of people are enjoying shaming some while not tolerating it in return.
This has become more of a personal battle between groups as some are doing nothing but supporting their own reasoning for their health situation and vulnerability to all disease.
We have a very un healthy society. We are open to so many medical conditions because we completely ignore pushing for a healthy society.
So, again. Im vax'd. I strongly believe if its your only plan you have for yourself then take it. If your old, take it. Un healthy, take it. If others chose not, then maybe respect their choice to fight it. Until we all acknowledge are lack of focus we continue to get sick. It was proven from the beginning of this that the best defense is being personally healthy.
No need to shame me here, I already acknowledged that many are vulnerable outside of their own control.
Most of us are getting tired of listening to people that really do not represent their claim that they are doing what needs to be done only by taking a shot.
We know that our covid situation is far more drastic than it needs to be, so why not get serious and all move toward a more healthy society instead of just promoting a shot in the arm?
Ignorance with in our society is going to be the biggest problem.

[LovemyBolt]

Canada Food Guide. ParticipAction. Just two examples of government sponsored initiatives. Eat right and exercise. We all know that mantra. We all say meh..mañana...too busy. Too easy just to get take-out. We know it's loaded with salt and sugar and preservatives. But it's so good. And fast and easy. Maybe we'll make a resolution for next year. But for now...

All very laudable sentiments from you. But reality just isn't. So for this nightmare, if it just takes a shot to minimize ones chances of ending up in hospital...sign us up. We can do that.

We all look for the easy button. The silver bullet. Alas.

[harblz]

Whether it's effective or not should not stop a doctor from prescribing it.

That's an interesting take.

That is basically saying that doctors are not trustworthy enough to make decisions on which drugs to use. That is their job.

I agree. It is absolutely their job to know what the effective treatments and drugs are, and to choose what they feel is appropriate. While you may feel differently, if my life was on the line, then I wouldn't want my doctor to be choosing my treatments based on what they read on facebook.