# Ivermectin and poison control



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Uptick in Mississippi poison control calls from people who take livestock dewormer to treat COVID-19


Mississippi’s Poison Control is reporting an alarming uptick in calls from people who took a drug bought at a feed store meant to deworm livestock.




www.fox8live.com





NEW ORLEANS (WVUE) - Mississippi’s Poison Control is reporting an alarming uptick in calls from people who took a drug bought at a feed store meant to deworm livestock.

Some believe it will help with COVID-19, but veterinary experts warn if you buy it at a feed store, it could possibly leave you paralyzed.

“Everyday, everyday, people, phone calls, phone calls, people coming in,” Raina Boudreaux at Double M Feed, Garden & Pet Supply describes.

Boudreaux says it started a month ago.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Yep, if you don't dose properly with any medication, including OTC you can have problems.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

https://www.sunherald.com/news/coronavirus/article253630293.html



"Symptoms associated with ivermecticin toxicity include rash, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, neurological disorders, and severe hepatitis, which would require hospitalization."


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Thanks for the reminder, need to take my ivermectin today.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

BS. They are not getting poisoned by ivermectin and those are not the symptoms of ivermectin toxicity. it is almost impossible to overdose with ivermectin.

They are taking ivermectin that has other stuff in it. it is the other stuff that is causing the problem. I blame Fauci, the FDA, NIH, CDC, and WHO for fighting Ivermectin to the point many doctors are afraid to prescribe it.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

no really said:


> Thanks for the reminder, need to take my ivermectin today.


I'm going to take a double dose and see what dangerous side effects I have.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I don't know how much these people are taking, but this would have to be the work of darwin. I have been doused with it many times, had it spit in my face, have been covered with the pour on, and never a problem. I've accidentally overdosed animals, like maybe by a thousand percent, without problems. It is so incredibly safe that these people must be really bad at math, or they took something else at the same time. I got pretty sick one time because I was drenched in ivomec pour on, AND handled Python fly tags all day. I learned that you really need gloves when you are working with Python fly tags on a large scale.

My guess is that the calls are coming from some idiotic Karen, with someone who has the misfortune of being related to them, when Karen finds out they took ivomec.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

The article has a picture of Ivermectin for horses which has no active ingredients other than ivermectin and apple flavoring. The dosing is right on the injector. The entire tube is for a horse weighing 2500 lbs, but the syringe is marked and labeled in 250 lb increments and further subdivided within the 250 lbs. You simply lock the little nut at the dose you want and that's how much the syringe will push out. There is plenty of information on how much a person should take on the internet, so anyone who took the whole tube is an idiot.

This is just another government hit piece on Ivermectin because people are starting to realize how ineffective the vaccines actually are.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:


> https://www.sunherald.com/news/coronavirus/article253630293.html
> 
> 
> 
> "Symptoms associated with ivermecticin toxicity include rash, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, neurological disorders, and severe hepatitis, which would require hospitalization."


Here is your expert author.
_"Justin Mitchell is the retention and special projects editor for McClatchy’s Southeast region. He also reports on LGBTQ issues in the Deep South, particularly focusing on Mississippi."_


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Looks like the OP had an alert in her Trolling folder and posted before reading.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

The discovery of ivermectin in 1975 was awarded the 2015 Nobel Prize in Medicine given its global impact in reducing onchocerciasis (river blindness), lymphatic filiariasis, and scabies in endemic areas of central Africa, Latin America, India and Southeast Asia. It has since been included on the WHO’s “List of Essential Medicines with now *over 4 billion doses administered*.

Numerous studies report low rates of adverse events, with the majority mild, transient, and *largely attributed to the body’s inflammatory response to the death of parasites and include itching, rash, swollen lymph nodes, joint paints, fever and headache.* In a study which combined results from trials including over 50,000 patients, *serious events occurred in less than 1% and largely associated with administration in Loa Loa infected patients*.

Further, according to the pharmaceutical reference standard _Lexicomp_, the only medications contraindicated for use with ivermectin are the concurrent administration of anti-tuberculosis and cholera vaccines while the anticoagulant warfarin would require dose monitoring. Another special caution is that immunosuppressed or organ transplant patients who are on calcineurin inhibitors such as tacrolimus or cyclosporine or the immunosuppressant sirolimus should have close monitoring of drug levels when on ivermectin given that interactions exist which can affect these levels.

A longer list of drug interactions can be found on the database of www.drugs.com/ivermectin.html, with nearly all interactions leading to a possibility of either increased or decreased blood levels of ivermectin. *Given studies showing tolerance and lack of adverse effects in human subjects given even escalating, high doses of ivermectin, toxicity is unlikely although a reduced efficacy due to decreased levels may be a concern. Finally, ivermectin has been used safely in pregnant women, children, and infants.






FAQ on Ivermectin | FLCCC | Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance


The MATH+ Hospital Treatment Protocol for Covid-19 is a physiologic-based combination treatment regimen created by leaders in critical care medicine.




covid19criticalcare.com




*
I broke 1 long paragraph into the 4 above.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

MoonRiver said:


> The article has a picture of Ivermectin for horses which has no active ingredients other than ivermectin and apple flavoring. The dosing is right on the injector. The entire tube is for a horse weighing 2500 lbs, but the syringe is marked and labeled in 250 lb increments and further subdivided within the 250 lbs. You simply lock the little nut at the dose you want and that's how much the syringe will push out. There is plenty of information on how much a person should take on the internet, so anyone who took the whole tube is an idiot.


Gave a whole tube to a fifty pound goat once. She was especially lively and the lock wasn't locked. She lived. Had a dog eat a whole tube once. Not a white footed collie, so it lived, and didn't get worms. The horse paste is designed for horses. There is a 1250 pound dose of ivomec somewhere in that tube. If you want to dose something accurately with that tube, you need to shoot the whole tube, or put it in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly each time you measure out a small increment. There is significant chance of drug settling in that paste solution, and storage temperature plays a huge role. As does storage time.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I was walking down a chute with a jug that had around 20 cow doses in it of the pour on. Heifer kicked the jug against the chute. Pour on went down britches leg and most of it ended up squishing around in my rubber boot. No worms!


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

barnbilder said:


> Gave a whole tube to a fifty pound goat once. She was especially lively and the lock wasn't locked. She lived. Had a dog eat a whole tube once. Not a white footed collie, so it lived, and didn't get worms. The horse paste is designed for horses. There is a 1250 pound dose of ivomec somewhere in that tube. If you want to dose something accurately with that tube, you need to shoot the whole tube, or put it in a mixing bowl and mix thoroughly each time you measure out a small increment. There is significant chance of drug settling in that paste solution, and storage temperature plays a huge role. As does storage time.


Actually, it's 2500. The thing is the FLCCC increased the frequency to twice a week and is probably going to double the dose as well, so if someone gets too little in one dose and too much in another, it probably averages out OK. In Brazil with the gamma variant, they were dosing even higher.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

no really said:


> Thanks for the reminder, need to take my ivermectin today.


Don't do that injectable. No side effects but it burns like heck!!!


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Maybe if the CDC had not been so obligated to big pharma, and worked with doctors to properly use ivermectin we would not see people self dosing.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines Meta- analysis of the studies done on Iver- and CoV-- if you're sick enough to be hospitalized, then without Iver- you have a death rate of ~8%; given Iver- it falls to 2%...That's not all that impressive, (you gotta treat 100 pts to save 6) but given the low side effect risk, it may be worth it.

The studies on Iver- as prophyllaxis are more problematic....For healthcare workers having a very high risk of exposure to infected pts, taking the double dose (not a single dose) reduces the risk of infection over the next two weeks from 60% to 8%-- certainly worth taking it if you're in that risk group. Role of ivermectin in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in India: A matched case-control study

.OTOH- What's your risk of contacting someone with CoV?...It's kinda like the argument about motorcycle helmets-- you only need one if you fall off. The real question is what's your risk of falling off?

Ivermectin Uses, Side Effects & Warnings - Drugs.com Scroll down to Side Effects

I don't know what to do in a case of Iver- OD, but here's a helpful report in case your chickens ever go into convulsions Clinical signs of ivermectin toxicity and the efficacy of antigabaergic convulsants as antidotes for ivermectin poisoning in epileptic chickens - PubMed Good old NIH- always looking out for us.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

painterswife said:


> Uptick in Mississippi poison control calls from people who take livestock dewormer to treat COVID-19
> 
> 
> Mississippi’s Poison Control is reporting an alarming uptick in calls from people who took a drug bought at a feed store meant to deworm livestock.
> ...


If that really IS true, then perhaps ivermectin should be made available in a human dosing form the way it is in other countries🙄🙄🙄🙄
There is no reason besides greed to keep it out of the public's hands.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

TripleD said:


> Don't do that injectable. No side effects but it burns like heck!!!


Spread with a knife over your biscuit and flush it down with a little Irish Coffee.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

GTX63 said:


> Looks like the OP had an alert in her Trolling folder and posted before reading.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

painterswife said:


> Boudreaux says it started a month ago.


Possibly some one has been selling adulterated knock-offs in that area. Or flat out counterfeits. All it takes is a market and some people who want the cheapest price.

If veterinary ivermectin paralyzed people, it would also paralyze farm animals. What nonsense.

Or maybe no one has had any problems and the government, or the pharmacies, or the wack-a-doodles have launched a campaign against ivermection with false complaints. It's phone calls, not people rushed to the emergency room and tested for ivermectin poisoning.

If ivermecion caused problems, it would be all over the country... no, all over the world, not just in one state..


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

RJ2019 said:


> If that really IS true, then perhaps ivermectin should be made available in a human dosing form the way it is in other countries🙄🙄🙄🙄
> There is no reason besides greed to keep it out of the public's hands.


They have pills but i have not found them in usa


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Forcast said:


> They have pills but i have not found them in usa


I'll post a link later. You have to use telemedicine and pay for the consult, but they will prescribe Ivermectin.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Ivermectin is available for humans.
What I find interesting is its dosage for parasites, looks like one dose.
Where are the self dosers of animal ivermectin getting their dosage info from?!? 
It looks like their can be a build up in your system depending on your age, seems unsafe to me.








Ivermectin: Side effects, dosage, uses, and more


Ivermectin oral tablet is a prescription medication used to treat parasitic infections. These include infections of the intestinal tract, skin, and eyes. Ivermectin oral tablet is available as a generic drug and as the brand-name drug Stromectol. Learn about side effects, warnings, dosage, and more.




www.medicalnewstoday.com


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:

Boudreaux says it started a month ago.


In Louisiana, they tell Boudreaux jokes - jokojokes.com/boudreaux-jokes.html


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doozie said:


> Ivermectin is available for humans.
> What I find interesting is its dosage for parasites, looks like one dose.
> Where are the self dosers of animal ivermectin getting their dosage info from?!?
> It looks like their can be a build up in your system depending on your age, seems unsafe to me.
> ...


The whole idea of using it prophylactically IS to build it up in the blood.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

MoonRiver said:


> The whole idea of using it prophylactically IS to build it up in the blood.


So how long do these self dosing people plan on taking it? 
Days, weeks, months? Based on what exactly?
Dosage from a Covid expert?


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> painterswife said:
> 
> Boudreaux says it started a month ago.
> 
> ...


And dont forget Thibodeaux.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> And dont forget Thibodeaux.


Or Malveaux


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doozie said:


> So how long do these self dosing people plan on taking it?
> Days, weeks, months? Based on what exactly?
> Dosage from a Covid expert?


Yes, the FLCCC doctors are Covid experts as well as Ivermectin experts.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

RJ2019 said:


> There is no reason besides greed to keep it out of the public's hands.


Read my previous post.


oregon woodsmok said:


> If veterinary ivermectin paralyzed people, it would also paralyze farm animals.


It does, just not very often.

Doozie is asking the right questions. Other posters since my lat post haven't caught on--So, I'll summarize--

Iver- is not so clearly beneficial that everyone should be using it....In hospitalized pts, it's helping only 6 of 100 pts, 92 of whom were going to get better anyways without it.

Using it for prophyllaxis is like wearing a flack jacket ay work-- If you're a Chicago cop, it's probably worth it. If you're a dirt farmer in IA, it probably isn't.

For prophyllaxis, you gotta take it on day 1 and on day 3 and then repeat every two weeks-- for how long? The ret of your life?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> Read my previous post.
> 
> 
> It does, just not very often.
> ...


Check out the FLCCC website. Ivermectin is effective as a prophylactic and in the early stages of Covid-19. Studies have purposely been done using Ivermectin with critically ill Covid patients which is not the recommended use of Ivermectin, simply to have negative clinical trials. It is during the viral stage it is most effective.

Because of Delta (and Gamma), the FLCC has changed the recommendation for prophylactic use to twice a week and is expecting to soon announce an increase in dosage as well.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> Check out the FLCCC website. Ivermectin is effective as a prophylactic and in the early stages of Covid-19. Studies have purposely been done ....


You didn't read the reference I gave on the meta-analysis of Iver- use--- Yes. It works. But not enough to warrant its use in the low risk, general population.....Your tin hat will save your life *IF* you get hit by a meteorite. Do you have yours on now? Why not?

For easy arithmetic-- let's say there's 3 x 10^8 people in the US and every day 10^4 get infected and they are spreading it for 3 days before they realize they're sick and stay home--so on any day, there's 3x 10^4 guys spreading the bug. Your chances of contacting one of them is 3 x 10^4 / 3 x 10^8 = 1 infected guy in every 10,000 you meet. You probably come in close contact with less than 20 people a day. ..Do you think it's necessary to take pills on 2 days of every 14 *forever* to avoid that risk? (and it's only 50% perfect)

In the very sick, of 100 pts, 92 will get better without Iver-...If you give Iver to ALL 100 pts, an additional 6 will get better....If you're one of the lucky 6, then you think it "works." If you're one of the other 94, then you don't think so....As I said above, it's worth taking in the very sick because it's cheap and easy and has a very good safety profile


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> You didn't read the reference I gave on the meta-analysis of Iver- use--- Yes. It works. But not enough to warrant its use in the low risk, general population.....Your tin hat will save your life *IF* you get hit by a meteorite. Do you have yours on now? Why not?
> 
> For easy arithmetic-- let's say there's 3 x 10^8 people in the US and every day 10^4 get infected and they are spreading it for 3 days before they realize they're sick and stay home--so on any day, there's 3x 10^4 guys spreading the bug. Your chances of contacting one of them is 3 x 10^4 / 3 x 10^8 = 1 infected guy in every 10,000 you meet. You probably come in close contact with less than 20 people a day. ..Do you think it's necessary to take pills on 2 days of every 14 *forever* to avoid that risk? (and it's only 50% perfect)
> 
> In the very sick, of 100 pts, 92 will get better without Iver-...If you give Iver to ALL 100 pts, an additional 6 will get better....If you're one of the lucky 6, then you think it "works." If you're one of the other 94, then you don't think so....As I said above, it's worth taking in the very sick because it's cheap and easy and has a very good safety profile


I'm over 70, overweight, and have 2 stents and an artificial aortic valve. Delta and Gamma have got my attention, plus I am leaving on a long trip in 2 weeks and am doing everything in my power to avoid getting Covid. Others can make their own choice but mine is to take Ivermectin twice a week until the government comes to its senses and supports a treatment plan for Covid-19 not based on multi-thousand dollar drugs.

I am very familiar with the meta-analysis as I have listened to several interviews with Beth Lawrie, one of the authors, as well as discussions led by Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. John Campbell.


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

You can actually get the proper form of this with a prescription. I have not done this but a relative did and it helped him get over COVID. But you need to find a doctor that will prescribe. Do a search - you will find more info.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

I believe you are hoping ivermectin is a silver bullet. There is no documentation it is. It has far less documented effectiveness than the vaccines or certain treatments they do have. Even steroids have proven more effective for treatment than ivermectin. 

The trick now is boosting your own immune system with the vaccines as much as possible and early diagnosis and proven treatments. 

They are focusing on treatments but it is proven that the vaccine is the best first step for the majority. Minimize its effects on your body is the first step.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I believe you are hoping ivermectin is a silver bullet. There is no documentation it is. It has far less documented effectiveness than the vaccines or certain treatments they do have. Even steroids have proven more effective for treatment than ivermectin.
> 
> The trick now is boosting your own immune system with the vaccines as much as possible and early diagnosis and proven treatments.
> 
> They are focusing on treatments but it is proven that the vaccine is the best first step for the majority. Minimize its effects on your body is the first step.


Pretty much everything you said about Ivermectin is wrong. The FLCCC has included vitamin d, vitamin c, B complex, zinc, etc. since last year. They were one of the first to recommend steroids. The rest of the medical community is finally starting to catch up with what the FlCCC has known and recommended for over a year.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I took the J&J vaccine. I did the Ivermectin injectable just to see if any thing changed. Just a small knot under the skin. It's not like skydiving without a chute!!!


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> I'm over 70, overweight, and have 2 stents and an artificial aortic valve. ....


Well, nobody's perfect.

That's the problem with using stats--They NEVER apply to the individual. One guy can't get 60% infected or 2% dead.

Your risk profile puts you in a bad spot IF you get infected, so prophyllaxis is a good call if you can't avoid exposure. It still isn't perfect. Complete isolation is your best bet, but that's usually impractical.

As far as hoping the medical community would concentrate on finding better treatment, we may as well wish that we were all rich, beautiful and could fly too, as long as we're wishing. Viruses have been known for 90 yrs now and still no really effective treatments despite a lot of research into the matter. Should we be counting on a miracle right now?


BTW- I just checked out the FLCCC site-- from the looks of their ist page, I'd judge them to be a pseudoscientific organization (The graphs they present imply that using Iver- in India miraculously lowered the case & death rates. However, as we've discussed here before, CoV, like all other epidemics, shows a wave pattern inherent in the system,. Other countries that didn't use Iver- showed the same wave pattern.)


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> Well, nobody's perfect.
> 
> That's the problem with using stats--They NEVER apply to the individual. One guy can't get 60% infected or 2% dead.
> 
> ...


Did you know Ivermectin also works against influenza? And many other viruses.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> Did you know Ivermectin also works against influenza? And many other viruses.


Yes-- statistically significant results, but clinically unimpressive. 
cf- Tamiflu (because I know the number by heart for Tamiflu)-- flu runs an average of 10 days (240 hrs) of symptoms. Take Tamiflu and that is reduced to 232 hrs (8 hr improved)-- statistically significant result , ie- high probability that the 8 hr dif is due to the drug....Is that 8 hrs out of 10 days worth $100 for pills?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> Yes-- statistically significant results, but clinically unimpressive.
> cf- Tamiflu (because I know the number by heart for Tamiflu)-- flu runs an average of 10 days (240 hrs) of symptoms. Take Tamiflu and that is reduced to 232 hrs (8 hr improved)-- statistically significant result , ie- high probability that the 8 hr dif is due to the drug....Is that 8 hrs out of 10 days worth $100 for pills?


I meant prophylactically.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Pretty much everything you said about Ivermectin is wrong. The FLCCC has included vitamin d, vitamin c, B complex, zinc, etc. since last year. They were one of the first to recommend steroids. The rest of the medical community is finally starting to catch up with what the FlCCC has known and recommended for over a year.


I don't hold the FLCCC in the same high regard that you do.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I don't hold the FLCCC in the same high regard that you do.


Maybe if you read the FLCCC doctors' curriculum vitae and listened to a couple of weekly reports, you could make a more educated decision.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Maybe if you read the FLCCC doctors' curriculum vitae and listened to a couple of weekly reports, you could make a more educated decision.


 I know you trust them. I don't. Their campaign of misinformation for profit is not for me. I did my homework on them early.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

GTX63 said:


> Here is your expert author.
> _"Justin Mitchell is the retention and special projects editor for McClatchy’s Southeast region. He also reports on LGBTQ issues in the Deep South, particularly focusing on Mississippi."_


I'm thinking that Justin's greatest LGBTQ issue in Mississippi is the lack of LGBTQ folks.

I think I saw an LGBTQ person in Walmart several months ago. 

(Full disclosure: I was born and raised in Mississippi.)


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I know you trust them. I don't. Their campaign of misinformation for profit is not for me. I did my homework on them early.


Wrong again. They are all practicing doctors and are losing money by creating the FlCCC. They were started by a few doctors who got together to develop treatment protocols for Covid-19 as the government wasn't doing it. What the FLCCC produces are protocols based on best practices from doctors treating Covid-19 all over the world.

I think the only thing the FLCCC sells is some t-shirts to help support the organization.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Wrong again. They are all practicing doctors and are losing money by creating the FlCCC. They were started by a few doctors who got together to develop treatment protocols for Covid-19 as the government wasn't doing it. What the FLCCC produces are protocols based on best practices from doctors treating Covid-19 all over the world.
> 
> I think the only thing the FLCCC sells is some t-shirts to help support the organization.


I am not wrong. Just because you are a practicing doctor does not mean you are not pulling a scam and presenting misinformation.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:


> I know you trust them. I don't. Their campaign of misinformation for profit is not for me. I did my homework on them early.


Did your homework include the amazing article written by the lbgtq activst?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I am not wrong. Just because you are a practicing doctor does not mean you are not pulling a scam and presenting misinformation.


If you look long enough, you can find negative information about anyone and anything.

Listen to the most current FLCCC Weekly Update. Listen to what a NY doc and an Ohio doc have to say, and what their patients say. Or this one from 2 weeks ago of a Florida doctor who runs 3 urgent care centers.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> If you look long enough, you can find negative information about anyone and anything.
> 
> Listen to the most current FLCCC Weekly Update. Listen to what a NY doc and an Ohio doc have to say, and what their patients say. Or this one from 2 weeks ago of a Florida doctor who runs 3 urgent care centers.


 They really have you working hard for them.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

painterswife said:


> I am not wrong. Just because you are a practicing doctor does not mean you are not pulling a scam and presenting misinformation.


You just described Faucci perfectly, even though he is not a real doctor, just a flunkie that works for the government.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

barnbilder said:


> You just described Faucci perfectly, even though he is not a real doctor, just a flunkie that works for the government.


I agree. I also don't use Faucci as a reliable source.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

But a guy who writes about the best cafe to eat at is.
https://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article253253653.html#storylink=authorpage


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

painterswife said:


> I am not wrong. Just because you are a practicing doctor does not mean you are not pulling a scam and presenting misinformation.


You only recognize big government sources on this like everything else. If the CDC or WHO says it, to you it is the only truth. Why do you not understand that the CDC is part of the same government telling us that everything is rosy with the Afghan pullout and the WHO has proven over and over to be a shill for China?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

GTX63 said:


> But a guy who writes about the best cafe to eat at is.
> https://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article253253653.html#storylink=authorpage
> View attachment 99355


I always look at the information presented and its source. The writer in that article is not the source. It is the same with the FLCCC. I look at the info presented and they provide incomplete and skewed info that they use to misinform.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

painterswife said:


> I always look at the information presented and its source.


A track record of biased links with incomplete/poor data and facts leads one to believe otherwise. This one keeps the streak alive.
But you do you.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> They really have you working hard for them.


They are saving thousands of lives. How can anyone be opposed to them?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> They are saving thousands of lives. How can anyone be opposed to them?


They say they are and you believe them. I guess that is enough for you. You got the vaccine though so I don't think you trust them as much as you profess.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> They say they are and you believe them. I guess that is enough for you. You got the vaccine though so I don't think you trust them as much as you profess.


How well are the vaccines working against delta and gamma and ...? Ivermectin is an effective antiviral, so taking it prophylactically or at the first sign of infection means ivermectin can quickly kill some of the virus and it also inhibits replication. That's something the vaccines don't seem to be able to do very well with the newer variants. So I'm protected against infection with Ivermectin and against serious disease with the vaccines.


The vaccines only work against the spike protein while Ivermectin has many different ways it attacks the virus.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> How well are the vaccines working against delta and gamma and ...? Ivermectin is an effective antiviral, so taking it prophylactically or at the first sign of infection means ivermectin can quickly kill some of the virus and it also inhibits replication. That's something the vaccines don't seem to be able to do very well with the newer variants. So I'm protected against infection with Ivermectin and against serious disease with the vaccines.
> 
> 
> The vaccines only work against the spike protein while Ivermectin has many different ways it attacks the virus.


I know you believe that but the testing does not prove it.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I know you believe that but the testing does not prove it.


For every study you can show me where ivermectin didn't work, I can show you at least 3 where it did. For whatever unknown reason, the US government and WHO have purposely sabotaged several Ivermectin studies by either dosing too little or too late. Ivermectin is most effective when taken early.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> For every study you can show me where ivermectin didn't work, I can show you at least 3 where it did. For whatever unknown reason, the US government and WHO have purposely sabotaged several Ivermectin studies by either dosing too little or too late. Ivermectin is most effective when taken early.


Go ahead show those studies. I have yet to see any studies you have provided that could not be shot down.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

I think I put more trust into FLCCC than into government officials, who should not be in the business of my health to begin with.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

No one can dispute the fact that the US government and the government's spokepersons (the national network news companies and the large internet companies) are censoring any expression of disagreement with the government's position on Covid-19. (Well, maybe painterswife can.  )

If that sounds to you more like a communist government than a republic/democracy government, well sometimes the truth is inconvenient.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> For every study you can show me where ivermectin didn't work, I can show you at least 3 where it did.





painterswife said:


> Go ahead show those studies. I have yet to see any studies you have provided that could not be shot down.


I posted the meta-analysis data earlier-- in the pts sick enough to be hospitalized, it only helps 6 out of every 100 treated. 

As prophylaxis, it helps about half the people *who are exposed *to the virus-- but with 30M infected out of 300M-- that means only 10% are exposed, so that 50% success rate is really only 0.5%-- hardly worth taking pills FOREVER.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> I posted the meta-analysis data earlier-- in the pts sick enough to be hospitalized, it only helps 6 out of every 100 treated.
> 
> As prophylaxis, it helps about half the people *who are exposed *to the virus-- but with 30M infected out of 300M-- that means only 10% are exposed, so that 50% success rate is really only 0.5%-- hardly worth taking pills FOREVER.


What meta-analysis are you looking at?

*All-cause mortality*​​_*Meta-analysis of 15 trials, assessing 2438 participants, found that ivermectin reduced the risk of death by an average of 62% (95% CI 27%–81%) compared with no ivermectin treatment [average RR (aRR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.73; I2 = 49%]; risk of death 2.3% versus 7.8% among hospitalized patients in this analysis, respectively (SoF Table 2 and Figure 3). *Much of the heterogeneity was explained by the exclusion of one trial44 in a sensitivity analysis (average RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17–0.58, n = 2196, I2 = 22%), but because this trial was at low risk of bias, it was retained in the main analysis. The source of heterogeneity may be due to the use of active comparators in the trial design. The results were also robust to sensitivity analyses excluding 2 other studies with an active treatment comparator (average RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.74, n = 1809, I2 = 8%). The results were also not sensitive to the exclusion of studies that were potentially at higher risk of bias (average RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10–0.80, 12 studies, n = 2095, I2 = 61%), but in subgroup analysis, it was unclear as to whether a single dose would be sufficient. The effect on reducing deaths was consistent across mild to moderate and severe disease subgroups. Subgrouping data according to inpatient and outpatient trials was not informative because few outpatient studies reported this serious outcome. The conclusions of the primary outcome were also robust to a series of alternative post hoc analyses that explored the impact of numerous trials that reported no deaths in either arm. Extreme sensitivity analyses using a treatment arm continuity correction of between 0.01 and 0.5 did not change the certainty of the evidence judgments (Table 3)._​

American Journal of Therapeutics


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Yep--That's the study-- done on healthcare workers with essentially a 100% exposure risk. Those given Iver were 62 -8% = 54% better off. (I rounded it to 50% in the last post.)...But the general public is only at a 1% risk of contacting the virus , making it even less efficient as a prophyllactic measure....We won't bother arguing about why anyone now needs to avoid being infected, given the 0.1% death rate.

Same with the use of Iver- in pts-- You gotta treat 100 ts to save 6 who would have died. ...Without Iver- 92 would survive anyway. The Iver only "saved" 6....Hardly a miracle cure.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Unless you are one of the 6!


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

doc- said:


> The Iver only "saved" 6....Hardly a miracle cure.


Doc, in all fairness, @MoonRiver did not say it was a miracle. He simply suggests it might help, and after 634 posts, it seems like it might.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

I understand ,HD- but those who support the use of Iver- are arguing like the govt is withholding air a& water from pats..It's a lousy 6% improvement IF you catch CoV AND get sick enough for hospitalization...and as prophyllaxis, you gotta treat 1000 civilians to save one infection...and because naive people don't understand this, they're out there trying to figure out how much horse paste to swallow, screwing it up and getting neurological damage....all to prevent a disease that is now no more dangerous than the flu.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

barnbilder said:


> Had a dog eat a whole tube once. Not a white footed collie, so it lived, and didn't get worms.


Any dog that has collie ancestry in it generally can't take it. Australian shepherd, Australian Cattle dog aka heeler, kelpies, English shepherd, Old English Sheepdog, Border Collie, Shetland Sheepdog, and dogs with herding heritage that is from a collie somewhere etc...... all because some famous sheep dog with a genetic allergy to Ivomec was used repeatedly as a stud and a lot of his pups were bred from as well spreading the genetic allergy.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

MoonRiver said:


> I'm over 70, overweight, and have 2 stents and an artificial aortic valve. Delta and Gamma have got my attention, plus I am leaving on a long trip in 2 weeks and am doing everything in my power to avoid getting Covid. Others can make their own choice but mine is to take Ivermectin twice a week until the government comes to its senses and supports a treatment plan for Covid-19 not based on multi-thousand dollar drugs.
> 
> I am very familiar with the meta-analysis as I have listened to several interviews with Beth Lawrie, one of the authors, as well as discussions led by Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. John Campbell.


Have you discussed this plan with your doctor for feedback? What did the doc say? I'm curious.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

NRA_guy said:


> I'm thinking that Justin's greatest LGBTQ issue in Mississippi is the lack of LGBTQ folks.
> 
> I think I saw an LGBTQ person in Walmart several months ago.
> 
> (Full disclosure: I was born and raised in Mississippi.)


I'm not LGBTQ but I've known that if you live in the cities, every 1 person out of 4 people you meet on a normal day is a LGBTQ person that is more or less out to their families/friends. In the rural areas, that percentage drops a lot due to the fear of being beat up or ostracized by friends/family. It'll be 1 out of every 6 to 8 people you interact in a day out in the public areas. Rural folks are more than likely to be in the closet more than city folks.

Sorry for throwing this thread off track.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

TedH71 said:


> Have you discussed this plan with your doctor for feedback? What did the doc say? I'm curious.


Judging from your other post, I don't think you are interested but misinformed.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

I'm just going to leave this here.... it's from one of my textbooks. This is what is considered a lethal dose of ivermectin to about 50% of the population (LD50).
Ivermectin dose in humans is typically .2mg/kg. Although I have heard that it can be .4mg/kg....


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

*RJ2019*If my math is right, that means someone who weighs about 150 lbs (68 kg) would have to take 3.4 g or 3400 mg to overdose on Ivermectin. Most Ivermectin pills are .3 mg, so 3400/.3 = 11,333 pills.

Someone check my math because that can't possibly be right.

ETA: As *StL.Ed* pointed out, a pill is 3 mg, not .3 mg, so using the information in RJ2019's textbook, it would take 1,133 pills to overdose, not 11,333 pills. Even if an overdose was just 1/10 of what is in the textbook, a person would still have to take over 100 pills.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

If your math is correct it explains why there is a shortage.


----------



## StL.Ed (Mar 6, 2011)

MoonRiver said:


> If my math is right, that means someone who weighs about 150 lbs (68 kg) would have to take 3.4 g or 3400 mg to overdose on Ivermectin. Most Ivermectin pills are .3 mg, so 3400/.3 = 11,333 pills.
> 
> Someone check my math because that can't possibly be right.


I think one error is that most Ivermectin pills are 3mg rather than .3mg. The standard dose would then be 1 pill per 15kg (33lb) of body weight or portion thereof; so 5 pills for a 150 lb person. That would make LD50 closer to 1,133 pills.
On the other hand, problems can set in long before the LD50 dose. If I remember correctly, up to 10 times the standard dose has been tested with few complications. I've been trying to find information on LD10 dose and lower, but haven't yet found the data.


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

You both bring up good points. My objective here was to illustrate that ivermectin would be rather difficult to overdose on.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

mreynolds said:


> And dont forget Thibodeaux.


When I read this, I thought of the arraingment scene in "The Big Easy"


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

Ohio Capital Journal: Judge orders Cinci hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with Ivermectin, despite CDC warnings.








Judge orders Cinci hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with Ivermectin, despite CDC warnings - Ohio Capital Journal


A Butler County judge ruled in favor of a woman last week who sought to force a hospital to administer Ivermectin — an animal dewormer that federal regulators have warned against using in COVID-19 patients — to her husband after several weeks in the ICU with the disease. Butler County Common...




ohiocapitaljournal.com


----------



## StL.Ed (Mar 6, 2011)

Probably following precedent from prior cases.


https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/ivermectin-wins-in-court-again-for-human-rights/article_98d26958-a13a-11eb-a698-37c06f632875.html





> In each of the three cases, the New York State Supreme Court Justices sided with the patient, and in each of the three cases, the patients made near-miraculous recoveries after the Ivermectin was given. In each case, these patients were in the Intensive Care Unit on ventilators, unable to breathe on their own, and universally, after the drug was given, they rapidly improved and were able to breathe on their own.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Another doctor explaining the “vaccine,” our immune system, and Ivermectin. Includes a study.


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Shouldn't that judge be fined for practicing medicine without a license?


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

No. The judge ruled that the patients had the right to receive a treatment that they requested.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> Shouldn't that judge be fined for practicing medicine without a license?


The hospital should be fined for NOT practicing medicine.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Ivermectin doesn’t work against COVID, top Alabama doctors say


"The drug doesn't work against COVID, full stop," said UAB infectious disease expert Dr. Michael Saag. "And you might read on the internet that it works. I'm sorry, that's wrong."




www.al.com





"The drug-maker said in its statement that it had found “no scientific basis” that the drug was beneficial to COVID patients, and “a concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies” examining the potential use of ivermectin on COVID patients. "


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

‘We have to let it go’ - Doctors say Ivermectin will not help treat COVID-19


Local doctors are working to dispel a few myths about certain medicines, some folks think can help them treat COVID-19.




www.wafb.com





"Dr. O’Neal says, while Ivermectin does have some antiviral properties, the latest studies show it doesn’t work against the coronavirus.

“Through the Spring we got better data. That says it doesn’t. So, now we have to let it go. We’ve tried lots of things during this pandemic, some have worked, some have not. Ivermectin doesn’t work,” said Dr. O’Neal.

Dr. Aldo Russo over at Ochsner Baton Rouge agrees.

“It appeared to have some sort of effect on the virus in-vitro, meaning in the lab. Now when the research continued in humans with COVID-19, the medication was not beneficial at all,” said Dr. Aldo Russo, Regional Medical Director for Ochsner Baton Rouge."


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Please watch the video. Thank you.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Please watch the video. Thank you.


I did, I watched the entire video. Then I researched the doctor and his claims. He has told lies about covid in other circumstances as well.

I chose not to post that information because I don't believe it will be more than a fart in the wind to some.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> Ivermectin doesn’t work against COVID, top Alabama doctors say
> 
> 
> "The drug doesn't work against COVID, full stop," said UAB infectious disease expert Dr. Michael Saag. "And you might read on the internet that it works. I'm sorry, that's wrong."
> ...


Did you know that the drugmaker has a new antiviral that the government is helping to fund? Ivermectin is off-patent. They make nothing, so they bad-mouthed it and are selling the government a new, more expensive drug under patent.

Do you always believe what government and big pharma says?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Did you know that the drugmaker has a new antiviral that the government is helping to fund? Ivermectin is off-patent. They make nothing, so they bad-mouthed it and are selling the government a new, more expensive drug under patent.
> 
> Do you always believe what government and big pharma says?


I am aware of that. I am also aware that it won't be available until at least next year and that Merck has already signed licensing agreements with generic drug manufacturers to expand access if it turns out to do what they hope. 

Merk still makes lots of money on ivermectrim.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I am aware of that. I am also aware that it won't be available until at least next year and that Merck has already signed licensing agreements with generic drug manufacturers to expand access if it turns out to do what they hope.
> 
> Merk still makes lots of money on ivermectrim.


You're helping me make my point.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> You're helping me make my point.


No. I pointed out that they already make lots of money with Ivermectrin when you posted a falsehood and said they don't.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> ‘We have to let it go’ - Doctors say Ivermectin will not help treat COVID-19
> 
> 
> Local doctors are working to dispel a few myths about certain medicines, some folks think can help them treat COVID-19.
> ...


I hate those kinds of doctors. Their hospitals are overflowing, people are dying, yet they have time to blame a drug they haven't even tried. They could get people out of the hospital and save lives if they would try the FLCCC I-Mask+ and Math+ protocols.

The likely reason that Ivermectin didn't work is that the delta variant came along and requires Ivermectin to be taken twice a week instead of once a week. That doesn't mean Ivermectin doesn't work, but that the dose was too low. If doctors would step up and prescribe Ivermectin, they could advise their patients of any change in dosage.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> No. I pointed out that they already make lots of money with Ivermectrin when you posted a falsehood and said they don't.


Alright, how much do they make from Ivermectin as compared to their total sales?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Alright, how much do they make from Ivermectin as compared to their total sales?


I don't have those numbers. Do you?

I do know they donate enough to treat 300 million people per year. Over 4 billion treatments since 1987. That would lead me to believe they make enough to at least fund those donations. Definitely that is not nothing. You can admit you were wrong now.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

doc- said:


> Shouldn't that judge be fined for practicing medicine without a license?


I usually don't get into these arguments on this but the judge ruled the hospital had to give the doctor ordered Prescription that they were holding back. 

Against that patients doctors orders. 

Otherwise, y'all carry on.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

painterswife said:


> I did, I watched the entire video. Then I researched the doctor and his claims. He has told lies about covid in other circumstances as well.
> 
> I chose not to post that information because I don't believe it will be more than a fart in the wind to some.


Don't take it if your so against it. It IS that simple.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> I did, I watched the entire video. Then I researched the doctor and his claims. He has told lies about covid in other circumstances as well.
> 
> I chose not to post that information because I don't believe it will be more than a fart in the wind to some.


I didn't find any bold claims regarding covid but I have seen him make bold claims about the vaccines possibly causing autoimmune diseases or cancer. I suspect that's not the case but I also suspect some people aren't going to be entirely comfortable with it until long term test results, like we have with other vaccinations.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

painterswife said:


> I don't have those numbers. Do you?
> 
> I do know they donate enough to treat 300 million people per year. Over 4 billion treatments since 1987. That would lead me to believe they make enough to at least fund those donations. Definitely that is not nothing. You can admit you were wrong now.


KENILWORTH, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Merck (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today announced it has entered into a procurement agreement with the United States government for molnupiravir (MK-4482). Molnupiravir is currently being evaluated in a Phase 3 clinical trial, the MOVe-OUT study, for the treatment of non-hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and at least one risk factor associated with poor disease outcomes. Merck is developing molnupiravir in collaboration with Ridgeback Biotherapeutics.​​“Merck is pleased to collaborate with the U.S. government on this new agreement that will provide Americans with COVID-19 access to molnupiravir – an investigational oral therapy being studied for outpatient use early in the course of disease – if it is authorized or approved,” said Rob Davis, president, Merck. “In addition to this agreement with the U.S. government, we are actively engaged in numerous efforts to make molnupiravir available globally to fulfill Merck’s commitment to widespread access.”​​Through the agreement, if molnupiravir receives Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) or approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Merck will receive approximately $1.2 billion to supply approximately 1.7 million courses of molnupiravir to the United States government. Merck has been investing at risk to support development and scale-up production of molnupiravir and *expects to have more than 10 million courses of therapy available by the end of 2021*.​







Merck Announces Supply Agreement with U.S. Government for Molnupiravir, an Investigational Oral Antiviral Candidate for Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19


Merck Announces Supply Agreement with U.S. Government for Molnupiravir



www.businesswire.com



​10 million courses works out to over $7 billion in just 1 year. That's why they claimed Ivermectin doesn't work.​​​


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Conjecture and bias against corporations. Amusing.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Apparently, anyone who has what is commonly termed "anecdotal evidence" is a liar. 

Apparently, only government approved treatments are safe or reliable or worthy.

Apparently, factcheck.org is 100% infallible and has no bias and no connections to the government, political parties, and corporations.

Apparently, only government officials can't be called liars when they have told WHOPPERS ever since the Covid fear campaign started.

Have a nice day.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Ivermectin has NO EFFECTS in fighting viral diseases but drug is safe


A top parasite expert from McGill University in Montreal, Canada, told the Daily Mail that the anti-parasite drug ivermectin has no ability to fight COVID-19. It has recently been touted as a cure.




www.dailymail.co.uk





Geary explained, though, that the concentration of the drug used in the study were so high that it could not be used for treatment in a human, and would likely cause an overdose.

'In that study they showed that in cell cultures, ivermectin could inhibit [Covid] replication, but the concentrations required for that effect were in a range called the micromolar range - very high concentrations relative to what you would find in the plasma of a treated person or an animal, which would be 20 to 50 times lower.'

'At high concentrations in cell culture, many compounds can have all kinds of effects but when you look at what we would call pharmacological levels - what we actually see and treated patients - it is far higher than [what would be used in humans]


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Ten years from now, we will know who was right.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Here is a news story that explains what happens to real humans while they wait for the government and medical establishment to figure things out.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2021/08/30/911-first-responders-dementia/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm


----------



## RJ2019 (Aug 27, 2019)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Here is a news story that explains what happens to real humans while they wait for the government and medical establishment to figure things out.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2021/08/30/911-first-responders-dementia/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm


Wow. I never had a clue....


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> No. The judge ruled that the patients had the right to receive a treatment that they requested.


Old joke from the '70s when the practice of medicine was becoming more & more just another example of consumerism with rising lawsuits and doctors becoming "healthcare providers."--

The day will come when a pt comes into the office demanding a castration operation. The doctor will start to protest, but then remember the new rules--"The customer is always right." and makes arrangements to admit the guy for the procedure.

...The operation is performed and the next morning the guy wakes up and meets his new roommate. He asks the new guy "What are you here for?"...The roommate says "A circumcision operation."...

The pt gets a blank, far way look on his face and whispers more to himself than to the room mate "Circumcision?...Circumcision?....That's the word....THAT'S THE WORD!!"


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

MoonRiver said:


> I hate those kinds of doctors. Their hospitals are overflowing, people are dying, yet they have time to blame a drug they haven't even tried. They could get people out of the hospital and save lives if they would try the FLCCC I-Mask+ and Math+ protocols.
> 
> The likely reason that Ivermectin didn't work is that the delta variant came along and requires Ivermectin to be taken twice a week instead of once a week. That doesn't mean Ivermectin doesn't work, but that the dose was too low. If doctors would step up and prescribe Ivermectin, they could advise their patients of any change in dosage.


a) The hospitals are NOT over-flowing. I posted the site on daily utilization earlier.
b) Ivermectin "works" but at no better than half the rate of the vax for prophylaxis and only a paltry 6% improvement in treatment of the sick. ...


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Here is a news story that explains what happens to real humans while they wait for the government and medical establishment to figure things out.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2021/08/30/911-first-responders-dementia/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm


Presenile dementia occurs at a rate of 8.3 cases per 100,000 population per year---Was this first responder one fo the 8.3 or an "extra" case????

Several different diseases have been associated with exposure to the WTC disaster-- most of which suddenly rose in number once Congress voted funds for the victims....Breast cancer was added to the list of redeemable conditions under the law even tho there has been no evidence that its incidence is higher in victims of exposure there, for instance. The govt reports on this subject are more political than medical. Cf- Congresses financial response to the Agent Orange/VN exposure problem-- the cohort of Service Members stationed in Europe during that period (ie- not exposed) actually had more health problems subsequently than those exposed in country in Nam-- but the optics of The Vet situation made it politically expedient to vote them ample compensation. (Look it up in JAMA from '81 or '82)


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> a) The hospitals are NOT over-flowing. I posted the site on daily utilization earlier.
> b) Ivermectin "works" but at no better than half the rate of the vax for prophylaxis and only a paltry 6% improvement in treatment of the sick. ...


That's not what the doctors in the field who are using Ivermectin are saying.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

doc- said:


> a) The hospitals are NOT over-flowing. I posted the site on daily utilization earlier.
> b) Ivermectin "works" but at no better than half the rate of the vax for prophylaxis and only a paltry 6% improvement in treatment of the sick. ...


*Louisiana is approaching a 'major failure' of its healthcare system as hospitals get dangerously close to capacity*
*Hurricane Ida Slams Louisiana Hospitals Full Of COVID-19 Patients*
*Louisiana hospitals full with COVID-19 patients hope for best as Ida hits*

*The hospitals in Louisiana which take indigent patients and patients though the ER—pretty much all COVID patients—are slammed.* The specialty hospitals have lots of staff and lots of beds and don't have much in the way of COVID patients, if there are any at all. They also do little to help the others. Thus *Louisiana has a very small number of general beds that are available for COVID patients.* It is a real crisis, but it is as much a crisis in health care resources as in COVID. While the Children's hospitals do have ERs, there are not many of them in Louisiana and there are very few total ICU beds. As another list member observed, you can have all the pediatric ICU beds full and still only have a tiny number of kids who are very sick.
*





"What Do Full Hospitals Really Tell Us About COVID?"


Prof. Ed Richards, who specializes in (among other things) public health law at LSU law school, wrote this on a




reason.com




*


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

The hospitals aren’t full here, either. Perhaps it is true somewhere.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

A hospitals rate of occupancy can be whatever they say it is. If a 200 bed hospital sets aside 50 rooms for overflow, quarantine, poker night etc, and 100 are currently in use, then they are at 67% not 50%. There is no national register they must follow before putting out the "No Vacancy" sign.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Here's a good story that has been in the news lately. The 68 year old woman has been in the hospital since April and has been declining in health while on a ventilator. Her daughter wanted the hospital to try ivermectin but they refused. She had to get a lawyer and a judge ordered the hospital to give her the ivermectin. After one dose she has shown her first improvement since being hospitalized. Her ventilator was reduced from 75% to 65% which is her first improvement. Her doctor (not one of the hospital doctors BTW ) said she will get 1 dose every day until she recovers. Some will argue it is just a coincidence she got better and perhaps it is but what in the world is wrong with letting dying people try something different?

(104) COVID-19 patient shows 'improvement' after receiving ivermectin following legal battle with hospital - YouTube


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

A coincidence that happens over and over again. When it won't hurt and might help, why not?


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

Forcast said:


> Ohio Capital Journal: Judge orders Cinci hospital to treat COVID-19 patient with Ivermectin, despite CDC warnings.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My cousin is alive today because of hydroxychloroquine

The CDC can suck eggs


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

painterswife said:


> Ivermectin doesn’t work against COVID, top Alabama doctors say
> 
> 
> "The drug doesn't work against COVID, full stop," said UAB infectious disease expert Dr. Michael Saag. "And you might read on the internet that it works. I'm sorry, that's wrong."
> ...



My body, my choice, right?

1984 seems to have become a training manual


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

painterswife said:


> ‘We have to let it go’ - Doctors say Ivermectin will not help treat COVID-19
> 
> 
> Local doctors are working to dispel a few myths about certain medicines, some folks think can help them treat COVID-19.
> ...



But 4 masks do.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Riverdale said:


> My body, my choice, right?
> 
> 1984 seems to have become a training manual


I have said I have no problem with anyone taking ivermectin under a doctor's care. Maybe you should keep up with your reading before you blast people.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> I have said I have no problem with anyone taking ivermectin under a doctor's care. Maybe you should keep up with your reading before you blast people.


While I understand the point you're trying to make, I don't see where any of us has the right to control what someone else does with thier own bodies, even if we don't agree with their decisions.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> While I understand the point you're trying to make, I don't see where any of us has the right to control what someone else does with thier own bodies, even if we don't agree with their decisions.


 So do you believe that no drugs should be prescription only and we should just take what we want, whenever we want?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

painterswife said:


> So do you believe that no drugs should be prescription only and we should just take what we want, whenever we want?


Your ignorance is astounding. But to your question..
We can take whatever we want, whenever we want, all without a prescription. If you can buy crack, you can buy Ivermectin. Remember, doctors "practice" medicine, and pretty much just guess at what a particular drug will do for the "symptoms" your presenting. Many of us could do better because we know our own bodies better than the doctors do.ymmv


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> So do you believe that no drugs should be prescription only and we should just take what we want, whenever we want?


I didn't say that drugs should not require a prescription, although not all do and I'm guessing you missed the part where I said there could be consequences for their actions.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> I didn't say that drugs should not require a prescription, although not all do and I'm guessing you missed the part where I said there could be consequences for their actions.


Why should drugs require a subscription if you should be able to put anything you want in your body? That is the point isn't it? According to you " I don't see where any of us has the right to control what someone else does with their own bodies, even if we don't agree with their decisions. " So what is the point of prescription drugs if no one should be able to control them?


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Painterswife, are you enjoying the (erroneous) thought that comments in this forum are always aimed at you? Sometimes, you seem to take every comment or post as a personal attack. I really don’t think that they are. Sometimes, people do address you, as I did here. Otherwise, not so much.

I hope you have a good day.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Painterswife, are you enjoying the (erroneous) thought that comments in this forum are always aimed at you? Sometimes, you seem to take every comment or post as a personal attack. I really don’t think that they are. Sometimes, people do address you, as I did here. Otherwise, not so much.
> 
> I hope you have a good day.


Don't worry about me. You often respond to posts not addressed to you. So do I. Not sure why it matters to you so much but then again you were the one who questioned why I respond.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Because I am a nice person. There is a difference in responding and responding as if the posts were personal. I can tell the difference.  I just wondered. That’s all.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Well, I believe I am a nice person as well. Aint life grand.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Actually, yes, it is!!!


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

If a dying person chooses to take ivermectin, and their doctor agrees and orders ivermectin, why do you feel the need to berate their choice? For that matter, if a person is dying, IMO, they should be allowed to persue any course of medical action they desire. Including refusing treatment or asking for unsafe levels of medications.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

painterswife said:


> Why should drugs require a subscription if you should be able to put anything you want in your body? That is the point isn't it? According to you " I don't see where any of us has the right to control what someone else does with their own bodies, even if we don't agree with their decisions. " So what is the point of prescription drugs if no one should be able to control them?


The point of prescriptions can be likened to the same reason that curious little children should not be allowed to put everything they want into their mouthes. The prescription is meant to protect the innocent, the helpless or dependent, the lame of mind and those who are unknowingly ignorant and without the critical thinking skills needed to think in terms of safety for their own well being. 

I don't have any objections to grown, independent adults willfully and knowingly poisoning themselves with parasiticides or any other poison of their choice if they know what the consequences of their actions might be. I don't think anyone should try to stop them from doing whatever harm they want to their own bodies. 

If they end up killing themselves with it that's okay too. It will solve all off their life problems at once and it will save somebody else from the trouble and expense of looking after somebody who has deliberately poisoned their own self. It's better to get self-poisoners like that out of the gene pool sooner than later.

.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> Why should drugs require a subscription if you should be able to put anything you want in your body? That is the point isn't it? According to you " I don't see where any of us has the right to control what someone else does with their own bodies, even if we don't agree with their decisions. " So what is the point of prescription drugs if no one should be able to control them?


The problem is that this is something that people are not getting it from their doctors but buy over the counter at their local farm supply stores. They aren't using the product as it's intended and it's grossly unfair if every livstock owner in the country has to go to their doctor to get a prescription to use ivermectin as it is intended. 

I stand firmly on my statement. We can't control how people use vet supplies that don't require a prescription and if people want to take that risk, it's their choice, just as it's their choice to buy prescription meds from other countries.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Ivermectin is available without a prescription in several countries. I doubt if the residents of those countries are any better educated as to dose and side effects than Americans are. It should be made OTC and problem solved.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> The problem is that this is something that people are not getting it from their doctors but buy over the counter at their local farm supply stores. They aren't using the product as it's intended and it's grossly unfair if every livstock owner in the country has to go to their doctor to get a prescription to use ivermectin as it is intended.
> 
> I stand firmly on my statement. We can't control how people use vet supplies that don't require a prescription and if people want to take that risk, it's their choice, just as it's their choice to buy prescription meds from other countries.


Your response was directly to a post I made about " Under a doctor's care". That means prescription ivermectin. Not vet supplies.

So do you still believe that people should be able to take any prescription drug they want?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> a person should be allowed to persue any course of medical action they desire.


There, I fixed it for you.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I just learned yesterday that my favorite food grade fly spray now requires a pesticide licence.


painterswife said:


> Your response was directly to a post I made about " Under a doctor's care". That means prescription ivermectin. Not vet supplies.
> 
> So do you still believe that people should be able to take any prescription drug they want?


They do all the time. Some buy on the street or from countries with different requirements and some simply doctor shop. Prescriptions keep honest people honest but they don't do much for those that seem to think they know better. 

Any thoughts on how to stop it? People are dying like flies from opiod abuse and they sure aren't getting them by prescription.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> I just learned yesterday that my favorite food grade fly spray now requires a pesticide licence.
> 
> 
> They do all the time. Some buy on the street or from countries with different requirements and some simply doctor shop. Prescriptions keep honest people honest but they don't do much for those that seem to think they know better.
> ...


You did not answer the question I asked but then again I did not expect you to.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Really? Aren't you the one with the shovel lip that refuses to respond to direct questions and gets butthurt when confronted? Always good for a smile.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> You did not answer the question I asked but then again I did not expect you to.


I believe it did but you aren't getting the answer you want. I also noticed you failed to respond to my comments, but nobody expected you to either. We simply can't control what people do and they obviously suffer the consequences of their actions. 

I don't believe that as long as ivermectin is sold in farm supply stores we have much chance of controlling what people do with that either.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

wr said:


> I believe it did but you aren't getting the answer you want. I also noticed you failed to respond to my comments, but nobody expected you to either. We simply can't control what people do and they obviously suffer the consequences of their actions.
> 
> I don't believe that as long as ivermectin is sold in farm supply stores we have much chance of controlling what people do with that either.


No problem. I learned well over the years and took lessons from you on not answering direct questions. I just thought it was amusing because you point it out so often that you don't get a direct answer and now I can show how you so often do the same thing.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Peas again.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Carrots


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

painterswife said:


> No problem. I learned well over the years and took lessons from you on not answering direct questions. I just thought it was amusing because you point it out so often that you don't get a direct answer and now I can show how you so often do the same thing.


I guess this is one of those times when I've answered and clarified but it's not the answer you want.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

SSDD


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

BearfootFarm 2020.
I always try to credit the original author.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

GTX63 said:


> BearfootFarm 2020.
> I always try to credit the original author.


I miss him.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

barnbilder said:


> There, I fixed it for you.


I disagree with anyone being able to take any kind of drug they want. That's how we ended up with antibiotic resistant bacteria.

The hospital not-treating my mother in law for kidney disease wanted her to sign up for chemo treatments to treat her bladder cancer. They got pretty nasty and required all her children to attend a "in her best interest" medical intervention. They tried to refuse to release her to go home since she refused cancer treatments. Ma just wanted to go home and get away from all the doctors and their tests. In situations like hers, where time is short, the patient should have the final say about their treatment.


----------



## jr23 (Sep 3, 2013)

no re the co is studying it and a top doctor in japan is in favorally said:


> Yep, if you don't dose properly with any medication, including OTC you can have problems.


absolutely the co is studying and might do clinical trials. a top japan doctor is convinced.
but some animal drugs are the same some are not and doses as well as other ingredients in animal drugs are not for humans.. trouble with cv 19 sems and msm have made it a political disease and biden put 100% faith in an 80 yr old paper shoffling doctor who changes his mind as often as katy perry song . i closing in to 70 and older i get i am now firmly in belief there should be retirement of government employees especially in critical positions like fda, dea ,infectious disease and congress


----------

