Australian Woman Denied Heart Transplant Because Of Her Vaccination Status

submitted by ROSS921 from magspress.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

It seems like you being disingenuous and willingly stupid.

Like are you paid to be here. You have to willingly ignore all the facts for several years to say some dumb ass shit like that.

Let me guess: ivermectin, a z pack, hydroqchlorquine, vitamin d, etc, all do nothing against COVID, right?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

This is supposed to be evidence of masks doing harm long before CoVID?

A paper from last month with harm being summarised as "discomfort was mentioned"?

It seems like you being disingenuous and willingly stupid.

When faced with people who base their views and opinions on verified science, most people go, "oh i see how people would have that view."

You go, "well that's willingly stupid".

There's a disconnect here. What's wrong with you?

Insufficient vitamin d affects the immune system. Supplementing will improve outcomes against any infection but only if you're insufficient to start with.

But vitamin D insufficiency is reasonably common.

I don't know what a z pack is.

Edit i googled z-pak. It's the antibiotic azithromycin. Antibiotics treat bacterial infections. They don't treat viral infections.

Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are not effective against CoVID.

[–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are not effective against CoVID

https://c19ivm.org/meta.html

Science says otherwise but let me guess, you believe in flying spaghetti monsters, not actual science

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Science says otherwise

Does it?

You should link to some real science then.

Like a scholarly paper that has been submitted to peer review and published. A webpage pushing ivermectin

Here is an example looking at Metformin, Ivermectin, and Fluvoxamine for Covid-19 treatment.

CONCLUSIONS
None of the three medications that were evaluated prevented the occurrence of hypoxemia, an emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death associated with Covid-19.

[–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

https://c19ivm.org/

Endless list of studies sorted by date on this page, which you would know if you actually cared to look at the website I gave you.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Yes they're sorted by date.

Your claim is "Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are not effective against CoVID" is not supported by science.

Which (if any) of those papers do t you think supports your claim?

At you can see from the paper my previous comment, ivermectin is not effective against CoVID.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The papers show effectiveness against covid

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Okay, lets look at the first paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0753332223001798

Volunteers were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 experimental groups and orally treated with IVM as either, a tablet, solution, or capsules at 0.4 mg/kg in a three-phase crossover design. Blood samples were taken as dried blood spots (DBS) between 2 and 48 h post-treatment and IVM was analyzed by HPLC with fluorescence detection. IVM Cmax value was higher (P < 0.05) after the administration of the oral solution compared to treatments with both solid preparations. The oral solution resulted in a significantly higher IVM systemic exposure (AUC: 1653 ng h/mL) compared to the tablet (1056 ng h/mL) and capsule (996 ng h/mL) formulations. The simulation of a 5-day repeated administration for each formulation did not show a significant systemic accumulation.

So Ivermectin was given to three groups 3 different ways and the amount of Ivermectin in the blood was measured for each group. No one had CoVID. The effect on covid was not measured. The only thing that was measured was the efficiency of getting Ivermectin into the blood.

That doesn't show effectiveness against covid does it?

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

You're so dishonest, not worth my time

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You said the papers show effectiveness against CoVID.

The first one doesn't, but you call me dishonest.

What the actual fuck, man?

Do you not see the irony here?

You were lying, so I'm being dishonest? You must be Christian. You've got the hang of externalizing blame.