Debased

Joe Doakes from Como park emails:

There is no proof that Ivermectin does anything for Covid. None at all. And when I say ‘none,’ I mean there is some, more than we’re prepared to admit, so we simply deny any proof exists.

That’s not proof, that’s just anecdotal gossipy rumor.

That’s not proof either. Everybody knows you can’t trust those dark-skinned savages to count correctly. It’s not as if they invented a new number or something.

Proof consists of a double-blind study performed by medical experts. Unless it’s the Pfizer vaccine being tested, then it would be unconscionable to deny half the patients the real medicine. In that case, give it to all and ignore the results.

This is SCIENCE. You must trust the SCIENCE. You’re not a SCIENCE denier, are you?

Joe Doakes

The biggest casualty of Covid – and of modern progressivism – is actual science.

10 thoughts on “Debased

  1. That second link doesn’t mention it, but the population of Uttar Pradesh is over 200 million. This is a significant test/result.

  2. Any treatment for covid would lead to less demand for the vaccine.
    But of course the virus would likely evolve its way around any treatment that decreased its ability to reproduce in a human host.

  3. we have no choice but to crack down on it

    And provide their teams of establishment spokesmen, MSM, and other trolls with the incentive to propagate that very message that “there’s no proof that Ivermectin works against Covid”. Doesn’t matter if it’s true as long as it casts doubt or just prevents people from knowing about 200 millions cases where it did.

    But of course the virus would likely evolve its way around any treatment that decreased its ability to reproduce in a human host.

    And if this is the case, how come the situation in Uttar Pradesh isn’t deteriorating like in Europe? But I’ll admit I don’t know how Ivermectin works.

  4. JD has a valid point about usage of off-label drugs. A number of them have been successful in treating illnesses: beta blockers for heart failure and migraine prevention. When I was in medical school in the stone age (1975) beta blockers had just appeared for hypertension and we were taught they were very, very bad for people with heart failure. That turned out to be true, Digitalis, the standby drug of the era, is no longer used. It can be toxic, in fact. It was never subjected to double blind studies because it started being used in the 19th century. If aspirin were invented today, it would not be over the counter and it might not be used for anti-inflammatory purposes because of its blood thinning properties. Is Ivermectin good for treating Covid? Possibly. I was initially enthusiastic about hydroxychloroquine because of early optimistic reports but it didn’t really pan out. A big part of real science is not to get too wrapped up in confirmation bias, for or against. Sadly, mainly alleged scientists do exactly that. The anti-Trump bias was evident in the pushback against hydroxychloroquine. Even vaccination drew scorn from people like Joe Biden since Trump had pushed hard for vaccine development. Now of course, if you don’t get vaccinated three, four, who knows how many times, you are in league with the Devil.

  5. golfdoc;
    I realize that this is anecdotal, but I know 3 people that have beat WuFlu with hydroxichloroquine. One of their wives, has Lupus and takes HCQ for it. She has been exposed to WuFlu seven times since the plandemic started and has yet to test positive. Could it be that the HCQ is protecting her from getting it?
    When I was deployed to SE Asia back in 1973, I, along with the six other guys from my squadron that deployed with me, we received HCQ as an anti malaria aid. To my knowledge, the military is still handing it out to personnel deployed in tropical areas.

  6. And if this is the case, how come the situation in Uttar Pradesh isn’t deteriorating like in Europe? But I’ll admit I don’t know how Ivermectin works.

    I don’t know. Why didn’t small pox evolve it’s way around its vaccine? I don’t know that, either.
    But I think that we have to be careful about not applying human terms to the virus. We talk about it evolving, but that is just a term that we find familiar and explains some things in terms that we understand. The goal of the virus is . . . nothing. It is not even alive. Each copy of the virus just reproduces, or not. In some sense if the virus “evolves around” a treatment or a vaccine, it fails, because successful evolution is the failure of the original organism to reproduce perfectly. What does a successful virus look like? It doesn’t want to do anything.

  7. I don’t know that, either.

    Yes you do! because a jab is NOT a vaccine. By definition, before they changed it, of course.

    HCQ and Ivermectin are treatments first and foremost. They do not guard against infection like vaccines, real ones, do. They just make symptoms go away if you take them after you fall ill or make symptoms mild if you take them proactively. These are treatments – NOT vaccines and were never meant to be administered as a deterrent.

    In the Uttar Pradesh example – I am sure if you actually count infected people, the number would be astronomical. But if you do not exhibit symptoms, who the fuck cares if you are infected and treatment is readily available? You are also not likely to even go test yourself. And if you do not test, it does not exist! Can you imagine if anyone CARED and TESTED for common cold every time someone got sniffles?

    Indeed, there is no more Science, just politics.

  8. jpa;
    Good points. Funny how suddenly, both Pfizer and Moderna have developed a pill to take, instead of the jab. Even funnier, two friends of mine that happen to be chemists, told me both versions have components of both HCQ and ivermectin. I’m trying to verify on my own by matching components.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.