What is going on with the story on ivermectin?

[Captante]

Prove to me that professional liars can lie and be believed

Propaganda in Nazi Germany (Wiki)

Joseph Goebbels (Britannica.com)

German propagandist

Just sayin.

 

[Moonbeam]

Propaganda in Nazi Germany (Wiki)

Joseph Goebbels (Britannica.com)

German propagandist

Just sayin.

Yeah, my point too.

 

[dank69]

Prove to me that professional liars can lie and be believed. The largest so called test of the effectiveness of Ivermectin was a fabrication that lasted 7 months before being exposed:

Huge study supporting ivermectin as Covid treatment withdrawn over ethical concerns

The preprint endorsing ivermectin as a coronavirus therapy has been widely cited, but independent researchers find glaring discrepancies in the data

www.theguardian.com

"
Meyerowitz-Katz told the Guardian that “this is one of the biggest ivermectin studies out there”, and it appeared to him the data was “just totally faked”. This was concerning because two meta-analyses of ivermectin for treating Covid-19 had included the Elgazzar study in the results. A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis that combines the results of multiple scientific studies to determine what the overall scientific literature has found about a treatment or intervention.
“Because the Elgazzar study is so large, and so massively positive – showing a 90% reduction in mortality – it hugely skews the evidence in favour of ivermectin,” Meyerowitz-Katz said.

You are telling me it is easy to detect:

Lawrence said what started out as a simple university assignment had led to a comprehensive investigation into an apparent scientific fraud at a time when “there is a whole ivermectin hype … dominated by a mix of right-wing figures, anti-vaxxers and outright conspiracists”.
“Although science trends towards self-correction, something is clearly broken in a system that can allow a study as full of problems as the Elgazzar paper to run unchallenged for seven months,” he said.
“Thousands of highly educated scientists, doctors, pharmacists, and at least four major medicines regulators missed a fraud so apparent that it might as well have come with a flashing neon sign. That this all happened amid an ongoing global health crisis of epic proportions is all the more terrifying.”

My Dear dank, what you have insisted on throughout this thread is an egotistical arrogance that your finely tuned bullshit meter has all along known that the Ivermectin thingi was a fraud and a joke and that any who fell for it were fools. That makes you the fool. I was also fooled but instead of denying it to the point of absurdity, as you have, I was reminded again just how herd mentality, your own personal herd mentality, can blind you to the truth.

Yes or no, should you stopped beating people to death with your arrogance?

You still have not directly answered my questions. Why are you so determined to avoid them? Despite your refusal to converse honestly with me (and with yourself) I will once again address exactly what I think you are saying here, as usual.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the gist of what you have posted here is that since many people can be fooled by propaganda it is therefore impossible for people to be able to recognize it quickly and easily. Therefore it follows that any early negative reactions must be mostly the result of internal biases.

Before I waste time refuting that garbage just for you to ignore me once again with your cognitive dissonance obfuscation, please tell me, if you can fucking manage it, if I understand your position accurately and if I don't, please explain it succinctly. There's an old saying that if you can't explain it to a 5 year old then you don't understand it yourself. So explain it to me like I am five.

 

[Iron Woode]

Prove to me that professional liars can lie and be believed. The largest so called test of the effectiveness of Ivermectin was a fabrication that lasted 7 months before being exposed:

Huge study supporting ivermectin as Covid treatment withdrawn over ethical concerns

The preprint endorsing ivermectin as a coronavirus therapy has been widely cited, but independent researchers find glaring discrepancies in the data

www.theguardian.com

"
Meyerowitz-Katz told the Guardian that “this is one of the biggest ivermectin studies out there”, and it appeared to him the data was “just totally faked”. This was concerning because two meta-analyses of ivermectin for treating Covid-19 had included the Elgazzar study in the results. A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis that combines the results of multiple scientific studies to determine what the overall scientific literature has found about a treatment or intervention.
“Because the Elgazzar study is so large, and so massively positive – showing a 90% reduction in mortality – it hugely skews the evidence in favour of ivermectin,” Meyerowitz-Katz said.

You are telling me it is easy to detect:

Lawrence said what started out as a simple university assignment had led to a comprehensive investigation into an apparent scientific fraud at a time when “there is a whole ivermectin hype … dominated by a mix of right-wing figures, anti-vaxxers and outright conspiracists”.
“Although science trends towards self-correction, something is clearly broken in a system that can allow a study as full of problems as the Elgazzar paper to run unchallenged for seven months,” he said.
“Thousands of highly educated scientists, doctors, pharmacists, and at least four major medicines regulators missed a fraud so apparent that it might as well have come with a flashing neon sign. That this all happened amid an ongoing global health crisis of epic proportions is all the more terrifying.”

My Dear dank, what you have insisted on throughout this thread is an egotistical arrogance that your finely tuned bullshit meter has all along known that the Ivermectin thingi was a fraud and a joke and that any who fell for it were fools. That makes you the fool. I was also fooled but instead of denying it to the point of absurdity, as you have, I was reminded again just how herd mentality, your own personal herd mentality, can blind you to the truth.

Yes or no, should you stopped beating people to death with your arrogance?

The 2 bolded parts of your unhinged reply show exactly where you went wrong.

The first statement points out the correct conclusion especially when you see dominated by a mix of right-wing figures, anti-vaxxers and outright conspiracists.

The second bolded part shows you are butt hurt that you weren't smart enough to figure out the incredibly obvious. That you would label people smarter than you as fools just shows you possess a puny intellect or a very thin skin.

We weren't blind to the truth. No, we were seeing clearly marked BS that you and other slow thinkers believed could pass for scientific proof. In other words you were wrong.

Now just let it go and find something else to post about.

 

[Greenman]

Was any reason ever given for the fraudulent study? Who profited from it, who was castigated for it?

 

[Moonbeam]

Was any reason ever given for the fraudulent study? Who profited from it, who was castigated for it?

That's a good question, in my opinion because I would like to know more about where it would lead.

 

[Greenman]

That's a good question, in my opinion because I would like to know more about where it would lead.

The problem is it's been politicized, so logic doesn't matter as much as winning. We end up with exactly what we have here in this thread, simply asking a question ignites a firestorm of recriminations and political posturing.
The question should be simple enough to answer, but we apparently now have fraudulent studies to contend with. Personally, I think anyone that would alter the results for personal or political gain should be stripped of any degree they posses and tried as a criminal.

 

[sandorski]

I doubt many care enough as to why the error occurred. They just want useful information and a bad paper or error in the study is not useful.

 

[Greenman]

I doubt many care enough as to why the error occurred. They just want useful information and a bad paper or error in the study is not useful.

It seems as though it was more than a simple error.

 

[Moonbeam]

You still have not directly answered my questions. Why are you so determined to avoid them? Despite your refusal to converse honestly with me (and with yourself) I will once again address exactly what I think you are saying here, as usual.

I have repeatedly answered your questions in my opinion, as best I can. Here are some of the problems I have on my end. You characterize my answers as not being direct as a case of me being determined not to, that there is something I am trying to avoid or hide and that it is dishonesty that drives this. Nothing could be further from the truth in my opinion. I have, and continue to expend as much effort as I can on explaining my position to you. I do so because you are special to me. You are one of my favorite people here someone with whom I want to communicate how I see things. But while I desire that I do not want that to become for me some sort of emotional need. And you are still hanging in here fully justifying my respect.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the gist of what you have posted here is that since many people can be fooled by propaganda it is therefore impossible for people to be able to recognize it quickly and easily. Therefore it follows that any early negative reactions must be mostly the result of internal biases.

Before I waste time refuting that garbage just for you to ignore me once again with your cognitive dissonance obfuscation, please tell me, if you can fucking manage it, if I understand your position accurately and if I don't, please explain it succinctly. There's an old saying that if you can't explain it to a 5 year old then you don't understand it yourself. So explain it to me like I am five.

OK: The answer here is that I do not think that is the gist of my argument. Many people can be fooled by propaganda, yes. As to whether it is impossible for people to recognize it, like you, I think it is possible. But that possibility has perimeters and is not basically what I am focused on as primary to what I really am getting at. Following up on that, some people are better at seeing through propaganda than others. You can fool some of the people some of the time........you know the rest. People also differ in were their blind spots lie. The reason I started this thread is much more general. The Ivermectin thingi is an example of a major point in my view of the human condition, a basic and dangerous flaw. We are pattern recognizing animals. Our ability to detect and focus in on danger signals with high degrees of specificity and definition is how we managed to survive. But once a generalized pattern of assumptions derived from our personal experience is formed we can become a prisoner of that. We as a species have recognized this phenomenon also to be a pattern to be avoided. Generalizations, stereotypes, doctrines, dogmas etc can all become prisons. We need a capacity to think outside the box, to question everything, to be open to new data, to expect the unexpected. We know this and in this also we can fall asleep. We can begin to believe, egotistically that we automatically do that, that it becomes an ingrained assumption and a matter of ego pride that we are basically infallible because, missing the mark on this, making errors in judgment, will make you a fool in the eyes of others.

In the case of Ivermectin, the original study that was full of holes was presented as peer reviewed. Should be a pretty good bet it was a sound study, right? But some grad student, somewhere, I believe, noticed something peculiar and that was it. The house of cards fell. The whole study, I believe, looks likely to be an intentional fraud. It is harder to question things that are the product of trusted sources. Unfortunately people trust themselves.

Thus people react differently to different situations. A scientist will react to peer review data much more receptively than somebody, perhaps, with some religious fear that science is the enemy of religion. A person with a political bias will react based on political motivations if they are unaware that will be the tendency and they make no conscious effort to avoid doing so. A person who fears being wrong will likely become more entrenched in their positions and express rage and contempt when confronted with the possibility they are biased. If something threatens the ego it creates the fear of metaphorical death because the ego is what we believe gives us self worth.

Anybody who wants to be a seeker of truth must understand, in my opinion, that the enemy is the ego self. The ego self contains our dominant concealed assumptions and prejudices, the good we self define as the good but which may not be real good at all. I saw in the Ivermectin issue all of those prejudices and assumptions in play and that issue is only of relevence to me as a concrete example of those things in play. All of the damage the need to believe caused was done because we are not sufficiently self aware of how unconsciously we are motivated to believe or not believe this and that. You can't be as easily tricked if you are empty of such ego needs. Sadly one big ego need is to believe whatever you believe is the good. This makes errors hard to repair.

In order to avoid the time line problem with Ivermectin let me say that first reactions to anything can be anything but they are based on per-existing categories that do not always get examined as they happen. We need to watch for that. We need to develop a more humility. We need to deal psychologically in a healthy way with stress. We need more consciousness. We need to know that we do not want what we need. That will not change until we are at the end of our rope and our need to know exceeds our fears. Perhaps it would help to know we are on a road where our current level of consciousness may lead to extinction.

I do not know if a 5 year old would understand this or not but I doubt a 5 year old would have the fucked up psychological sophistication to need it.

I am going to continue this regarding your three questions specifically but I have something real world that needs doing.

 

[Moonbeam]

It seems as though it was more than a simple error.

It does indeed.

 

[Gardener]

...I have something real world that needs doing.

Stay there for awhile. When you come to your senses I will unblock you.

 

[Greenman]

Stay there for awhile. When you come to your senses I will unblock you.

How will you know if you have him blocked?

 

[Pohemi]

How will you know if you have him blocked?

You'll see less of other users quoting his nonsense, but don't hold your breath.

 

[MtnMan]

Prove to me that professional liars can lie and be believed.

What fucking rock have you been living under for the past 6 years?

 

[sandorski]

It seems as though it was more than a simple error.

Perhaps, but most only care about the Papers/Studies that contribute something. Maybe someone would look into it, most likely some curious Reporter.

 

[Moonbeam]

What fucking rock have you been living under for the past 6 years?

Boy did you get me. I never thought of that.

 

[Moonbeam]

This isn't the first time you flat out do not answer the questions asked of you. Why bother conversing at all? Write a blog somewhere if you aren't interested in a two-way conversation.

Back to this I responded with:
I am reminded of this by anything to which I take offense, that there are unconscious needs that drive me that are hard to see. Any time I am triggered by something I know the problem is not with what triggers, but that that is the effect on me. I am the source, it is not out there. Criticism, judgmentalism is a disease. Whatever triggers it has something to teach you, I believe.

My job is now to explain this so a 5 year old can understand it. I tried to explain this is terms of PTSD because it is, in my opinion, much the same thing. If you were to show pictures of a child being abused to a very young child perhaps pre-verbal, I don't think there would be much of a reaction, especially the one you would feel. That is because the concept of what is really happening isn't present and has to be learned. A person has to see abuse as abuse and also have a moral code that says abuse is not okay. Only then can a person be triggered. What is child abuse. There are probably many ways to define it. I would call corporal punishment abusive, others would disagree. Spare the rod spoil the child. I have used a mild slap on the face it to suddenly interrupt a girl who had lost control and was verbally assaulting her mother. Not real happy about being in that situation.

Anyway, abuse is a concept that we self define in our heads so abuse as a mental construct is a program. X = Y >R>ID?>A An act occurs is seen as abuse and triggers rage at the perpetrator, which hopefully triggers action but certainly not always because questions can arise about consequences of getting evolved. I suggest that there is a different way of seeing, being there in the present, not unlike what I believe to be true of the Zen Warrior. X=A The recognition of abuse and the action to stop it happen outside of time, they are one and the same thing. No time for rage, no time for debate, no time for fear or doubt. The act and the actor are one and the same.

I am saying then that to be awake is to end time and to come into possession of ones full human nature, to be human and real. All of our concepts about child abuse are the product of thought and rationalizations because there is a deeper hidden morality built into our genes that knows what is right and wrong. Reason seeks to formalize into words what it is but never can.

Thus there are two different conscious states from which the problem can be viewed. You have expressed one in your questions, the natural flow of thoughtful experience in the presence of evil and I have expressed what I believe to be another, that truth is when I am. Being is truth revealed. You believe evil is outrageous based on a code of ethics. I believe that code of ethics is built into our genes and manifests via being.

As this description is about two different states of consciousness, one characterized to the duality of thought and the other via direct perception, there can be no real or accurate way to put a non-verbal state into words. But it has to be there to be perceived and sought after in words the certainty 'that the good exists' can't be escaped. It is the ground of our being.

 

[TheVrolok]

Ivermectin Does Not Reduce Risk of Covid Hospitalization, Large Study Finds https://nyti.ms/3ISnOiW

I'll leave this here.

 

[Pohemi]

Shocker that Moonpie is still dancing in circles and pontificating while explaining nothing. The whole thread has been a pile of shit consisting of KNOWN data, despite his attempts to obfuscate the past.

 

[brianmanahan]

Shocker that Moonpie is still dancing in circles and pontificating while explaining nothing.

i'm sure the problem is that everyone else hates themselves

 

[DisarmedDespot]

I do not know if a 5 year old would understand this or not but I doubt a 5 year old would have the fucked up psychological sophistication to need it.

I'll be blunt: your writing style is fucking obnoxious.

 

[Iron Woode]

Shocker that Moonpie is still dancing in circles and pontificating while explaining nothing. The whole thread has been a pile of shit consisting of KNOWN data, despite his attempts to obfuscate the past.

He loves posting psychobabble. He believes it makes him sound like a deep thinker. More like a derp stinker.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Can we lock this thread already?

Ivermectin worthless against COVID in largest clinical trial to date

The antiparasitic failed to reduce hospitalization and all other severe outcomes.

arstechnica.com

 

[dank69]

Can we lock this thread already?

Ivermectin worthless against COVID in largest clinical trial to date

The antiparasitic failed to reduce hospitalization and all other severe outcomes.

arstechnica.com

Let's make it available OTC anyway:

Tennessee Senate passes bill to allow over-the-counter sales of ivermectin

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WJHL) – A local lawmaker has co-sponsored a bill that would allow ivermectin to be sold over the counter in Tennessee without a prescription. On Wednesday, the bill co-sponsored b…

thehill.com