I do residential additions and related remodeling. No high voltage work at all. 240V is as high as it goes in residential.
I do residential additions and related remodeling. No high voltage work at all. 240V is as high as it goes in residential.Greenman works in high voltage electrical fields… it stands to reason the magnetic properties of the vaccine were acting up.
Thankfully you can wash those out by drinking your own urine.
It's funny how you projected this entirely the opposite of reality. It HAS been studied, and the studies indicate it has no value against covid. Because it has become a political drug conservatives continue to insist this hasn't happened because accepting science means the liberals were right.
Nobody would be against using it if it had value! Nobody! It's just that conservatives have gone so insane that they would rather shove horse paste up their asses than admit the liberals were right yet again.
I'm guessing its the agony of a bruised ego.
I think this is an example of a disconnect that covid has really laid bare - the gap between the study and practice of medicine and the practice of public health. So is the most correct scientific answer about ivermectin and covid something to the effect of 'it may be effective but currently the data doesn't support strong claims of it and safety data is uncertain'? Sure. The public health answer, which is the answer everyone but doctors and researchers should care about, is a simple, declarative 'NO'. The focus should always be public health first, and public health demands direct, easy to understand communication that's as consistent as possible given changing events.The problem is your narrative isn't strictly true. There are studies with favorable outcome, however they weren't anywhere near the quality of a pivotal phase III clinical trial that would be used for FDA approval; and in terms of quality of data it's not simply certainty of benefit, there is insufficient data on safety.
I think there is a tendency to try and communicate a more absolute stance than is indicated for political purposes. This leads to technically accurate statements that get interpreted by intelligent people as more absolute than they are. This further exacerbates the divide.
I think it's disgusting that folks like Rand Paul intentionally capitalize on this phenomenon.
It's a more than a little pathetic that you feel the need to come up with this wild fantasy in an attempt to be demeaning. Are you really so weak and uncertain in your convections that personal attacks are the only thing that make you feel vindicated? Why the need to present yourself as a tough guy? Are you lashing out because you've been bullied? Do you think your empty words hurt me in some way?Actually seems more like he just got his period. Old guy with an achy shoulder. Yeah I'm sure it was the fucking shot and not anything else.
I'd hate to see what that pathetic wimp would do if he had to take the literal ballpoint pen sized needle my stepdad took right in his belly every 3 months. Guessing he would've fainted and shit himself. And that's before they even actually put the needle in.
And imagine if they had to deal with like 1/5 of the general pains and shit women put up with just from having a baby maker (let alone having an actual baby).
I knew he was a snowflake but holy shit, this is like full blown mental illness level of pathetic crybaby. Yeesh.
Reactionary rightwingers reject science in favor of conspiracy every fucking day of the week, clinical trials are not on their radar.The problem is your narrative isn't strictly true. There are studies with favorable outcome, however they weren't anywhere near the quality of a pivotal phase III clinical trial that would be used for FDA approval; and in terms of quality of data it's not simply certainty of benefit, there is insufficient data on safety.
I think there is a tendency to try and communicate a more absolute stance than is indicated for political purposes. This leads to technically accurate statements that get interpreted by intelligent people as more absolute than they are. This further exacerbates the divide.
I think it's disgusting that folks like Rand Paul intentionally capitalize on this phenomenon.
Left shoulder at the injection site. Three visits to as many different doctors provided no answers. My primary care physician referred to it as "covid shoulder", and other than prescribing Motrin and some exercises, had no solution. Motrin did provide relief, but I don't like taking it for long periods of time. I'm a working contractor, and 64 years old, something always hurts, so Motrin is my drug of choice. I have to be careful about how often I take it.
It was a fellow here on the AT forum that provided me with a solution that actually worked, for which he has my eternal gratitude. I think that thread is in H&F.
That said, if a variant comes along that's deadlier than what's floating around now I'll get the booster, but not until then. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've had covid twice and been vaccinated. The second round was post vaccination and wasn't as unpleasant as the first time I had it. Though it still put me down for a week.
What way? Just because you support the misleading narrative of calling ivermectin "horse dewormer" doesn't mean others have the same attitude. That's like calling nuclear reactor coolant water and distilled drinking water the same thing. Both are purified water sources but are intended for different purposes. I don't get the big resistance from Progressives in pursuing every possible treatment option for Covid. The vaccine is just another treatment option and has been proven to not be a preventative measure like everyone was originally told.It will be interesting to watch you ignore the results should they not go your way.
So why do you seemingly want to #bothsides these two groups, as if they are both based on trusting in the false claims of others?
From Dictionary.com, a belief is...
Hmm, a projected ad hominem? I asked you a question that you deflected instead of answering. It was a valid question based on your previous post, I didn't just pull it out of my ass, unrelated to the ongoing discussion.I appreciate that you gave some effort at moving past @Pohemi420 's sloppy ad hominem...
You're still running in circles, trying to make an idiotic point.To say it again, I simply state that humans are driven by BELIEF. By their FAITH in things. In other people. To TELL them the truth. None of this is separable from the topic at hand.
It very well could have been from poor injection placement.Glad a fellow ATer put you on to something that helped.
Sounds more like injury from injection and not the vaccine in of itself. For me, the reaction at the shoulder was similar to flu shots. Very similar and honestly the way it was administered was no different. Hurt at first but got better.
Feel better.
The problem is your narrative isn't strictly true. There are studies with favorable outcome, however they weren't anywhere near the quality of a pivotal phase III clinical trial that would be used for FDA approval; and in terms of quality of data it's not simply certainty of benefit, there is insufficient data on safety.
I think there is a tendency to try and communicate a more absolute stance than is indicated for political purposes. This leads to technically accurate statements that get interpreted by intelligent people as more absolute than they are. This further exacerbates the divide.
I think it's disgusting that folks like Rand Paul intentionally capitalize on this phenomenon.
Well yeah but did they try it with zinc and when did they administer it and I took it and I got better so fast so this is clearly fake and.. and… and…Full study:
Ivermectin does not work better than placebo.
I wonder how much more money will have to be wasted because people who do NOT trust science still continue to deny reality...
Can we do proper trials on promising things instead of rehashing this shit? Ever? No? 'muricans will never let it go? Ok then..
Well yeah but did they try it with zinc and when did they administer it and I took it and I got better so fast so this is clearly fake and.. and… and…
That only works of the Zinc is administered via UV enema.Well yeah but did they try it with zinc and when did they administer it and I took it and I got better so fast so this is clearly fake and.. and… and…
Are, so you are pretending. A classic.
What "we" know is what we are told. It is faith the drives the common person. A belief in something.
A belief in those who adhere to scientific principles is rapidly declining. A passing fad that fades before our eyes.
The people would rather believe and put their faith into whatever makes them feel better. It is downright pavlovian of humans to do this.
So then tell me again, what is known, and why the !@#$ do you expect others to know the same as you?
If you expect there to only be one truth, then you are sorely misguided. For in conflict, to the victor go the spoils and the writing of history. Truth is what we make of it.
Someone can study and prove Ivermectin does not work. Others can claim they studied and came to the opposite result. Anyone else will simply believe what they want. And you know it.
What you're really saying here is you want to know why people are stubbornly ignorant. I suspect we will never find out in this lifetime.
Reactionary rightwingers reject science in favor of conspiracy every fucking day of the week, clinical trials are not on their radar.
Despite your fervent proclamation of righteousness, you (and by extension they) are simply human. Even thinking that you (and they) behave rationally, is a great lie. A delusion many share, driven by man's Ego and his conquest over the planet. Yet however high and mighty you think yourself, you are still nothing more than an animal fighting for scraps. And looking for meaning where there is none. Just because you believe yourself in possession of the truth DOES NOT mean your opponents are going to !@#$ing agree.
You are no different than Ned Stark holding a piece of paper. Thinking you have any defense whatsoever. Hand your truth to an enemy, and see how long you keep your head.
And you... if only Ned Stark had a dictionary. That surely would have helped....
I appreciate that you gave some effort at moving past @Pohemi420 's sloppy ad hominem, giving your reply an intellectual flair, but from the tone and substance you don't seem to understand the message. Of course you can lay out a rational argument for the truth. But your truth is immaterial to someone else's belief. They'd have to be willing to listen first. Do you imagine that today's politics would allow us that opportunity?
To say it again, I simply state that humans are driven by BELIEF. By their FAITH in things. In other people. To TELL them the truth. None of this is separable from the topic at hand.
Hmm, a projected ad hominem? I asked you a question that you deflected instead of answering. It was a valid question based on your previous post, I didn't just pull it out of my ass, unrelated to the ongoing discussion.
You're still running in circles, trying to make an idiotic point.
JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE DOESN'T WANT TO BELIEVE VERIFIABLE FACTS, DOESN'T MAKE THEIR POSITION AND "BELIEF" VALID.
Jesus fucking christ.
Ready, fire, aim. It amazes me to see so many scientifically educated people show such little comprehension of the posts they respond to.There isn't a single study in existence that passes even a tiny bit of scrutiny. Find me ONE placebo controlled double blind peer reviewed study that actually shows any positive effects against Covid. ONE will do.
There is none, there are however over 50 that have no conclusion what so ever because when they tried to falsify data and the study was retracted it didn't stop being referred to as a "scientific study proving the effects", this is why this is still a thing. It's because people read an article referencing a study and that is what it took. It's just how 'muricans work and it's why both democrats and republicans STILL "know" that Hillary is crooked.
It's a fucking disease of the mind and we'll see 50 more of these studies and the ACTUAL studies that show it doesn't do shit will be summarily ignored by those who already decided it is the best treatment and that vaccines do not work a LONG time ago. Waste money, prolong the suffering and say "we have to investigate this more becuase a pre-print in Spain where three people who had bought a boatload of the crap showed that it did work and cured both AIDS and cancer as well".... Jesus Christ this is NOT science.
Never leave the group illuminated by the one true orthodoxy or the apes will start hurling shit at you. An external manifestation of self hate the need to ridicule. We always seek to apply the same techniques that broke us because we know they work. But, of course they won’t work on anybody who has managed to heal.That only works of the Zinc is administered via UV enema.
There isn't a single study in existence that passes even a tiny bit of scrutiny. Find me ONE placebo controlled double blind peer reviewed study that actually shows any positive effects against Covid. ONE will do.
There is none, there are however over 50 that have no conclusion what so ever because when they tried to falsify data and the study was retracted it didn't stop being referred to as a "scientific study proving the effects", this is why this is still a thing. It's because people read an article referencing a study and that is what it took. It's just how 'muricans work and it's why both democrats and republicans STILL "know" that Hillary is crooked.
It's a fucking disease of the mind and we'll see 50 more of these studies and the ACTUAL studies that show it doesn't do shit will be summarily ignored by those who already decided it is the best treatment and that vaccines do not work a LONG time ago. Waste money, prolong the suffering and say "we have to investigate this more becuase a pre-print in Spain where three people who had bought a boatload of the crap showed that it did work and cured both AIDS and cancer as well".... Jesus Christ this is NOT science.
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines (nih.gov)
Data sources:
We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials involving 3406 participants met review inclusion.
Conclusions:
Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.