astrofool wrote: » As I said, there is as much studies for as against:https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/ivermectin-why-potential-covid-treatment-isnt-recommended-use However, these things are true: the lab tests of Invermectin required much higher dosing than would usually be administered as part of a course of Invermectin That dosing level hasn't gone through safety tests The study you linked to had ~3500 people in the trial Vaccines had ~30,000 people per vaccine trial Vaccine have been administered to hundreds of millions of people and proven safe The cost of vaccines is very low compared to other treatments (especially AZ which is sold at cost) Vaccines have a much higher effective rate than any of the studies on Invermectin Which begs the question, why are you still pushing Invermectin (and why are you pushing these info dumps on random threads instead of the Invermectin thread?)
Lumen wrote: » It's a bit tricky to thread together your points over time and various threads but I think you've stated or suggested that: 1. Lockdowns are useless or harmful. 2. Vaccines are dangerous. 3. Ivermectin is a useful prophylactic against Covid infection. 4. Ivermectin is a useful treatment for Covid disease. Taken together, you therefore seem to believe that instead of employing behavioural change and vaccines, we should instead rely on the prophylactic and treatment effects of ivermectin. Is that correct?
PhoenixParker wrote: » You haven't read any of the studies on ivermectin have you? The dosing levels used in most of the prophylactic studies are the approved doses nor the "what we needed in a petri dish" doses. Nobody is pushing ivermectin instead of a vaccine. There are still billions who are months and years away from a vaccine dose.
patnor1011 wrote: » Seems that it does help.https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Abstract/9000/Ivermectin_for_Prevention_and_Treatment_of.98040.aspx For the study, published on June 17 in the American Journal of Therapeutics, a group of scientists reviewed the clinical trial use of ivermectin, which has antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, in 24 randomized controlled trials involving just over 3,400 participants. The researchers sought to assess the efficacy of ivermectin in reducing infection or mortality in people with COVID-19 or at high risk of getting it. Using multiple methods of sequential analysis, the researchers concluded with a moderate level of confidence that the drug reduced the risk of death in COVID-19 patients by an average of 62 percent, at a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.19-0.79, in a sample of 2438 patients. Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the risk of death was found to be 2.3 percent among those treated with the drug, compared to 7.8 percent for those who were not, according to the review. “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 authors wrote. One more peer reviewed studyhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/
astrofool wrote: » Vitamin D helps, dexamethasone helps, not being obese and having a healthy cardiovascular system helps. People who take all these and live healthily have had severe COVID, some leading to death. Invermectin probably doesn't help (as much studies for as against it). Hydroxychloroquine also probably doesn't help (at least as a prophylactic). Do you want to know what really helps with almost complete reduction in death and severe disease? Vaccines.
patnor1011 wrote: » Oh well I tried but you seems to be determined to deflect and create your own conspiracies how people are antivaxx as if that even meant something. Then you go on about stuff I never mentioned while you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that even our own medical scientists said that we could have cut covid deaths by half simply by providing vitamin D supplements to sick and vulnerable people. Vitamin D is not new or latest. I mentioned how chinese used it to treat their outbreaks well over a year ago and while I understand why everyone who mentioned it was laughed at and sent to conspiracy forum then, it is pathetic to see people like you doing the same now in the light of new facts and studies which confirmed that it is working not only as a treatment but as prevention too. The same go for vitamin C. After a year everyone already know that this virus is dangerous nearly exclusively to the people with other multiple underlying conditions and young or old healthy people do not need to worry about it as absolute majority of them do not even know they have or already had it. Congratulation you made it to my ignore list. I see no reason to further read your crystal ball fantasies about how you think what other think or your conspiracy theories about how everyone but you is antivaxx.
charlie14 wrote: » To be perfectly honest all I am seeing from your posts is the by now far to familiar anti-vaxxer playbook. Declarations of "I`m not anti vaccines" while at the same time determinedly avoiding any mention of vaccines and their role in combating this virus while pushing every half assed alternative theory. Even quoting some very dodgy ultra right publications when doing so, as well as the long time debunked high incidents of naturally acquired herd immunity ala Giesecke, Tegnell and Ioaniddis. Plus this conspiracy that everyone knows about, but for some strange reason you are unwilling to share. Your latest is vitamin D, so perhaps you can tell me what efficacy rating has vitamin D for prevention of death and severe illness from Covid-19 ? From analysis by the British Medical Journal of the Pfizer/BioNTech extensive clinical trials data their vaccine has an efficacy of 52% first dose and 95% when fully vaccinated. But then the BMJ are also part of this worldwide conspiracy that everyone apparently knows about as well.
patnor1011 wrote: » You did not answer my question. So once again, are you seriously stating here that Vitamin D deficiency do not play any role with severity of infection and it is just conspiracy theory nonsense? It has a lot to do with Sweden. Vitamin D can protect against getting a severe case of COVID-19, a group of Swedish researchers and doctors have suggested in an article in the medical magazine Läkartidningen. Given that known risk factors for COVID-19 are obesity, diabetes, and being institutionalised, low levels of vitamin D, which are dependent on sun exposure, are common to all of them, the doctors emphasised. “Vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of a severe course of COVID-19. A metaanalysis of placebo-controlled studies shows that vitamin D treatment generally protects against respiratory tract infections. The effect is greatest in individuals with low vitamin D levels, which can be explained by the effect of the vitamin on the immune system”, the researchers concluded.https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/6120407 The link between vitamin D defficiency and covid infection outcome was already proven by many scientists our own included so your little tirade about vitamine tablets and magic beans is frankly kindergarten level talk. You also suffer from extraordinary high imagination. Your constant projection about what other talk or "push" like accusing me that I am pushing alternative to vaccination is also just product of your own wild imagination. Every other Swede suffers from lack of vitamin D in the winter - https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/6120407https://www.nutraingredients.com/Article/2015/05/28/Sweden-to-expand-mandatory-vitamin-D-fortification?utm_source=copyright&utm_medium=OnSite&utm_campaign=copyright
charlie14 wrote: » In fairness it`s not that difficult to discredit when your are quoting The Epoch Times and promoting drugs as a cure-all that have not been subject to large clinical trials and the data verified and their use as such sanctioned by such authorities as the EMA or FDA. But then I suppose they are also part of this conspiracy which most people seem to know off but which you have failed to clarify after being asked by a number of posters. Do you understand the difference between causation and correlation as you appear to believe they are one and the same. Causation explicitly applies to cases where action A causes outcome B. Correlation is simply a relationship. A relates to B but one event doesn`t necessarily cause the other event to happen. As far as I`m concerned, you can use your vitamin tablets, magic beans or whatever takes your fancy. Personally I will be sticking with vaccines. As I have said to you before, this is a thread in relation to Sweden. If you want to push an alternative to vaccines then there is a very good vaccine thread on Board.ie where I am sure you will find people to engage with you on your theories There is even a conspiracy thread I believe, and if none of those takes your fancy then perhaps consider opening a thread of your own as I cannot see what you have been posting recently having anything to do with Sweden and Covid-19.
patnor1011 wrote: » This is already classic strategy to attack messenger when you cant discredit the message. Sadly in this case it does not work as even though some outlets may be controversial facts reported clearly show their (Indian) approach is promising and seems to be working. Just to clarify, are you seriously stating here that Vitamin D deficiency do not play any role with severity of infection and it is just conspiracy theory nonsense?
charlie14 wrote: » If, as you say you are a believer in vaccines then it might be an idea to take a look at how vaccines level, are and have been for the last few months, reducing new cases, hospital and ICU numbers rather than pushing drugs that have no data from large scales clinical trial and qouting articles from The Epoch Times, a far right newspsper and media company affiliated with the Falan Gong religious movement. Very sick people die every year. Last year Sweden had an excess of 9,175 deaths compared to previous year. And that was in a year where for the first 12 weeks Sweden had lower deaths than the previous year. Are you now attempting to make some kind of case that because this virus is more lethal due to age and medical conditions, that it is acceptable to just shrug shoulders and say **** happens ? When it comes to China, like the Epoch Times, I would be very sceptical of what either publishes, but at least with China they imposed a level of lockdown early on that would be impossible anywhere else, with the possible exception of North Korea. The rest of your post is just the usual baseless conspiracy theory nonsense.
PintOfView wrote: » There's something wrong with the Swedish data on that web site (our world in data). The Irish data looks ok, with a peak last April of 3,500, and the line for 2021 starting above 3,800 in Jan. The Swedish pattern may be ok, but the numbers seem way off, with their numbers like, or lower than, ours, but they have, as you say, double our population. The Economist have a page that gives excess deaths by country alsohttps://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker (good for bigger picture trends and comparisons)
humberklog wrote: » How come Sweden has far less average deaths than us in non Covid years? Or am I reading it right? Sweden -2,000 at the beginning of year/graph (average 2015-2019) and Ireland at 3,200 for the same time/point and they've roughly twice our population.
patnor1011 wrote: » Excuse me. This accusation and name throwing is old smear tactic and simply do not work anymore. I can assure you I have had more vaccines than you can ever imagine of getting simply because I came from a country with robust and mandatory vaccination program. I have absolutely nothing against any vaccines. Yet for some reason you scream antivaxx like it was some magical word. Case is fairly simple. This pandemic outcome turned out to be far from predictions thrown out at the start of it and from the look of it treating affected people simply become not that important due to low mortality or overall effect on population. Mostly already very sick people were affected so focus shifted from possible treatment to some hypothetical prevention which by the way is not possible anyway. Mortality decreased because the most vulnerable people already died while majority of cases did not even developed any symptoms or problems, their immune system managed to deal with this virus without them even knowing something is happening. I have seen it with my very own eyes when we had few outbreaks at my work place. It is economics pure and simple. Possible treatment with cheap and readily available remedies are thrown out or dismissed as not working while expensive therapies or experimental treatments are being pushed as a way out. We hear about this and that new drug all the while we refuse to acknowledge that place where virus started dealt with it quite fast with a help of proven, cheap and quite safe remedies and medications. Take vitamin D for example which china brought by truckloads to affected regions and even our own scientists found a link between most severe cases being identified as people with vitamin D deficiency. No conspiracy here but science.
TomSweeney wrote: » Sweden got it right ..https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=sweden+covid+data //thread
charlie14 wrote: » What is playing the biggest role in Sweden like everywhere else is vaccines. The high levels of immunity due to high case numbers went out the window May 2020 when Sweden`s antibody test results became known and when Manaus had to go back into lockdown late 2021 after believing from high seroprevalence figures they had achieved natural herd immunity. If any further proof was needed then the massive spike in case numbers from their latest surge show that. High case numbers that thankfully did not result in corresponding high mortality levels due to vaccines. But then proof of vaccines and the negligible value of natural herd immunity in combating this pandemic are not what you want to hear or acknowledge. With your constant pushing of your alternatives you are just coming across as an antivaxxer and a conspiracy theorist with your "most people know why that is happening
patnor1011 wrote: » I agree, thread is about Sweden. What play biggest role is most likely that they had so many cases a lot of them simply gained natural immunity. I wont be mixing India and their Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine approach the only thing I would add is that you may not be aware that when SARS happened, the CDC in the USA approved HCQ as a "safe and effective" treatment against the virus... Which probably also explains why the tremendous SARS epidemic fizzled and sputtered out after a few months. Not happening now despite covid being not much different from SARS. Suddenly proven methods are out of window and most of the people know why that is happening.
patnor1011 wrote: » I agree, thread is about Sweden. What play biggest role is most likely that they had so many cases a lot of them simply gained natural immunity. I wont be mixing India and their Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine approach the only thing I would add is that you may not be aware that when SARS happened, the CDC in the USA approved HCQ as a "safe and effective" treatment against the virus...Which probably also explains why the tremendous SARS epidemic fizzled and sputtered out after a few months. Not happening now despite covid being not much different from SARS. Suddenly proven methods are out of window and most of the people know why that is happening.
charlie14 wrote: » 1. I really do not have the time to go through every state in India with you. 2. this is a thread in relation to Sweden and as such Sweden are using vaccines not Ivermectin to lower case numbers, reduce the numbers in hospitals and ICU`s. So perhaps you should consider opening your own thread on India and Ivermectin. I have no problem with India using this drug in the treatment of Covid patients even though the World Health Organisation advises it should only be used to treat Covid-19 within medical trials. I do have a problem where it is being handed out as a drug that is purported to prevents infections where there is little or no data from large scale clinical trials, similar to vaccine trials, to back this up. I find that not just dangerous, but from medical authorities, unethical.
