COVID OMICRON Thread

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,319
    77
    Porter County
    And only 39% are boosted. I have a hard time imagining vax rates will actually increase on an annual or semiannual shot.

    However, I'm calling moving goal posts from the money crowd. I've made my point, there is plenty of money to be made in ivermectin.

    Prevention is prioritized over treatment as a primary focus because it reduces overall health costs and hospital burden. However, anyone who says no one is focusing on finding treatments is either not paying attention or lying.
    I never had goal posts to move. I was simply asking about your comments. You kept equating the two.
     

    MRockwell

    Just Me
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Oct 4, 2010
    2,835
    129
    Noblesfield
    I'm just not talking about politics + COVID when it seems the rest of you are.

    Well the government is ultimately where the funding is coming from (via mandate and direct payment) for reimbursing providers for administration fees, and I know what those are.
    How can you separate politics and Covid, when it has been politicized from the beginning?
    When the government is ultimately where the funding is coming from, covid is directly tied to politics.

    How many on K Street and Wall Street are making money off a generic vs. how many making money off a vaccine?
     

    nonobaddog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2015
    11,794
    113
    Tropical Minnesota
    Where are the honest studies on Ivermectin in the US?

    Rand Paul said...
    “The hatred for Trump deranged these people so much that they’re unwilling to objectively study it,” Paul told constituents on Friday, Aug. 27, after a woman asked why ivermectin wasn’t more available, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer’s report of the gathering. “So someone like me that’s in the middle on it, I can’t tell you because they will not study ivermectin.”
     
    Last edited:

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,816
    113
    Gtown-ish
    And only 39% are boosted. I have a hard time imagining vax rates will actually increase on an annual or semiannual shot.

    However, I'm calling moving goal posts from the money crowd. I've made my point, there is plenty of money to be made in ivermectin.

    Prevention is prioritized over treatment as a primary focus because it reduces overall health costs and hospital burden. However, anyone who says no one is focusing on finding treatments is either not paying attention or lying.
    I’m not sure what prompted this debate over profit. What underlies the whole conversation to me is practical profit motive and the influence of money to exploit fears in pursuit of that. But also there is the claim that pharma has a profit motive to use its influence to shut down any competitor of vaccines as the official tool against covid.

    Your point seems to be a counter to that. That pharma could make that kind of money from Ivermectin too. I suspect that’s what underlies your point because why go on about something so obviously unlikely?

    There isn’t that kind if money potential in Ivermectin. Or in any treatment. It’s way easier to get governments to require something as a prophylaxis than it would as a treatment. You only make money on treatments when people are already sick. But a vaccine, if you can convince people that it’s part of the solution, that if we just get enough people to just take this shot, everything will return to normal, then you get enough people to support mandates. That means everyone has to take it and not just the people who are sick.

    But lets play along. How much does generic Ivermectin cost for a course of 12mg once daily for 5 days? I saw a treatment course on pubmed that was just that. So I loked around to see how much that coats. I found a coupon for 20 3mg pills for $30 at Jay C’s. One course and done.

    That 3 shots of vaccine will never be enough. It’s not now. And betcha that we’ll soon be hearing the clown chief medical advisor to the other clown saying that everyone needs to take the Omicron shot when that gets its emergency use status in perpetuity.

    As the powers that be start to acknowledge the new endemic nature of covid, it’ll become like the annual flu shot. Except with mandates. I don’t see the mandates ever stopping. And “fully vaccinated” will give permanent rise to “up to date” as the new mandate standard. And it’s just going to continue until we get sane people running the show.
     
    Last edited:

    nonobaddog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2015
    11,794
    113
    Tropical Minnesota
    California recently extended their mask mandates and added a bunch of quarantine mandates for employees with different requirements based on vaccination status.

     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,816
    113
    Gtown-ish
    California recently extended their mask mandates and added a bunch of quarantine mandates for employees with different requirements based on vaccination status.

    Which is ridiculous. If this is “the science” then “the science” is retarded.



    Please note: “the science” enclosed in quotes denotes the centralized top down “science” declared by a few crony scientists who like to pretend they’re gods.
     

    nonobaddog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2015
    11,794
    113
    Tropical Minnesota
    If you go to the NIH Treatment Guidelines site and look at Ivermectin they mention a lot of studies and then exclude them for various reasons. They go on to list 7 "key studies" that most influenced the guidelines panel. These studies are all foreign studies - one each from Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Columbia and Iran and 2 studies from India. These are the studies they selected to base their decisions on. You could probably do better by throwing darts.

    https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/ivermectin-data/

    They say -
    Because most of these studies have significant limitations, the Panel cannot draw definitive conclusions on the clinical efficacy of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide further guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

    So one would think such needed studies would be in the works but when you go to ClinicalTrials.gov, as they suggest, you find it is pretty underwhelming. They list 9 studies but 5 are still "recruiting", 1 is "not yet recruiting", 1 is "withdrawn", 1 is "terminated" and 1 is "active, not recruiting". So there are no US studies for the guidelines panel to consider. It has been two fricking years now.

    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=covid&term=ivermectin&cntry=US&state=&city=&dist=
     

    mbills2223

    Eternal Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Dec 16, 2011
    20,138
    113
    Indy
    I’m not sure what prompted this debate over profit. What underlies the whole conversation to me is practical profit motive and the influence of money to exploit fears in pursuit of that. But also there is the claim that pharma has a profit motive to use its influence to shut down any competitor of vaccines as the official tool against covid.

    Your point seems to be a counter to that. That pharma could make that kind of money from Ivermectin too. I suspect that’s what underlies your point because why go on about something so obviously unlikely?

    There isn’t that kind if money potential in Ivermectin. Or in any treatment. It’s way easier to get governments to require something as a prophylaxis than it would as a treatment. You only make money on treatments when people are already sick. But a vaccine, if you can convince people that it’s part of the solution, that if we just get enough people to just take this shot, everything will return to normal, then you get enough people to support mandates. That means everyone has to take it and not just the people who are sick.

    But lets play along. How much does generic Ivermectin cost for a course of 12mg once daily for 5 days? I saw a treatment course on pubmed that was just that. So I loked around to see how much that coats. I found a coupon for 20 3mg pills for $30 at Jay C’s. One course and done.

    That 3 shots of vaccine will never be enough. It’s not now. And betcha that we’ll soon be hearing the clown chief medical advisor to the other clown saying that everyone needs to take the Omicron shot when that gets its emergency use status in perpetuity.

    As the powers that be start to acknowledge the new endemic nature of covid, it’ll become like the annual flu shot. Except with mandates. I don’t see the mandates ever stopping. And “fully vaccinated” will give permanent rise to “up to date” as the new mandate standard. And it’s just going to continue until we get sane people running the show.
    In regards to the coupon you mentioned, those things are essentially piggy backing on an insurance contract. I can guarantee no pharmacy can purchase that regimen for the price you mention, so the pharmacy would be forced to sell it below cost. The manufacturer is still going to make the profit margins I mentioned.
     
    Last edited:

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,816
    113
    Gtown-ish
    In regards to the coupon you mentioned, those things are essentially piggy backing on an insurance contract. I can guarantee to pharmacy can purchase that regimen for the price you mention, so the pharmacy would be forced to sell it below cost. The manufacturer is still going to make the profit margins I mentioned.
    Okay, so basically you’re saying that manufacturers charge $60 for a course of Ivermectin, which would be the same as 3 vaccine doses. Obviously that’s neither here nor there. There’s no practical path to profit motive driving Pharma to chase after Ivermectin mandates even if Ivermectin has a high efficacy for curing covid. And that’s kinda what this conversation seems to be.

    Incidentally, a survey of pricing makes me wonder if you guys make any money at all on Ivermectin. I found prices without the coupons ranging from $60 to $95z If some are charging $60, they ain’t making any money. Or, those who sell it cheaper are getting volume discounts.

    I would hope that in this unrealistic scenario where big pharma is pushing mandates for ivermectin to make everyone have to take it as a prophylaxis :rolleyes: at least the government could get a volume discount. But maybe not. It is a Biden administration that would have to do it. They’d probably negotiate the highest price and expect kickbacks.
     

    littletommy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 29, 2009
    13,154
    113
    A holler in Kentucky
    Red pilling violates youtube TOS.
    I follow a guy named Modern renaissance man on YouTube and Instagram, he points out the ridiculousness of a lot of issues. He’s completely banned from the tube, and every time he post anything questioning mandates or vaxxes, Instagram posts a disclaimer on his message saying something about “misinformation”.


    Yet, all platforms will let shrieking libtards post things about “anti vaxxers are killing us all” and “medical treatment should be withheld from anti vaxxers”

    It’s truly ****ed up, and I’m afraid it’s not gonna end well.
     
    Top Bottom