Mandated vaccines or weekly testing for employers of 100+ people.......

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!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,161
    113
    North Central
    I wondered if anyone had done any double-blind studies of Ivermectin use. I found two so far:

    First Study

    Second Study

    I’m still looking for others. Both of those used a sample size of about 500. Both found no difference in the control group vs. the Ivermectin use. I’ll keep looking for more.

    In Vitro

    The above showed a 5,000 fold decrease in viral RNA, however it was not a test on humans. It could show the theory works, but it didn’t test if it works in vivo.

    Meta analysis

    This one was a study of other studies involving thousands of patients. No change in outcome with Ivermectin.

    Who is financing these? What are their goals? Can we trust studies of such highly politicized issues? TPTB have unequivocally stated ivermectin does not work, will TPTB fund a study that doesn't agree with them? Would you believe a study that was paid for by the pharmaceutical company? Can we believe a study paid for by government money?
     

    Hatin Since 87

    Bacon Hater
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 31, 2018
    11,402
    77
    Mooresville
    Ok so I just got a call from my aunt. I posted a few days ago about being quarantined because grandma has Covid, and aunt has been taking care of her. My aunt is “fully” vaccinated (whatever that means anymore) but still caught Covid from grandma. She’s getting the antibody treatment (As did grandma). I’m sure I’ll hear back tomorrow, and will update as I hear.

    If she’s fully vaccinated, why the need for the antibody treatment? If the vaccine was so effective, wouldn’t that be enough? I’m glad they’re giving her the treatment, but it doesn’t make sense. So now will this be considered a vaccine recovery? Or is there a statistic for vaccine with assisted recovery?

    You guys can get vaxxed. I’m cool with that. Something isn’t adding up, and I won’t, and you won’t force me to.
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    Who is financing these? What are their goals? Can we trust studies of such highly politicized issues? TPTB have unequivocally stated ivermectin does not work, will TPTB fund a study that doesn't agree with them? Would you believe a study that was paid for by the pharmaceutical company? Can we believe a study paid for by government money?
    The studies all include that information in their “funding” and “competing interests” declarations.
     

    Ziggidy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 7, 2018
    7,270
    113
    Ziggidyville
    The only part I disagree with is people saying “so-and-so took it and survived Covid,” which is meant to imply the IM worked. I’ve seen it repeated here on INGO numerous times that this virus has a 99%+ survival rate. As I’ve joked before, if 100 people eat green Skittles everyday and 99 of them survive Covid, because they would have anyway, does that mean it was the Skittles? By the same argument, I understand why doctors are hesitant to be forced to prescribe something they might think is equally silly. The line between your rights as a patient and the doctor’s right not to be forced to do something they think is wrong seems a rather fine one.
    How do we know, even today, what works and does not work? How do we know the few banned drugs do not work? What studies have been performed that will tell in less than a year, what is good or not good?

    Looking at those who claim they were treated with non-acceptable drugs; why challenge the results? Are the results any different that any of the other drugs/procedures?

    Why is the so called "FDA APPROVED" drug still being administered as an experimental drug with no legal recourse if adverse reactions occur?

    Hearing what works just may give hope to some people. It may actually open people's eyes to the possibilities.

    Just read that Nebraska AG is saying is saying it is ok for docs to give the alternatives.

    There's hope....
     

    Hatin Since 87

    Bacon Hater
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 31, 2018
    11,402
    77
    Mooresville
    Who is financing these? What are their goals? Can we trust studies of such highly politicized issues? TPTB have unequivocally stated ivermectin does not work, will TPTB fund a study that doesn't agree with them? Would you believe a study that was paid for by the pharmaceutical company? Can we believe a study paid for by government money?
    I’m betting if ivermectin did a study that shows ivermectin works nobody would believe those results.


    Same theory as you described, yours just has more levels of people involved to create the illusion it’s an unbiased study.
     

    buckwacker

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 23, 2012
    3,083
    97
    These individuals didn’t tell me that it prevented infection. You’re saying people I know personally are liars because somebody else lied.
    Ok, you said data so I thought you were referring to all the usual suspects in gov and media. If you're talking anecdotal "evidence" from people you know, you should understand that im going to have a hard time believing 95% unvaccinated from a third or fourth hand source on the interwebs. Even the people referred to in the first sentence of this post don't claim anything nearly that high.
     

    Hatin Since 87

    Bacon Hater
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 31, 2018
    11,402
    77
    Mooresville
    Normally a paragraph would be utilized to separate two completely different thoughts.



    That makes you the originator of a falsehood then, doesn't it?
    It wasn’t 2 separate, unrelated thoughts. It was a nurse not getting vaccinated, and an entire state of nurses not getting vaccinated. You should pay attention to which form of punctuation is used, it will save some misunderstanding. A comma, for instance, would have placed them together. A period separates them.

    Not really. A judge ruled they had to allow religious exemptions to nurses who refused to get it.


    Sounds like they found a way to allow unvaccinated healthcare workers because of the shortages, without admitting defeat.
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    So who the heck are any of those people and or organizations? Can we trust them?
    That’s also included. I guess you’d have to look at them individually and decide what you think of them. Or you can just broadly dismiss anything that doesn’t support your beliefs based on assumptions of their motives. I’m not saying that to be a jerk, but we start to get to a point where nothing can be proven. If there was a study that supported Ivermectin use in humans, I don’t think anyone would be trying so hard to dismiss it.

    Despite what some think, I don’t have a “side” in this. I take the information I’m given and decide if it makes sense to me. So far, very little of what’s been presented in these threads has been very logical. It’s like an ouroboros of faulty logic that just circles back to itself.
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,161
    113
    North Central
    That’s also included. I guess you’d have to look at them individually and decide what you think of them. Or you can just broadly dismiss anything that doesn’t support your beliefs based on assumptions of their motives. I’m not saying that to be a jerk, but we start to get to a point where nothing can be proven. If there was a study that supported Ivermectin use in humans, I don’t think anyone would be trying so hard to dismiss it.

    Despite what some think, I don’t have a “side” in this. I take the information I’m given and decide if it makes sense to me. So far, very little of what’s been presented in these threads has been very logical. It’s like an ouroboros of faulty logic that just circles back to itself.

    Just a housekeeping point; I like your posts and input.
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    Just a housekeeping point; I like your posts and input.
    Thanks. I appreciate you and several others giving a different perspective as well. I won’t pretend the global response to all of this isn’t insane. I’m just stopping short of saying it’s all coordinated. Other than that, I look at claims people make and I question them if they don’t make sense. It’s just as important to try to disprove things as it is to prove them.
     

    jsharmon7

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    7,821
    113
    Freedonia
    Ok, you said data so I thought you were referring to all the usual suspects in gov and media. If you're talking anecdotal "evidence" from people you know, you should understand that im going to have a hard time believing 95% unvaccinated from a third or fourth hand source on the interwebs. Even the people referred to in the first sentence of this post don't claim anything nearly that high.
    Sure, it’s a YMMV sort of thing. I believe the vaccines are keeping people out of the ICU and alive because people I personally know and trust are providing that information. I’m sure you have reliable sources to make important decisions from as well.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom