Covid Scientific Literature

There is a cannabinoid that is highly likely to be effective in treating covid and I would love to see it studied

Sure I’ll do some googlin’ for ya :upside_down_face:

05-COVID-Wallace-508.pdf (2.7 MB)

"…the CDC’s own data shows that for every 100,000 vaccines given to young people, more than 25,000 will have temporary side effects that prevent them from ā€œnormal activities,ā€ 700 will require medical care and 200 will be hospitalized.

In contrast, the CDC estimates that only about 50 out of 100,000 adolescents have EVER been hospitalized for Covid-related illness."

4 Likes

Hanlons razor is a joke… literally

Its origins are a joke book

That was never meant to be taken seriously

5 Likes

You must have missed the fact that was satire, lol.

Whoosh!

1 Like

I posted this on my companies own internal web site:
There has been a lot of information bouncing around lately about the origins of Covid-19. Some is good, some ok, and some complete BS. Personally I am still developing my opinions, but this article was published in the the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. They have been around since 1945 and are most popularly known for publishing the annual countdown to midnight doomsday clock. It’s a long read, but interesting. As with all science, be skeptical, I’m not claiming they are correct, but there is some interesting information.

1 Like

Show him the Ivermectin meta analysis I posted. It’s shown solid results at treating ā€œlong covidā€, and again, is incredibly safe.

My lady has an appointment with her GP this week to get an off label prescription for exactly that

4 Likes

Would love to hear back about how it affects her.

1 Like

Hell yeah, I’m sure they’re desperate for anything at this point.

ALL drugs can interact with genetics.

in the case of ivermectin I’ve seen it both cure and kill (dogs; mange). I wasn’t particularly impressed with the vet who pushed that plunger home…

turns out Collies have a genetic variation that makes ivermectin problematic. given the way DNA replication works, ā€œwe are all differentā€ is provably true…

5 Likes

Of course, one could die from aspirin.

But statistically, when we look at the billions of doses of Ivermectin administered, its overwhelmingly considered safe

Even extreme high doses appear to be overwhelmingly safe

4 Likes

is ivermectrin used in vetrenay medicine? i need thta stuff and other peniccillins for a bug out bag.

It’s used 10x on animals as it is for humans. You can go down to the feed shop and get apple flavored ivermectin for horses rn

3 Likes

alot of drs liked it but because trump said he liked the concept of using anything that works the mainstream hates it. It sounds like spinosad- they got it from soil.

it said that its problematic when used above the dosage rate? I dont een go above dosage rate on my lawn herbicide- its the dose for a reason. i wouldnt even use it but things got out of hand and my lawn was all weeds. Now its healthy and full of grass so weeds will be less likely to get in.

1 Like

Thank you for sharing that data. I highly recommend anyone concerned about the safety of the vaccine in children and adolescents read that PDF you just shared.

I’m not sure where you pulled that quote from, but the numbers in that quote are not supported by the data file that you shared. That file you shared shows how effective and safe the vaccine is in young people, even while pointing out known side effects of concern. You should read it over and view the slides. Basically it provides data suggesting that the COVID vaccine is safer than getting COVID-19 for adolescents, based off the data we currently have.

There is nothing in the data you cited showing a ~50/100,000 hospitalization rate for adolescents with COVID-19. It certainly is a low rate, but they are also the highest spreaders of the population. The rate chart in there is the amount of adolescents who make up # of hospitalizations for total COVID, but not the individual risk rate for an adolescent. It does show that there are 636 known myocarditis cases in adolescents per 1 MILLION doses administered, even if that is 10 times higher than the reported rate, it’s still a safer rate than 50/100,000 for getting COVID itself.

Here is a link to total case counts (not a rate) of people hospitalization for COVID-19 by age. you can unclick of different groups to see quantities of hospitalizations for specific age groups. Again, not a rate though.
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/covidnet/COVID19_5.html

I think maybe that ā€œ50/100,000ā€ is referring to total covid cases but not the actual risk of hospitalization for an adolescent who is COVID+. I thought I saw those data once but can’t seem to find them. It would be very hard to accurately assess that since not all adolescent cases may have been tested and reported.

EDIT: somehow when I replied it didn’t quote the PDF you shared which was intended.

1 Like

Did you read the disclaimer on that link?

ā€œThe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) conducts population-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations in children (persons younger than 18 years) and adults. The current network covers nearly 100 counties in the 10 Emerging Infections Program (EIP) states (CA, CO, CT, GA, MD, MN, NM, NY, OR, and TN) and four additional states through the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Project (IA, MI, OH, and UT). The network represents approximately 10% of US population (~32 million people).ā€

Here’s who analyzed the data:

Here is an original randomized control study that did not find any beneficial effects of Ivermectin. I am glad that you shared the FDA warning about Ivermectin even though you feel it could be an effective treatment. I appreciate you looking at scientific data that may go against your gut feeling.

I would recommend reading original data that doesn’t support the meta analysis, and looking at some of the original studies THEMSELVES that are cited by the meta-analysis to see if you think they were good studies.

I am sorry to hear about your lady, if I understand what you are saying correctly, did you say she has caught COVID and is experiencing the ā€œlong covidā€ symptoms? If so I hope her health improves and you both find something that works for her.

For all of those who havent gotten the vaccine and are in good health, I strongly recommend it. Me and many of my friends have gotten the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine. It’s been months and no one I know has suffered long term detrimental effects from the vaccine. On the other hand, I have several friends who caught COVID and at least two I know who had ā€œlong covidā€ symptoms. I know that’s anecdotal, but everything seems to point to the vaccine being less risky than COVID itself.

2 Likes

So, despite the fact I have had no issues whatsoever in 14 months, you’re recommending I get something that will potentially give me heart inflammation, blood clots, or maybe I’ll just mysteriously die an hour or a week later.

Interesting.

4 Likes

You only linked the CDC document. I am sorry but that guy who did the writeup you just shared is full of shit, and none of his main points are supported by the data presented in that document. He just takes little clips of the document out of context and makes up his own conclusions. None of his conclusions are supported by the original document. Read the original document in it’s entirely.

I have seen this ā€œtrickā€ before. People make wild claims and draw eye-catching conclusions while citing some document or data, and the data cited in no way support the original claims. I don’t even know if it’s a deliberate attempt at manipulating the reader, or if the guy is just that bad at data interpretation. Please do not take other’s words for it, read the original source yourself and draw your own conclusions.

These tricksters cite a document that in no way supports what they say, and people just believe without reading the document! I have actually even seen this happen in peer reviewed published data. There is a claim, and a citation, and you check the citation and it doesn’t even study what was claimed, or the data do not actually support was is claimed. Frankly, science is long and boring and rarely ever conclusive, if it is, it takes a long time and lots of research to be conclusive.

4 Likes