Coronavirus

[thplinth]

On 9/9/2021 at 9:05 AM, thplinth said:

This is what he is talking about in Africa where Ivermectin is widely used in certain countries as an anti-parasitic. 

Here is hoping it does work eh.

The above post (now removed of course) in September was of the Japanese Doctor at the Tokyo Medical Association talking about using Ivermectin in August, as Japan at the time was suffering a far worse outbreak than before anyone was vaccinated.

If you look at their numbers something interesting then happened. They got it real bad but they managed to snuff it out relatively quickly. Is it Ivermectin related, maybe, maybe not, it certainly fits the timings. (It is also interesting they had such a bad outbreak recently after heavily rolling out the vaccines as well but that is another discussion.)

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/japan/

Maybe we can stick to the topic and not make it personal in future. Cheers.

[phart]

They haven't used ivermectin. It isn't approved.

Japan’s medicines regulator, the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), lists on its website the vaccines and therapeutics authorised for COVID-19 (here).

This list includes vaccines developed by Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AstraZeneca, along with the therapeutics remdesivir, baricitinib, casilibimab and sotrovimab.

There is no mention of ivermectin.

[thplinth]

People taking a near instantly definitive position on HCQ because Donald Trump recommended it speaks volumes about the intellectual integrity of the 'debate'. Then Ivermectin becomes the 'new HCQ' so it must be rubbished. It is borderline moron stuff. Partisan politics on a pandemic discussion. It is beyond pathetic and very sad in a way.

Edited November 9, 2021 by thplinth

[phart]

on that graph

 

[phart]

On 8/1/2020 at 6:17 AM, phart said:

That's 7 full Randomized controlled trials done with hydroxychloroquine and none have found it to be effective.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1849

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.20.20157651v1

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1009/5872589#.XxCYlMdGoJM

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4207

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.15.20151852v1

 

Aye was just going against Trump as opposed to listening to the evidence.

[phart]

Network of Right-Wing Health Care Providers Is Making Millions Off Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, Hacked Data Reveals

The data also reveals that 72,000 people paid at least $6.7 million for Covid-19 consultations promoted by America’s Frontline Doctors and vaccine conspiracist Simone Gold.

https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/covid-telehealth-hydroxychloroquine-ivermectin-hacked/

[phart]

 

[ThistleWhistle]

As of yesterday:

French health authority advises against Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for under 30s | Reuters

The Haute Autorite de Sante (HAS), which does not have legal power to ban or licence drugs but acts as an advisor to the French health sector, cited "very rare" risks linked to Myocarditis, a heart disease, that had shown up in recent data on the Moderna vaccine and in a French study published on Monday.

 

"Within the population aged under 30, this risk appears to be around five times lesser with Pfizer's Comirnaty jab compared to Moderna's Spikevax jab," HAS said in its opinion published on Monday.

 

UK - Mid August: 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-approved-by-mhra-in-12-17-year-olds

Dr June Raine, MHRA Chief Executive said:

I am pleased to confirm that that the COVID-19 vaccine made by Moderna has now been authorised in 12-17 year olds. The vaccine is safe and effective in this age group.

We have in place a comprehensive safety surveillance strategy for monitoring the safety of all UK-approved COVID-19 vaccines and this surveillance will include the 12- to 17-year age group.

It is for the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) to advise on whether this age group should be vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine made by Moderna as part of the deployment programme.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55274833

From BBC at the beginning of the week looks like we 'only' have 17m Moderna doses so not a massive player but wonder if we'll follow suit?

 

 

 

 

[phart]

It's a balancing act with all the risks and how small they are.

Glad i'm not having to make the decision.

[ThistleWhistle]

21 minutes ago, phart said:

It's a balancing act with all the risks and how small they are.

Glad i'm not having to make the decision.

I certainly don't envy them but from a risk vs reward perspective this one would seem fairly easy though - on the one hand it's the sixth largest volume of vaccine we have and might just need a re-arranging of the furniture around age ranges as to who gets it.  On the other all it would take is one kid having serious heart issues from Moderna after France banned it for confidence in the program to take a severe dent.   

[phart]

3 minutes ago, ThistleWhistle said:

I certainly don't envy them but from a risk vs reward perspective this one would seem fairly easy though - on the one hand it's the sixth largest volume of vaccine we have and might just need a re-arranging of the furniture around age ranges as to who gets it.  On the other all it would take is one kid having serious heart issues from Moderna after France banned it for confidence in the program to take a severe dent.   

I was meaning the general risk between the two Pfizier and mod.

But yeah go with the 5 times lesser risk one on the specifics.

[ThistleWhistle]

On 11/1/2021 at 9:06 PM, phart said:

actual ONS report

 

Thought the above would be of interest.  

Again for me public confidence in the vaccine is more important than its efficacy - this from yesterday did no favours at all:

NHS boss Amanda Pritchard is accused of 'abusing' Covid statistics | Daily Mail Online

• Ms Pritchard claimed today there were '14 times' more Covid patients in hospital now than 'this time last year'
• Yet figures show 800 admissions and 7,000 inpatients in England now compared to 1,300 and 11,000 in 2020
• NHS England was later forced to clarify that Ms Pritchard was referring to statistics from earlier this autumn

[phart]

1 minute ago, ThistleWhistle said:

Thought the above would be of interest.  

Again for me public confidence in the vaccine is more important than its efficacy - this from yesterday did no favours at all:

NHS boss Amanda Pritchard is accused of 'abusing' Covid statistics | Daily Mail Online

• Ms Pritchard claimed today there were '14 times' more Covid patients in hospital now than 'this time last year'
• Yet figures show 800 admissions and 7,000 inpatients in England now compared to 1,300 and 11,000 in 2020
• NHS England was later forced to clarify that Ms Pritchard was referring to statistics from earlier this autumn

Yeah all the mathmaticians have been going on about it last few days. The ones I quote in this thread anyway. Mostly for use of denominators haven't seen them talking about this specific one though. Hopefully it gets addressed.

For instance this is it for the case i saw

https://fullfact.org/health/phe-ukhsa-bolsonaro/

 

for the other issue of cherrypicking the 14 times more

 

[thplinth]

I think I posted this before but it is a very interesting drug is Ivermectin

They knew it was an anti-viral as far back as 2017 but it is even more extraordinary than that.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201711

Ivermectin: enigmatic multifaceted ‘wonder’ drug continues to surprise and exceed expectations
The Journal of Antibiotics volume 70, pages495–505 (2017)

Abstract
Over the past decade, the global scientific community have begun to recognize the unmatched value of an extraordinary drug, ivermectin, that originates from a single microbe unearthed from soil in Japan. Work on ivermectin has seen its discoverer, Satoshi Ōmura, of Tokyo’s prestigious Kitasato Institute, receive the 2014 Gairdner Global Health Award and the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, which he shared with a collaborating partner in the discovery and development of the drug, William Campbell of Merck & Co. Incorporated. Today, ivermectin is continuing to surprise and excite scientists, offering more and more promise to help improve global public health by treating a diverse range of diseases, with its unexpected potential as an antibacterial, antiviral and anti-cancer agent being particularly extraordinary.

The past: unmatched successes
Perhaps more than any other drug, ivermectin is a drug for the world’s poor. For most of this century, some 250 million people have been taking it annually to combat two of the world’s most devastating, disfiguring, debilitating and stigma-inducing diseases, Onchocerciasis and Lymphatic filariasis. Most of the recipients live in remote, rural, desperately under-resourced communities in developing countries and have virtually no access to even the most rudimentary of medical interventions. Moreover, all the treatments have been made available free of charge thanks to the unprecedented drug donation program.

Antiviral (e.g. HIV, dengue, encephalitis)
Recent research has confounded the belief, held for most of the past 40 years, that ivermectin was devoid of any antiviral characteristics. Ivermectin has been found to potently inhibit replication of the yellow fever virus, with EC50 values in the sub-nanomolar range. It also inhibits replication in several other flaviviruses, including dengue, Japanese encephalitis and tick-borne encephalitis, probably by targeting non-structural 3 helicase activity.97 Ivermectin inhibits dengue viruses and interrupts virus replication, bestowing protection against infection with all distinct virus serotypes, and has unexplored potential as a dengue antiviral.98

Ivermectin has also been demonstrated to be a potent broad-spectrum specific inhibitor of importin α/β-mediated nuclear transport and demonstrates antiviral activity against several RNA viruses by blocking the nuclear trafficking of viral proteins. It has been shown to have potent antiviral action against HIV-1 and dengue viruses, both of which are dependent on the importin protein superfamily for several key cellular processes. Ivermectin may be of import in disrupting HIV-1 integrase in HIV-1 as well as NS-5 (non-structural protein 5) polymerase in dengue viruses.99, 100

[phart]

I don't understand why they dont just use this graph it's not subject to timelines etc. The objections to the ONS 32 times thing are a lot lee robust than the other ones i pointed out, using opaque objections about seasonality. As opposed to actualy technical faults in the mathematics like the other ones. I'm not really equipped to sort it out though.

 

[Lamia]

3 hours ago, thplinth said:

Yet again you have to personalize the discussion. Thick as fuck. People can make their own mind up. All I posted was 'interesting'. 

It was a genuine question which yet again you avoid answering. Think that is the answer in itself right there.

[phart]

1 hour ago, Lamia said:

It was a genuine question which yet again you avoid answering. Think that is the answer in itself right there.

Weird how "personalise" has an American spelling.

[phart]

 

[dipped flake]

5 hours ago, thplinth said:

The above post (now removed of course) in September was of the Japanese Doctor at the Tokyo Medical Association talking about using Ivermectin in August, as Japan at the time was suffering a far worse outbreak than before anyone was vaccinated.

If you look at their numbers something interesting then happened. They got it real bad but they managed to snuff it out relatively quickly. Is it Ivermectin related, maybe, maybe not, it certainly fits the timings. (It is also interesting they had such a bad outbreak recently after heavily rolling out the vaccines as well but that is another discussion.)

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/japan/

Maybe we can stick to the topic and not make it personal in future. Cheers.

Maybe if you stuck to facts and not made up rubbish from right wing conspiracy nuts then people wouldn't make it personal

[phart]

The rabbit hole goes so deep

[thplinth]

17 hours ago, dipped flake said:

Maybe if you stuck to facts and not made up rubbish from right wing conspiracy nuts then people wouldn't make it personal

Nice of you to bring your nicola butt hurt from other threads to this discussion. Classy.

No idea what you are talking about but as you have a history of talking hysterical wank I'll just file it under flaked. I know you prefer it when it is the same half dozen circle jerks all tugging each other off but try to be more tolerant of other opinions. As we can see on multiple threads it is not possible to post views on this board on which the little orthodoxy clique disapprove of. Immediately they make it personal. Very noticeable.

[phart]

 

 

[thplinth]

I think if we want to get personal then for me this pandemic crisis has really surfaced a significant demographic within our midst who given the first whiff of fear have very authoritarian and censorious tendencies. Quite shocking at times.

Pretty much every power grab in history was done on the back of a crisis, some real but many manufactured or exaggerated. You often wonder about how the 'people of the day' allowed it to happen...

Well seeing so many willing footsoldiers (and not in the TA sense) on here and in wider society calling for people to be excluded from working, travelling, applauding them being denied their basic rights is pretty eye opening to say the least. And it is not the people you might have predicted before hand. No...

My impression of them is they are not the sharpest tools in the shed. Useful idiots perhaps is too strong but it is definitely heading that way quickly. They think they know best and that arrogance empowers them to tell you what to do what to think, to control your life. I find them a bit creepy.

[phart]

I for one welcome my new master snuffleupagus

[romanticscot]

3 hours ago, phart said:

The rabbit hole goes so deep

I personally found this to be disgusting. There is no reason, well medical anyway that children should be given medicines that are not fully tested, for a disease that they are at so low risk at catching on a mass scale. 

Edited November 10, 2021 by romanticscot