COVID-19 vaccine discussion

Effective Monday August 16, 2021 the City of New Orleans will require proof of vaccination or a current negative Covid test for ALL bars, restaurants and breweries.

12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

And it begs the obvious question about "approval" for an untested alternative.  FDA approval seems very selective.  In the end, both seem effective.  Many of our poorer, black and brown brethren around the world are seeing positive results using therapeutics.  The state of Delhi with a vax rate of 6+% saw a 97% reduction in their cases (P-1 variant).  Mexico.  Argentina.  Parts of Africa.  Venezuela.   It's been around for four decades and treated billions upon billions of people and is one of the safest drugs around.  Combined with other measures and the vaccines, it seems like a slam dunk?

Ask yourself what may be potential factors associated with an antiparasitic agent pinging effectiveness in poorly executed studies implemented in third world countries. There is a big fucking confounder here. 

19 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

And it begs the obvious question about "approval" for an untested alternative.  FDA approval seems very selective.  In the end, both seem effective.  Many of our poorer, black and brown brethren around the world are seeing positive results using therapeutics.  The state of Delhi with a vax rate of 6+% saw a 97% reduction in their cases (P-1 variant).  Mexico.  Argentina.  Parts of Africa.  Venezuela.   It's been around for four decades and treated billions upon billions of people and is one of the safest drugs around.  Combined with other measures and the vaccines, it seems like a slam dunk?

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-reports-44230-new-covid-19-cases-overall-tally-3157-mln-2021-07-30/
 

From not long ago in which cases are rising again(did they stop using the therapeutics that you say drove the numbers down?) and that 38% have at least one vaccine shot and an estimated 2/3 have antibodies from eithe mr infection or vaccination. 
 

doesn’t seem to match any of your numbers. 

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Ask yourself what may be potential factors associated with an antiparasitic agent pinging effectiveness in poorly executed studies implemented in third world countries. There is a big fucking confounder here. 

Um many of the patients also have a parasitic infection and effectively treating that helps?

if you have covid and loa loa worms, ivermectin is for you, you poor son of a bitch. 

Edited August 12, 2021 by Pato del Muerto

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Um many of the patients also have a parasitic infection and effectively treating that helps?

Bingo.  Endemic strongyloides or other co-infections, layer in use of steroids for treatment of COVID and impact on outcome of co-occurring infection, and no shit an antiparasitic reduces mortality rates. 

I'm no medical expert, but it seems to me anyone with half a brain should automatically be suspicious when the proponents of a drug tout it as 100% effective. 

CSB when I was a 3rd year med student we had this skinny dude from South America who was sick as shit and no one could figure out what was going on. No fever normal total WBC normal other labs. The intern looked closer at the differential and his eosinophils were sky high. She said I bet he’s got worms. Long story short gave him ivermectin and 2 days later he shit out a 2 foot tapeworm /csb

22 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

She said I bet he’s got worms.

Pics? 
 

 

of the intern, not the worms you assholes. 

39 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I'm no medical expert, but it seems to me anyone with half a brain should automatically be suspicious when the proponents of a drug tout it as 100% effective. 

Or suggest buying the apple flavored paste from Tractor Supply Co.

59 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Um many of the patients also have a parasitic infection and effectively treating that helps?

if you have covid and loa loa worms, ivermectin is for you, you poor son of a bitch. 

Maybe that's working for aggys.  All those parasites from fucking sheep

56 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

CSB when I was a 3rd year med student we had this skinny dude from South America who was sick as shit and no one could figure out what was going on. No fever normal total WBC normal other labs. The intern looked closer at the differential and his eosinophils were sky high. She said I bet he’s got worms. Long story short gave him ivermectin and 2 days later he shit out a 2 foot tapeworm /csb

That’s good enough for me. Where do I get this again? Tractors Supply?

21 minutes ago, Telegraph_it said:

That’s good enough for me. Where do I get this again? Tractors Supply?

Confession.  A work buddy of mine placed an informational-type crank call to Tractor Supply in Tyler with a heavy, put-on, spreadneck accent, asking the poor guy who answer the phone about Ivermectin because his "old lady" was coughing (cue the other coworker coughing in the background for effect).  The guy was like, we have it, but you know it "don't work for that."  My buddy, without missing a beat, said, "I read an article!"  The guy was like, "We'll sell you a tube but limited supply." 

 

This poor guy sounded exhausted.  Not his first rodeo with this sort of call.  We probably were the first crank.

1 minute ago, dcbc said:

Confession.  A work buddy of mine placed an informational-type crank call to Tractor Supply in Tyler with a heavy, put-on, spreadneck accent, asking the poor guy who answer the phone about Ivermectin because his "old lady" was coughing (cue the other coworker coughing in the background for effect).  The guy was like, we have it, but you know it "don't work for that."  My buddy, without missing a beat, said, "I read an article!"  The guy was like, "We'll sell you a tube but limited supply." 

 

This poor guy sounded exhausted.  Not his first rodeo with this sort of call.  We probably were the first crank.

Eh, this was relatively harmless but still not good form playing bits on retail workers / servers. The poor bastard answering the phone has enough shit to deal with. Punch up, not down. 

1 minute ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Eh, this was relatively harmless but still not good form playing bits on retail workers / servers. The poor bastard answering the phone has enough shit to deal with. Punch up, not down. 

Yeah.  I agree.  I was an observer, but I laughed.  So guilty.  Plus, I don't know exactly how many phone calls people at our Tractor Supply field on a daily.  So maybe it pulled him away from an unvaccinated customer for a minute and saved his life.  But yeah.  You hold the moral high ground.  Here I am.  Asshole, me!

52 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

Maybe that's working for aggys.  All those parasites from fucking sheep

What if I were to tell you aggy IS the parasite?

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Pics? 
 

 

of the intern, not the worms you assholes. 

Pre camera phones but she was cute

Interesting article in pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) from the Mayo Clinic comparing Pfizer and Moderna and how they fare over time, including against Delta. It's not peer reviewed yet, but it's also the Mayo Clinic, so I've got a reasonable level of confidence in it. It's important information that's been asked for a lot on these threads, so I'm going to break it down.

Remember though, there is a chance the study won't get published, or will be published with revisions.  

This post is going to be a lot of words, but there's a lot to unpack here. Even the TL:DR is long.

 

TL:DR Both mRNA vaccines are still highly effective against ICU visits and deaths at 6 months. There were no recorded deaths in this group for either vaccine in this study. Pfizer declined hard in July against infections and less against hospitalizations, but continues to prevent ICU visits and deaths at the same rate as Moderna. Pfizer is less effective against Delta than Alpha. 

As of July, Moderna confers a 50% risk reduction for overall infection over Pfizer. In Florida, it's a 60% reduction.

There is no statistical difference in ICU visits and no deaths for either vaccine.

Risks are still low overall for fully vaccinated people of either vaccine.  The number of breakthroughs is still very low at 326 total so far. 

 

The study ran until July 29, so it does include Delta taking over. Patients from Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Not a great cross-section of America, but what we have for now.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707v2

 

Quote

43,895 mRNA-1273-vaccinated individuals, 35,902 were fully vaccinated.     43,895 BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals, 37,573 were fully vaccinated

Breakthroughs were rare, with twice as many occurring in the Pfizer cohort.  

Quote

breakthrough infections n = 106 for Moderna; n = 220 for Pfizer

 

Quote

From January 2021 until July 2021

Infections 

Moderna-: 86%, 95%CI: 81-90.6%      Pfizer: 76%, 95%CI: 69-81%)

 

Hospitalizations

Moderna: 91.6%, 95% CI: 81-97%        Pfizer: 85%, 95% CI: 73-93%

 

ICU admissions

Moderna: 93.3%, 95% CI: 57-99.8%  Pfizer: 87%, 95% CI:46-98.6%, p=1.2×10−3

 

No deaths for either cohort. 

 

They noticed the vaccine effectiveness was declining in April 2021 from Moderna-93% and Pfizer-86% effective to 86% and 76% respectively. So they started collecting data comparing the vaccines against one another in Feb 2021. 

 

Quote

These estimates of effectiveness against infection (86% and 76%) were lower than those that we previously observed in the Mayo Clinic Health System through April 20, 2021 (Moderna: 93.3%, 95% CI: 85.7-97.4%; Pfizer: 86.1%, 95% CI: 82.4-89.1%).6 We thus analyzed the effectiveness of full vaccination longitudinally on a monthly basis starting in February 2021 

 

July arrived and so did Delta. 

 

Quote

Notably, the Delta variant prevalence in Minnesota increased from 0.7% in May to over 70% in July whereas the Alpha variant prevalence decreased from 85% to 13% over the same time period. 

 

They noticed a much bigger decline, especially for Pfizer, correlated with Delta's arrival in force.  Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation and they can't yet say if the increased infections are due to Delta evading the vaccine, or declining immunity, though they do show that Pfizer is more effective against Alpha than it is against Delta. 

 

July 2021 effectiveness against infection

 

Quote

Moderna: 76%, 95% CI: 58-87%     Pfizer: 42%, 95% CI: 13-62%

 

Quote

95% confidence intervals of the estimates for effectiveness against infection did not overlap (Moderna: 81-90.6%; Pfizer: 69-81%) 

 

 

July comparison

Quote

In most states, individuals vaccinated with Moderna were less likely to experience breakthrough infections over the duration of the study period (IRRFlorida: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.28-0.62; IRRWisconsin: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.26-1.0; IRRArizona: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.15-0.92; IRRIowa: 0.0, 95% CI: 0.0-1.6) (Table 5). Considering all states together, mRNA-1273 conferred a two-fold risk reduction against breakthrough infection compared to Pfizer (IRR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.39-0.64)

 

They speculate the same reasons for Moderna being more effective that have been speculated by myself and others on here (larger doses and longer dosing interval), but also note the lipids used to coat the spike protein are different.

Unfortunately, they didn't analyze date of vaccination, so it's not clear if it's waning immunity, or Delta, or something else. I think it's likely it's both, but that's my own opinion. 

 

Quote

Finally, while we did observe a recent reduction in vaccine effectiveness in July, we did not analyze the risk of infection relative to the date of vaccination. The reduced effectiveness could be due to waning immunity over time, the dynamic landscape of SARS-CoV-2 variants, or other factors that were not considered here.

 

They do find that Pfizer is less effective at preventing symptomatic infection against Delta, than it was against Alpha, though still highly effective. 

 

Quote

We observed a pronounced reduction in the effectiveness of Pfizer coinciding with the surging prevalence of the Delta variant in the United States, but this temporal association does not imply causality, and there are likely several factors contributing to changes in vaccine effectiveness over time. Consistent with our findings, a previous test-negative case-control study found that full vaccination with Pfizer was less effective in preventing symptomatic infection with the Delta variant (88.0%, 95% CI: 85-90.1%) than with the Alpha variant (93.7%, 95% CI: 91.6-95.3%), although it was highly effective against both.17

 

Any tips for those who've taken their 'not quite 12yo' kids in? 

Am thinking about one of the Austin/Travis Co  no-appointment sites. My thought was to use the real name but change the birth year so the card will mostly be correct if needed at some point. 

6 minutes ago, Pods said:

Interesting article in pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) from the Mayo Clinic comparing Pfizer and Moderna and how they fare over time, including against Delta. It's not peer reviewed yet, but it's also the Mayo Clinic, so I've got a reasonable level of confidence in it. It's important information that's been asked for a lot on these threads, so I'm going to break it down.

Remember though, there is a chance the study won't get published, or will be published with revisions.  

This post is going to be a lot of words, but there's a lot to unpack here. Even the TL:DR is long.

 

TL:DR Both mRNA vaccines are still highly effective against ICU visits and deaths at 6 months. There were no recorded deaths in this group for either vaccine in this study. Pfizer declined hard in July against infections and less against hospitalizations, but continues to prevent ICU visits and deaths at the same rate as Moderna. Pfizer is less effective against Delta than Alpha. 

As of July, Moderna confers a 50% risk reduction for overall infection over Pfizer. In Florida, it's a 60% reduction.

There is no statistical difference in ICU visits and no deaths for either vaccine.

Risks are still low overall for fully vaccinated people of either vaccine.  The number of breakthroughs is still very low at 326 total so far. 

 

The study ran until July 29, so it does include Delta taking over. Patients from Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Not a great cross-section of America, but what we have for now.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707v2

 

Breakthroughs were rare, with twice as many occurring in the Pfizer cohort.  

 

 

They noticed the vaccine effectiveness was declining in April 2021 from Moderna-93% and Pfizer-86% effective to 86% and 76% respectively. So they started collecting data comparing the vaccines against one another in Feb 2021. 

 

 

July arrived and so did Delta. 

 

 

They noticed a much bigger decline, especially for Pfizer, correlated with Delta's arrival in force.  Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation and they can't yet say if the increased infections are due to Delta evading the vaccine, or declining immunity, though they do show that Pfizer is more effective against Alpha than it is against Delta. 

 

July 2021 effectiveness against infection

 

 

 

 

July comparison

 

They speculate the same reasons for Moderna being more effective that have been speculated by myself and others on here (larger doses and longer dosing interval), but also note the lipids used to coat the spike protein are different.

Unfortunately, they didn't analyze date of vaccination, so it's not clear if it's waning immunity, or Delta, or something else. I think it's likely it's both, but that's my own opinion. 

 

 

They do find that Pfizer is less effective at preventing symptomatic infection against Delta, than it was against Alpha, though still highly effective. 

 

 

I wish I could get that data for J&J

2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Go fuck yourself you lying duplicitous piece of shit.

Well at least this time, Baba didn’t cite to a study that literally has the word “RETRACTED” stamped all over it.

2 hours ago, GreenspointTexas said:

Effective Monday August 16, 2021 the City of New Orleans will require proof of vaccination or a current negative Covid test for ALL bars, restaurants and breweries.

Sounds like a road trip to NOLA could be back on

1 minute ago, hornmpa96 said:

Sounds like a road trip to NOLA could be back on

I’m going in October. I better figure out how to get that vaccine card to fit in my wallet. 

14 minutes ago, BillyBadAss said:

Any tips for those who've taken their 'not quite 12yo' kids in? 

Am thinking about one of the Austin/Travis Co  no-appointment sites. My thought was to use the real name but change the birth year so the card will mostly be correct if needed at some point. 

I’m pretty sure the only tip would be to lie about their age 

5 minutes ago, Telegraph_it said:

I’m going in October. I better figure out how to get that vaccine card to fit in my wallet. 

They fold.  It is a little annoying that they couldn’t have the foresight to make them credit card sized.

Edited August 13, 2021 by conVINCEd

The problem with the card besides its stupid size and complete inability to stand long term wear and tear is how fucking easy it is going to be for people to simply fake. 

They fold.  It is a little annoying that they couldn’t have the foresight to make them credit card sized.

We have a Louisiana govt app called LAWallet that has a digital state drivers license that is valid in-state. They’ve also added the info on your vaccination - so my phone proves I’m vaxed - and tells me how many days it’s been since my 2nd shot. Handy.

Edit to my previous post at the bottom, they said their results are consistent with previous findings that Pfizer is less effective against Delta than Alpha. They weren't looking at that in this study. 

13 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

We have a Louisiana govt app called LAWallet that has a digital state drivers license that is valid in-state. They’ve also added the info on your vaccination - so my phone proves I’m vaxed - and tells me how many days it’s been since my 2nd shot. Handy.

Louisiana leading the way on anything surprises me.  Good for you guys.

1 hour ago, Pods said:

They speculate the same reasons for Moderna being more effective that have been speculated by myself and others on here (larger doses and longer dosing interval), but also note the lipids used to coat the spike protein are different.

 

The UK data is potentially informative to the impact of extended intervals.  Some people really got bent out of shape when extended dosing intervals were bounced around as a roll out optimization strategy, but I think that UK and Canada made the right decisions.  Not only faster uptake, but arguably evidence of longer durability. The FDA and CDC are simply ill equipped for agile decision making during a quickly moving pandemic. Their inertia prove beneficial in other times and places, but they have just continually been a shit show during this whole thing. 

4 hours ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

No, unfortunately most of these people have already passed on their genes.

21 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

The UK data is potentially informative to the impact of extended intervals.  Some people really got bent out of shape when extended dosing intervals were bounced around as a roll out optimization strategy, but I think that UK and Canada made the right decisions.  Not only faster uptake, but arguably evidence of longer durability. The FDA and CDC are simply ill equipped for agile decision making during a quickly moving pandemic. Their inertia prove beneficial in other times and places, but they have just continually been a shit show during this whole thing. 

Agreed. Masks, Fomites, Aerosol spread, the CDC been months to a year+ behind emerging data. It's been very frustrating. 

I'd really like to see Pfizer crank up a trial teasing out how much unique impact delayed doses and larger doses each add. I would expect they each contribute. 

This is also a bit of a catch-22 for Pfizer if increased dosing interval adds additional immune response and that holds for a third shot, which it may not. If it does, Pfizer folks are likely going to need boosters sooner than Moderna. 

34 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

The UK data is potentially informative to the impact of extended intervals.  Some people really got bent out of shape when extended dosing intervals were bounced around as a roll out optimization strategy, but I think that UK and Canada made the right decisions.  Not only faster uptake, but arguably evidence of longer durability. The FDA and CDC are simply ill equipped for agile decision making during a quickly moving pandemic. Their inertia prove beneficial in other times and places, but they have just continually been a shit show during this whole thing. 

They got behind in March of 2020 when fauci said no reason to wear masks at this time, and have never caught up. 

15 minutes ago, Pods said:

Agreed. Masks, Fomites, Aerosol spread, the CDC been months to a year+ behind emerging data. It's been very frustrating. 

 

The CDC does a really good job with historical data, not so much with agility in an evolving situation. 

6 hours ago, Pods said:

They speculate the same reasons for Moderna being more effective that have been speculated by myself and others on here (larger doses and longer dosing interval), but also note the lipids used to coat the spike protein are different.

Unfortunately, they didn't analyze date of vaccination, so it's not clear if it's waning immunity, or Delta, or something else. I think it's likely it's both, but that's my own opinion. 

Another variable to consider is that Pfizer vaccinations started considerably earlier than Moderna on average, so there are more people walking around 5-6 months post-Pfizer vaccination than post-Moderna. The Mayo didn't look at vaccination date, so we can't tell how big of an effect that had.  

Now that there’s officially a third shot for the immunocompromised, does anyone know if there’s data on whether the third shot should be the same as or different from the first two?   MIL got Pfizer back in January and isn’t sure if she should get Moderna or Pfizer for the boster. 

9 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

Well at least this time, Baba didn’t cite to a study that literally has the word “RETRACTED” stamped all over it.

Well that's just perfect.

Lmao babayaga’ed just became a thing, didn’t it?

14 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-reports-44230-new-covid-19-cases-overall-tally-3157-mln-2021-07-30/
 

From not long ago in which cases are rising again(did they stop using the therapeutics that you say drove the numbers down?) and that 38% have at least one vaccine shot and an estimated 2/3 have antibodies from eithe mr infection or vaccination. 
 

doesn’t seem to match any of your numbers. 

The numbers I cited were for the state of Delhi, not all of India.  They have/had a 6% +/- vax rate and from last I saw and their case count dropped by more than 90+% using a cocktail of therapeutics, including ivermectin.  If you look at the case counts today, they remain extremely low.

Cases peaked in April at 25-26K, and still remain low today - August 12th:  new cases 49, 5 day average of 51

 

14 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Ask yourself what may be potential factors associated with an antiparasitic agent pinging effectiveness in poorly executed studies implemented in third world countries. There is a big fucking confounder here. 

It's not a magic bullet.  But it's also been around for four decades, and is listed at the WHO as one of the safest drugs around with minimal side effects.  Hundreds of millions of doses go out each year for a myriad of other reasons (such as the cure for river blindness).  And it costs about a dollar a day.  You can also ask yourself why these poor countries use it as it's their only recourse?  It's anecdotal evidence bears significant further research in addition to the more than two dozen current studies.  If those efficacy rates can be replicated, it seems a perfect pairing with the vax to take at the onset of symptoms.  Like taking Tamiflu early to mitigate symptoms, even for those with the flu shot.  

15 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Ask yourself what may be potential factors associated with an antiparasitic agent pinging effectiveness in poorly executed studies implemented in third world countries. There is a big fucking confounder here. 

Why is there so much pushback on therapeutics?

12 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

Well at least this time, Baba didn’t cite to a study that literally has the word “RETRACTED” stamped all over it.

The original post didn't have the retraction on - the one I showed Brisket, so if it was, mea culpa.  The point wasn't that masks are dangerous.  We wear them.  The point was they are not zero risk either (assuming they are even worn appropriately)

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The original post didn't have the retraction on - the one I showed Brisket, so if it was, mea culpa.  The point wasn't that masks are dangerous.  We wear them.  The point was they are not zero risk either (assuming they are even worn appropriately)

The point you were trying to make is NOT supported by any clinical data or studies. They retracted the paper because it was bad science and its methodology was flawed. 

Masks are zero risk. Stop seeding doubt and concern trolling people out of good health practices. You've been consistently wrong on the length, severity, authenticity, and effective measures against COVID. Give it a rest, dude. We're already two Easters and an election past your original predictions of when it would end

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The original post didn't have the retraction on - the one I showed Brisket, so if it was, mea culpa.  The point wasn't that masks are dangerous.  We wear them.  The point was they are not zero risk either (assuming they are even worn appropriately)

I quoted your response to Brisket. The paper you linked in that response was retracted in July, several weeks before you cited it in your post. It had a retraction notice as well as a watermark with “RETRACTED” stamped all over the text. If you even so much as looked at the paper (much less read it carefully), you could not possibly have missed that.

And you can’t acknowledge that your only evidence in support of your point is a retracted paper, and then go ahead and reassert the point anyway. You completely failed to support that point. Your only evidence is junk. Stop wasting our time with bullshit.

2 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

I quoted your response to Brisket. The paper you linked in that response was retracted in July, several weeks before you cited it in your post. It had a retraction notice as well as a watermark with “RETRACTED” stamped all over the text. If you even so much as looked at the paper (much less read it carefully), you could not possibly have missed that.

And you can’t acknowledge that your only evidence in support of your point is a retracted paper, and then go ahead and reassert the point anyway. You completely failed to support that point. Your only evidence is junk. Stop wasting our time with bullshit.

That was the only paper ever written about problematic issues with masks and children?  

14 minutes ago, lmao said:

Why is there so much pushback on therapeutics?

Because they usually have to be administered in hospitals/health care facilities.  Which can't spare the space/personnel right now.  

They're doing fascinating stuff with robotic prosthetics for amputees.  But the best treatment is not to lose your arm in the first place.  

Nurses don't know what else to do right now but plead with people to just not engage in anything dangerous for the next few weeks because they can't help anybody due to the overwhelming influx of Covid-19 patients with delta and no vaxx

16 minutes ago, lmao said:

Why is there so much pushback on therapeutics?

Ummmm.....there's not?  Physicians in the field have tried any number of things (from drugs to treatment techniques -- some of which have improved, such as trying to avoid intubation, and putting patients on their stomach instead of their back, as just one example).  And there ARE several therapeutics that have been demonstrated to actually knock back the illness and help patients -- monoclonal antibody treatments being the best example.

There is no fucking conspiracy against the concept of an existing, safe drug being an effective therapeutic.  There just isn't.  Every doctor I know would fucking LOVE it if treating COVID was as easy as putting every patient on the equivalent of a "Z pack" of invermectin, they got better, and COVID became no big deal.

What is more problematic is the obsession with "miracle cures" (HCQ, invermectin) that supposedly magically make COVID a non-issue, and because COVID is a non-issue, we should ditch the vaccine approach.

8 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

That was the only paper ever written about problematic issues with masks and children?  

Post all the others, then.

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Because they usually have to be administered in hospitals/health care facilities.  Which can't spare the space/personnel right now.  

They're doing fascinating stuff with robotic prosthetics for amputees.  But the best treatment is not to lose your arm in the first place.  

Nurses don't know what else to do right now but plead with people to just not engage in anything dangerous for the next few weeks because they can't help anybody due to the overwhelming influx of Covid-19 patients with delta and no vaxx

It's a pill.  Any doctor or PA can write a script for it.  Most countries take a combo of Iver, z-packs, and zinc at the onset of symptoms.  Hardly complicated to dole out and each has been around for decades?  I want to say Iver and z-packs are listed on the WHO as "essential medicine".  I know Iver is at least.  

5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Because they usually have to be administered in hospitals/health care facilities.  Which can't spare the space/personnel right now.  

They're doing fascinating stuff with robotic prosthetics for amputees.  But the best treatment is not to lose your arm in the first place.  

Nurses don't know what else to do right now but plead with people to just not engage in anything dangerous for the next few weeks because they can't help anybody due to the overwhelming influx of Covid-19 patients with delta and no vaxx

It just seems like an odd thing to have a strong political opinion on. It's a decision made between a physician & patient. 

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummmm.....there's not? 

lol.  Social media has been censoring ivermectin talk for months now.