Talk of The Villages Florida

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- The Villages, Florida, Non Villages Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/)

- - Vaccine (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/vaccine-319488/)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malsua (Post 1942472)

Even when the FDA wrote that statement, there was a mountain of evidence from blinded, peer revied studies showing efficacy of Ivermectin in prophylaxes an treatment of Covid-19 at all stages of the disease.

The FDA statement says "taking large doses can be bad".

No one I read ever mentioned talking large doses. The dose is .2mg/kg. Overdose does not begin until about 2mg/kg. I.e. roughly 10x suggested dosing. Ivermectin has an extremely wide safety profile as well where the therapeutic effect occurs all across the middle, no where near toxic dosing begins.

The FDA article also goes on to mention not using it off label. 20% of the drugs in this country are used off label.

I was taking Ivermectin since about late November until I got my Vaxx. Zero issues.
Wasn't cheap. 28 3mg pills were $107 and my dose is 7 every two weeks.

One state in India just announced they are recommending EVERYONE in their state begin a regime of it. Uttar Predash and a few others with low covid rates, have already been doing that. The proof is in the numbers. It works.

Merck makes and sells Ivermectin. They are in a position to make money from Ivermectin. Here is a statement from Merck from 5 hours ago:

"No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease"

Here is a link to the Merck site and their statement:

Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Merck.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by chet2020 (Post 1942496)

Someone will make some money however, if the unvaccinated begin taking it as a prophylactic, in short order the virus will be eradicated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chet2020 (Post 1942496)

The Merck statement is from February.

I have no idea why Merck is ignoring a vast amount of study on the efficacy of Ivermectin. Merck gave up the patent on it and they also have a new competing drug.

Take a minute and read some of the following.
https://bird-group.org/wp-content/up...ting_the.4.pdf

https://bird-group.org/wp-content/up...ting_the.4.pdf

That is from the British researcher group BIRD and is an article from the FLCCC group.

So that's a Meta Analysis.

Quote:

Conclusions: Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to
viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly

You can look at the individual studies if you like. Every single study, every single time shows decreased time to viral clearance, reduced mortality at pretty much any stage of the disease and better outcomes. It also works to prevent it in the first place.

I'm not sure why Merck is on about the safety profile. Ivermectin has been dosed north of 4 billion times. The contraindications are well known and the safety profile is _BETTER_ than aspirin. Aspirin kills more people in a year than Ivermectin has killed in the 40+ years it's been dispensed. If you know of a safe drug, compare it to Ivermectin. I'm willing to bet it's not as safe as Ivermectin. I'm not making light of this, drugs can kill if improperly dosed or if they interact with other drugs. Ivermectin has a blood thinner that it can interact with that causes a deficiency. There's one or two other minor things, and that's it. It's an exceptionally safe drug. This is all well known.

You are joking, correct?

You need to get tested for the flu virus to confirm you have it and you get a vaccination for it!

I never got tested.....What are you talking about?????

No herd immunity

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie0723 (Post 1942330)

The main problem was overwhelming hospitals. Vaccine has done it's job reducing hospitalizations to a mostly manageable level.

The vaccinated have a COVID risk no more than the flu now.

I no longer worry about those who refuse, their body, their choice, their risk.

Unfortunately, with the high numbers of people unwilling to get the vaccine, we are unlikely to get to herd immunity for a generation. Those more vulnerable may continue to get very sick and some will die. Those unwilling to get the vaccine will put everyone at risk for years to come because the vaccine isn’t 100% effective and some vaccinated will die. The unwillingness to get the vaccine becomes more than a personal issue but a societal responsibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by larbud (Post 1942272)

When have we ever needed a vaccine for a virus that you need to be tested for in order to know whether you have it or not?
That is the most assinine thing I've ever heard.
When have we ever needed a vaccine for a virus that we have a cure for?

Now THAT's a dang good question! Actually, though, there is no "cure" per se. There isn't even a treatment protocol. There only that "test," in case you have no symptoms, and the reliance on God's built-inhaling mechanism.

But that doesn't gain more power and control for the gubment now, does it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by OETTING (Post 1942621)

Not true. If you are vaccinated, if you do catch it, it won't kill you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan (Post 1942282)

Are you just poking the lion or do you actually believe this?

Hmm, let's see polio, measles, chickenpox, and on and on. You get symptoms, you get tested you know you are screwed because you didn't get the vaccine.

Excuse me? What cure do we have? I am sure there are about 500,000 dead Americans that would be interested in that little tidbit.

Ugh. Another vaccine post