People Taking Livestock Drug to Treat COVID

[classical5]

Just take the vaccine. Why would you rather take drugs meant for animals?

Ivermectin: Health officials warn people not to take a drug meant for livestock to ward off or treat Covid-19 - CNN

Why would someone take an animal medication? You are taking an untried vaccine made with new untested technology that has never been used in humans - not even in trials - before covid. In fact mRNA was universally considered experimental until covid, and nobody even applied for human trials because in animal trials it caused autoimmune disease.

Everyone taking mRNA vaccines is participating in a giant experiment. You are risking your life and health over the flu. And you question someone taking a triedand true vet med?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Did the supply of fish tank cleaner run out? My guess is that poison control centers have always been kept quite busy by people trying all kinds of toxic home remedies. But of course anything Covid related will make the headlines.

 

[classical5]

Did the supply of fish tank cleaner run out? My guess is that poison control centers have always been kept quite busy by people trying all kinds of toxic home remedies. But of course anything Covid related will make the headlines.

People today are more stupid than 20 years ago. Who needs a warning on a lawn mower that says not to put your hand in a running mower?

When I was a kid the car owners manual included instructions on adjusting the carburetor, todays manuals advise not to touch the hot engine.

 

[Ceallaigh]

People today are more stupid than 20 years ago. Who needs a warning on a lawn mower that says not to put your hand in a running mower?

When I was a kid the car owners manual included instructions on adjusting the carburetor, todays manuals advise not to touch the hot engine.

I think that's probably due to frivolous lawsuits.

 

[classical5]

I think that's probably due to frivolous lawsuits.

I think that’s true but also a sign of increased stupidity.

When I was a kid if someone filed a lawsuit because he wasn’t warned not to Stick his hand in a mower he would never get a lawyer or a judge and would be laughed out of town.

 

[Ceallaigh]

I think that’s true but also a sign of increased stupidity.

When I was a kid if someone filed a lawsuit because he wasn’t warned not to Stick his hand in a mower he would never get a lawyer or a judge and would be laughed out of town.

Personally I didn't keep track of stuff like that when I was a kid. Although I remember seeing a man with cut up fingers from sticking his hand in the fan blades of a car he was working on back around 1969.

 

[The Barbarian]

Why would someone take an animal medication? You are taking an untried vaccine made with new untested technology that has never been used in humans - not even in trials - before covid. In fact mRNA was universally considered experimental until covid, and nobody even applied for human trials because in animal trials it caused autoimmune disease.

Interesting. Show us that.

Ironically, mRNA vaccines show some promise in treating autoimmune diseases:

Science 2021 Jan 8;371(6525):145-153. doi: 10.1126/science.aay3638.
A noninflammatory mRNA vaccine for treatment of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Abstract


The ability to control autoreactive T cells without inducing systemic immune suppression is the major goal for treatment of autoimmune diseases. The key challenge is the safe and efficient delivery of pharmaceutically well-defined antigens in a noninflammatory context. Here, we show that systemic delivery of nanoparticle-formulated 1 methylpseudouridine-modified messenger RNA (m1Ψ mRNA) coding for disease-related autoantigens results in antigen presentation on splenic CD11c+ antigen-presenting cells in the absence of costimulatory signals. In several mouse models of multiple sclerosis, the disease is suppressed by treatment with such m1Ψ mRNA. The treatment effect is associated with a reduction of effector T cells and the development of regulatory T cell (Treg cell) populations. Notably, these Treg cells execute strong bystander immunosuppression and thus improve disease induced by cognate and noncognate autoantigens.

Nat Rev Immunol 2021 Feb;21(2):72. doi: 10.1038/s41577-021-00504-3.
mRNA vaccine shows promise in autoimmunity
Abstract
A vaccine based on liposome-formulated uracil-modified mRNA shows promise in mouse models of multiple sclerosis.

Nat Rev Drug Discov 2021 Feb;20(2):99. doi: 10.1038/d41573-021-00014-w.
Suppressing autoimmunity with mRNA vaccines

As you know, the Pfizer mRNA vaccine has been extensively tested and has full FDA approval. Someone who knows no more than you do about it, has been handing you all sorts of false stories.

 

[The Barbarian]

I think that’s true but also a sign of increased stupidity.

They aren't stupid; they're just politically indoctrinated. So, in spite of what doctors and scientists say, they just can't hear it. Stupidity is less damaging than that kind of indoctrination.

When I was a kid if someone filed a lawsuit because he wasn’t warned not to Stick his hand in a mower he would never get a lawyer or a judge and would be laughed out of town.

Many years ago, I was an ergonomist for an insurance company. I had heard all those stories, too. But talking to claims people, they told me most of them were urban legends, or with stuff added to, or left out of the story to make it sound more absurd.

I guess the classic one is the hot coffee story.

Like most people, you’ve probably heard about the lady who sued McDonalds and won millions because her coffee was too hot. The perfect example of a greedy individual taking advantage of a broken system, right? I mean that’s what the news reported? Right? What if I told you that everything you thought you knew about the “Hot Coffee” case was wrong.
Real Story Behind the McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case

The huge punitive damages (ultimately $480,000) were due to the fact that McDonald's internal documents showed that they knew what they were doing was dangerous and was harming people, but they decided it was cheaper to serve coffee at dangerous temperatures rather than fix the problem. Turns out they were right. The damages in the case were quite modest, given the costs of fixing the problem. Which they finally did, fearing more lawsuits.

That was only the most egregious example. There are lots of others floating around.

 

[Arcangl86]

You are taking an untried vaccine made with new untested technology that has never been used in humans - not even in trials - before covid. In fact mRNA was universally considered experimental until covid, and nobody even applied for human trials because in animal trials it caused autoimmune disease.

Everyone taking mRNA vaccines is participating in a giant experiment. You are risking your life and health over the flu. And you question someone taking a triedand true vet med?

1) COVID-19 is not the flu and is both significantly more dangerous and more contagious. 2) Moderna was literally founded to develop mRNA vaccines and completed 2 phase 1 trial of a mRNA flu vaccine between August 2015 and December 2017, which is 2 years before COVID appeared on the radar. 3)
Humans and livestock are very different animals. Things designed for one aren't automatically safe for the other.

 

[classical5]

1) COVID-19 is not the flu and is both significantly more dangerous and more contagious. 2) Moderna was literally founded to develop mRNA vaccines and completed 2 phase 1 trial of a mRNA flu vaccine between August 2015 and December 2017, which is 2 years before COVID appeared on the radar. 3)
Humans and livestock are very different animals. Things designed for one aren't automatically safe for the other.

1). Propaganda not supported by medical data.

2). I stand corrected. There was a human trial. But you didn’t bother to read the actual study.

The abstract says there were no adverse reactions. Wrong! There were 201 people in the study, 124 adverse events, at least 10 severe, some groups were dropped from the study. LOL Moderna only kept people in the study who did not have an adverse reaction!

No surprise, Moderna has a big financial interest.

As you wrote Modernas sole purpose is mRNA. Of course they make their study look good. But it’s called a conflict of interest.

 

[Arcangl86]

1). Propaganda not supported by medical data.

Yeah, I put more trust in the Mayo Clinic, the best hospital in the country, then a random person online.

2). I stand corrected. There was a human trial. But you didn’t bother to read the actual study.

The abstract says there were no adverse reactions. Wrong! There were 201 people in the study, 124 adverse events, at least 10 severe, some groups were dropped from the study. LOL Moderna only kept people in the study who did not have an adverse reaction!

No surprise, Moderna has a big financial interest.

As you wrote Modernas sole purpose is mRNA. Of course they make their study look good. But it’s called a conflict of interest.

Look at those goalpost move!

 

[The Barbarian]

Yeah, I put more trust in the Mayo Clinic, the best hospital in the country, then a random person online.

[sarcasm]Well, you'll never get the truth if you keep acting like that!![/sarcasm]

 

[The Barbarian]

I stand corrected. There was a human trial. But you didn’t bother to read the actual study.

Apparently, you didn't either...

Serious Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability or incapacity. The proportions of participants who reported at least one serious adverse event were 1% in the vaccine group and 1% in the placebo group. The most common serious adverse events occurring at higher rates in the vaccine group than the placebo group were myocardial infarction (5 cases in vaccine group vs. 3 cases in placebo group), cholecystitis (3 vs. 0), and nephrolithiasis (3 vs. 0). Three serious adverse events were considered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as possibly related to vaccine: the one report of intractable nausea/vomiting and two reports of facial swelling in persons who had a previous history of cosmetic filler injections. The possibility that the vaccine contributed to the serious adverse event reports of rheumatoid arthritis (n=1), peripheral edema/dyspnea with exertion (n=1), and autonomic dysfunction (n=1) cannot be excluded.

Notice the heart disease is actually lower than expected for a U.S. age group. I'd think twice about it, if I had collagen or botox injected in my face, though.

 

[classical5]

Apparently, you didn't either...

Serious Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability or incapacity. The proportions of participants who reported at least one serious adverse event were 1% in the vaccine group and 1% in the placebo group. The most common serious adverse events occurring at higher rates in the vaccine group than the placebo group were myocardial infarction (5 cases in vaccine group vs. 3 cases in placebo group), cholecystitis (3 vs. 0), and nephrolithiasis (3 vs. 0). Three serious adverse events were considered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as possibly related to vaccine: the one report of intractable nausea/vomiting and two reports of facial swelling in persons who had a previous history of cosmetic filler injections. The possibility that the vaccine contributed to the serious adverse event reports of rheumatoid arthritis (n=1), peripheral edema/dyspnea with exertion (n=1), and autonomic dysfunction (n=1) cannot be excluded.

Notice the heart disease is actually lower than expected for a U.S. age group. I'd think twice about it, if I had collagen or botox injected in my face, though.

I read the actual report. You did not. Fail!

 

[The Barbarian]

I read the actual report.

If you did, you didn't learn anything from it. As you now realize.
Serious Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability or incapacity. The proportions of participants who reported at least one serious adverse event were 1% in the vaccine group and 1% in the placebo group.

In other words, there was no difference in the number of serious adverse events in people taking the vaccine, compared to those taking a placebo. No difference. Any person with normal intelligence would have caught this, if they had actually read the report. You did not.

Fail!

Yep. Whether it's because you never read the report, or because you couldn't figure out what it meant, is hard to say. But fail you did.

 

[classical5]

If you did, you didn't learn anything from it. As you now realize.
Serious Adverse Events
Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability or incapacity. The proportions of participants who reported at least one serious adverse event were 1% in the vaccine group and 1% in the placebo group.

In other words, there was no difference in the number of serious adverse events in people taking the vaccine, compared to those taking a placebo. No difference. Any person with normal intelligence would have caught this, if they had actually read the report. You did not.



Yep. Whether it's because you never read the report, or because you couldn't figure out what it meant, is hard to say. But fail you did.

Wrong.

some dosage levels had so many adverse reactions that group was dropped from the study.

The study is quite clear, 124 adverse reactions in 201 subjects, at least 10 were severe reactions and dropped from the study.

 

[loveofourlord]

Wrong.

some dosage levels had so many adverse reactions that group was dropped from the study.

The study is quite clear, 124 adverse reactions in 201 subjects, at least 10 were severe reactions and dropped from the study.

I think you two are talking about different things, your talking about the parasite medicine, and he's talking about the vaccine, if I'm correct.

 

[The Barbarian]

1) COVID-19 is not the flu and is both significantly more dangerous and more contagious.

1). Propaganda not supported by medical data.

So now it's "the Mayo clinic is lying about medical data." Do you have any notion how insane that sounds?

I stand corrected. There was a human trial. But you didn’t bother to read the actual study.The abstract says there were no adverse reactions.

No, if you had bothered to read it, you would have found:
"No vaccine-related serious adverse event was reported." And "Significant cell-mediated responses were not detected in either study."

It might seem unnecessary to you to read the actual paper, but the people telling you stories about this stuff are lying to you, as you surely realize by now.

 

[The Barbarian]

I think you two are talking about different things, your talking about the parasite medicine, and he's talking about the vaccine, if I'm correct.

Maybe. That would explain a lot of things about his responses. But my comments were regarding his claims about the vaccine:

Why would someone take an animal medication? You are taking an untried vaccine made with new untested technology that has never been used in humans - not even in trials - before covid. In fact mRNA was universally considered experimental until covid, and nobody even applied for human trials because in animal trials it caused autoimmune disease.

Everyone taking mRNA vaccines is participating in a giant experiment. You are risking your life and health over the flu. And you question someone taking a triedand true vet med?

As far as taking the horse medicine, it's not approved for antivirus use at all:

The FDA said it approved ivermectin for use “for treatment of certain internal and external parasites in various animal species” and “people should never take animal drugs [as] using these products in humans could cause serious harm”.

Side-effects that could be associated with ivermectin, it said, included “skin rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, stomach pain, facial or limb swelling, neurologic adverse events (dizziness, seizures, confusion), sudden drop in blood pressure, severe skin rash potentially requiring hospitalisation, and liver injury (hepatitis).

“Laboratory test abnormalities include decrease in white cell count and elevated liver tests. Any use of ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of Covid-19 should be avoided.”
...
In Mississippi last week, the state health department said at least one person had been hospitalised after ingesting ivermectin.

Dr Thomas Dobbs, Mississippi’s state health officer, said using the drug as a preventative “is really kind of crazy. So please don’t do that.”
...
Additional studies, it said, were needed to determine whether ivermectin “might be appropriate to prevent or treat coronavirus or Covid-19”.
‘You are not a horse’: FDA tells Americans stop taking dewormer for Covid

 

[classical5]

I think you two are talking about different things, your talking about the parasite medicine, and he's talking about the vaccine, if I'm correct.

No, it’s about a covid vaccine trial done by Moderna.

The trial abstract states the study had no adverse reactions. The full report written by Moderna details a high level of adverse reactions (124 out of 201 subjects) including at least 10 severe reactions. Adverse reactions to some dosage levels were so high those dosages were dropped from the study.

The report conclusion and abstract were based only on those subjects who were kept to the end of the study. Moderna decided who to keep, the severe reactions were dropped.

Some here insist on touting just the abstract because it supports their bias.