Ivermectin Use in Indonesia

[ripple the car]

People should be allowed to present information and debate ideas. Especially in the case of a pandemic whose origins no one can conclusively and definitely pin down.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

But it is at least possible. That’s a pretty steep and immediate plummet. Even if the plummet is ultimately linked to something else, at least looking into the possibility that it was thanks to ivermectin seems reasonable.

But theirs no proof. Vaccinations are working and better stuff is working in hospitals . Not ivermectin. There's no point to take it , when the hospital will give you better stuff. I'm sure people, with mild COVID-19 will be fine with eating candy, ivermectin or other crap.

 

[KCfromNC]

People should be allowed to present information and debate ideas. Especially in the case of a pandemic whose origins no one can conclusively and definitely pin down.

Seems that the origin of the pandemic is totally of topic here. Just as irrelevant as posts about the imagined limitations of covid testing. But that's what we get rather than "information" about large-scale studies showing how effective the treatment mentioned in the OP is. I wonder why.

 

[ripple the car]

Seems that the origin of the pandemic is totally of topic here. Just as irrelevant as posts about the imagined limitations of covid testing. But that's what we get rather than "information" about large-scale studies showing how effective the treatment mentioned in the OP is. I wonder why.

In a sense, it is. No one can tell us definitively where it came from. Yet some would tell us how to think about, process, critique, and question everything from the true dangers actually posed by the virus, to how safe and effective the vaccines are.

Doesn’t matter if your own experiences are telling you a given thing. Here’s a study which indicates the opposite. It has graphs and charts and numbers. Trust the study. Not your own experiences with the pandemic, treatments, vaccines, or law enforcement. And even if you (the citizen) are ultimately wrong, you’ll have no platform to even share or bounce your opinions or ideas, as they will be censored and shut down, before anyone can figure out if you’re on to something or not. This is what I am seeing, K. Here, and elsewhere. It is concerning, and dangerous.

Societies and governments which allow no debate or critique of wide-reaching policies tend to be crummy ones to live in.

 

[KCfromNC]

In a sense, it is. No one can tell us definitively where it came from. Yet some would tell us how to think about, process, critique, and question everything from the true dangers actually posed by the virus, to how safe and effective the vaccines are.

Doesn’t matter if your own experiences are telling you a given thing. Here’s a study which indicates the opposite. It has graphs and charts and numbers. Trust the study. Not your own experiences with the pandemic, treatments, vaccines, or law enforcement. And even if you (the citizen) are ultimately wrong, you’ll have no platform to even share or bounce your opinions or ideas, as they will be censored and shut down, before anyone can figure out if you’re on to something or not. This is what I am seeing, K. Here, and elsewhere. It is concerning, and dangerous.

You're really that worried that anecdotes from amateurs aren't given the same weight as rigorous studies by experts?

 

[regent]

Here is an easy to understand comparison of how Ivermectin works on COVID-19 and how the new antiviral developed by Pfizer works.

It’s long but there is no easy way to summarize his analysis.

Here is the description of the video

New Pfizer antiviral and ivermectin, a pharmacodynamic analysis New Pfizer antiviral, PF-07321332, C₂₃H₃₂F₃N₅O₄

 

[regent]

Here is Dr. Campbell’s description of the new Pfizer antiviral before he compared it to Ivermectin.

 

[cow451]

I thought the claim was that Ivermectin helps with a quick recovery when taken at an early stage. Why would it reduce new cases?

Hush. If we wanted intelligent questions, we would’ve asked.

 

[Aaron112]

The answer: Widespread potential except .......... overcoming the greed is possibly impossible.
Those who have been bribed to believe lies , are they greedy too, or naive? Innocent? No.

Everything points towards money and profits.

Indonesia isn't the only country that has reported a reduction in COVID infections and deaths after using Ivermectin.

I'm curious as to why so many people are opposed to Ivermectin. It's a drug with approximately 40 years usage, so the risks are well known, and it's cheap. We are continually told that COVID is an emergency situation, but there is no desire to allow people to take personal responsibility for their healthcare, and have the option to use Ivermectin at low cost.

And yet, an expensive vaccine with no long term data is pushed on populations, and is sometimes even mandated.

 

[DaisyDay]

The answer: Widespread potential except .......... overcoming the greed is possibly impossible.
Those who have been bribed to believe lies , are they greedy too, or naive? Innocent? No.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-indonesia/indonesia-launches-vaccination-drive-as-covid-19-deaths-hit-record-idUSKBN29I09U/

COVID-19 vaccination in Indonesia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

On 13 January 2021, the program commenced when President Joko Widodo was vaccinated at the presidential palace.[1] In terms of total doses given, Indonesia ranks third in Asia and fifth in the world.[2]
​

In short, Indonesia did not rely on Ivermectin to cure or treat Covid-19. They had a robust vaccination program.

 

[rambot]

In a sense, it is. No one can tell us definitively where it came from. Yet some would tell us how to think about, process, critique, and question everything from the true dangers actually posed by the virus, to how safe and effective the vaccines are.

Doesn’t matter if your own experiences are telling you a given thing. Here’s a study which indicates the opposite. It has graphs and charts and numbers. Trust the study. Not your own experiences with the pandemic, treatments, vaccines, or law enforcement. And even if you (the citizen) are ultimately wrong, you’ll have no platform to even share or bounce your opinions or ideas, as they will be censored and shut down, before anyone can figure out if you’re on to something or not. This is what I am seeing, K. Here, and elsewhere. It is concerning, and dangerous.

Societies and governments which allow no debate or critique of wide-reaching policies tend to be crummy ones to live in.

The reason foe the truat thr study mentality is because itsnlooking at 3,000,000,000 peollea stories while your story and all your friends may total 20.

That's should not be as convincing data though it is becssue it is our own experience. We often add a lot of credence to our own experience whether it is consistent with everyone else's or not