What idiotic Trump COVID policies did he protect you from specifically?
The only reason I ask is because a lot of the COVID denier conservatives I have to listen to in my community (deep red state) have repeatedly expressed disappointment in Trump for “trusting the experts” about COVID, pushing the vaccines, or some other nonsense.
So it’s interesting to see you express that Trump didn’t do enough to trust the science when I have to repeatedly listen to complain that he followed the science too much. Lol
I never claimed that Murphy protected us from specific policies. What he didn’t do was endorse a deworming drug to fight a virus, or question medical experts. That was reassuring.
Did you actually do your research on that “deworming drug”? It’s been used to treat a hell of a lot more than parasites. That is just its most common use.
This has always been funny to me as someone who actually works in healthcare and regularly reads scientific studies. Of all the things you could choose to hate Trump over, the example you give is one that plenty of people in the scientific community considered to be a treatment avenue worth researching.
Damn, the media propaganda machine is effective. Trump could run into a burning building to save a litter of puppies and they’d still find a way to make everyone hate the guy. It’s impressive.
Yes. I did. Please show me a reputable, peer-reviewed study showing any evidence of Ivermectin efficacy in treating viral infection. Just one. Go on, we’ll wait.
What I do know is that over the counter equine Ivermectin should never be consumed by humans, and that this spate of idiocy gave science way more data than they ever asked for on the deleterious effects of Ivermectin toxicity in humans, including blindness and death.
But go on, tell us all about how you’re the expert.
So a single claim from a single source with a notoriety for spewing fabrication and propaganda is your “proof” against the mountains of evidence to the contrary? You have been lied to, by the very people you’re citing. The propaganda is strong, clearly, since you’re currently peddling it in full faith of its veracity. Ivermectin poisoned, blinded, and killed so many well-meaning people who, like you, were convinced by people more concerned with political ideology than they were for public safety. There isn’t one shred of evidence from any reputable source that says otherwise. New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, Oxford Academic, Lippincott, Duke Health, University of Kansas Medical Center, BMC, Cureus, and HUNDREDS of other studies all conclude exactly the opposite, and all conclude that misuse or overdose of Ivermectin is patently harmful or even fatal to humans. Continuing to suggest otherwise is reckless, unethical, and outright immoral. You’re endangering people too naive, gullible or traumatized to look at this critically. Pushing the Ivermectin lie at this point makes you culpable in the harm done to those who you con into poisoning themselves. Live with that on your conscience.
“Please show me a reputable, peer-reviewed study showing any evidence of Ivermectin efficacy in treating viral infection. Just one.”
You asked for one so I gave one. If you want more you can look here as a starting point. https://c19early.org/
You can check out people like Dr robert malone, Dr jay bhattacharya, Dr pierre kory. Other countries have also seen great success with ivermectin and yes I am aware there is a veterinary version. The human version is what is meant to be given to humans in proper dosage. If you’re slurping down horse medicine you might have issues beyond covid.
Worth researching, yeah maybe. Covid was new, there was no medicine against it, so you’d expect any worthwhile scientist to throw whatever they got at the wall to see what would stick.
But it’s a whole different story between scientists testing something in a study and a non-medically-trained politician recommending the non-medically-trained public to off-label self-medicate with a drug that hasn’t been tested, with no dosage recommendations and with no medical oversight.
As someone who works in healthcare and regularly reads scientific studies you should know the difference.
What idiotic Trump COVID policies did he protect you from specifically? The only reason I ask is because a lot of the COVID denier conservatives I have to listen to in my community (deep red state) have repeatedly expressed disappointment in Trump for “trusting the experts” about COVID, pushing the vaccines, or some other nonsense. So it’s interesting to see you express that Trump didn’t do enough to trust the science when I have to repeatedly listen to complain that he followed the science too much. Lol
I never claimed that Murphy protected us from specific policies. What he didn’t do was endorse a deworming drug to fight a virus, or question medical experts. That was reassuring.
Dont forget injecting bleach.
Did you actually do your research on that “deworming drug”? It’s been used to treat a hell of a lot more than parasites. That is just its most common use.
This has always been funny to me as someone who actually works in healthcare and regularly reads scientific studies. Of all the things you could choose to hate Trump over, the example you give is one that plenty of people in the scientific community considered to be a treatment avenue worth researching.
Damn, the media propaganda machine is effective. Trump could run into a burning building to save a litter of puppies and they’d still find a way to make everyone hate the guy. It’s impressive.
deleted by creator
I did enough research to know that Ivermectin is ineffective against viruses. Remarking on “the media propaganda machine” won’t change that.
Yes. I did. Please show me a reputable, peer-reviewed study showing any evidence of Ivermectin efficacy in treating viral infection. Just one. Go on, we’ll wait.
What I do know is that over the counter equine Ivermectin should never be consumed by humans, and that this spate of idiocy gave science way more data than they ever asked for on the deleterious effects of Ivermectin toxicity in humans, including blindness and death.
But go on, tell us all about how you’re the expert.
https://rumble.com/v37n8gm-peer-reviewed-and-published-too-little-too-late-ivermectin-worked-against-c.html
The propoganda is strong. I used to be just like you. You’ve been lied to on a scale unimaginable.
So a single claim from a single source with a notoriety for spewing fabrication and propaganda is your “proof” against the mountains of evidence to the contrary? You have been lied to, by the very people you’re citing. The propaganda is strong, clearly, since you’re currently peddling it in full faith of its veracity. Ivermectin poisoned, blinded, and killed so many well-meaning people who, like you, were convinced by people more concerned with political ideology than they were for public safety. There isn’t one shred of evidence from any reputable source that says otherwise. New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, Oxford Academic, Lippincott, Duke Health, University of Kansas Medical Center, BMC, Cureus, and HUNDREDS of other studies all conclude exactly the opposite, and all conclude that misuse or overdose of Ivermectin is patently harmful or even fatal to humans. Continuing to suggest otherwise is reckless, unethical, and outright immoral. You’re endangering people too naive, gullible or traumatized to look at this critically. Pushing the Ivermectin lie at this point makes you culpable in the harm done to those who you con into poisoning themselves. Live with that on your conscience.
“Please show me a reputable, peer-reviewed study showing any evidence of Ivermectin efficacy in treating viral infection. Just one.”
You asked for one so I gave one. If you want more you can look here as a starting point. https://c19early.org/
You can check out people like Dr robert malone, Dr jay bhattacharya, Dr pierre kory. Other countries have also seen great success with ivermectin and yes I am aware there is a veterinary version. The human version is what is meant to be given to humans in proper dosage. If you’re slurping down horse medicine you might have issues beyond covid.
Worth researching, yeah maybe. Covid was new, there was no medicine against it, so you’d expect any worthwhile scientist to throw whatever they got at the wall to see what would stick.
But it’s a whole different story between scientists testing something in a study and a non-medically-trained politician recommending the non-medically-trained public to off-label self-medicate with a drug that hasn’t been tested, with no dosage recommendations and with no medical oversight.
As someone who works in healthcare and regularly reads scientific studies you should know the difference.
You must be trolling