Anti-vaxxers now drinking their own urine

[OgNasty]

sheeple

Given that anti-vaxxers think using this word is so clever, proposal to call them "peeple" in return. You know, because they drink their own piss.

The anti-vaxxers I know think that covid is a joke and wouldn't worry about taking anything to prevent it...  More likely this is trolling the fearful as you know some liberal is in their shower with a mask on right now trying to figure out how to piss in their own mouth without removing their mask.

You can drink your own piss if you want, but I think if you're going to play into the nonsense there are more fun ways to do so: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajherrington/2022/01/11/study-finds-cannabis-compounds-prevent-infection-by-covid-19-virus/?sh=355a65b71753

[1715208193]

1715208193

[1715208193]

1715208193

[cmg777]

Well this is where I have to agree to disagree with you here OP. I'll not drink my urine out of fear of COVID or cure to COVID but rather I'll drink my own urine if I can't find any water if the power goes out and I can't find any underground sources but at least I'll filter it. You can drink your own urine hell you probably drank some the other day if you think about it urine from animals gets filtered by dirt in our natural ecosystem. It doesn't come out of thin air like stimulus or fiat does.

[ibminer]

I don't want your stupid vaccine, and I don't want to drink my own piss.

Maybe I'm an anti-mRNA'er?  

If you think I'm going to shoot myself up with 3 concoctions that are instructing my cells to do something, which has never been tested long term, or on a mass scale.. y'all  trippin' on something special.

Whether a virus exists or it doesn't, whether it has been man made or not, I've seen enough evidence to know most of the hype is being financially and politically driven, especially most recently. Personally, I do think people are dying due to COVID and I do think it exists, but I believe somewhere along the lines stats and data are being skewed and potentially manipulated for various special interest reasons.

At the moment, I'd be worried about how eager and aggressive people are trying to push and require a vaccine, which is still getting people sick, and comes with its own side effects which most doctors will tell you "can't happen"... well, until a "new study" eventually comes out and tells you they were wrong.

I mean seriously, have any of you guys went back and looked at medicines or other prescriptions doctors gave you as a kid, maybe even as an adult?  Half of them don't exist anymore, pulled off the market because of the issues they cause.
... FFS, they were selling cigarettes to you.

It seems clear to me what the safest option is, for *most* humans, and it appears to be an effective way to remove the spread.. simply wear a good mask, proper hygiene, and socially distance during high spread times, and maybe kick up your vitamin intake. I'm not saying the vaccine doesn't work, but it's not as effective as they make it seem... and the way they push it on you, should scare you.

If I'm 80 years old and have health issues, I might opt for a new vaccine like this, but the majority of our population, especially kids, should really not be experimented on.

We went from trying to force people to wear masks (didn't go especially well), to now trying to force them to inject 3 shots, which themselves make a good amount of people feel sick.. and then force them to register some sort of card saying they've done it.. and then try requiring companies to check the cards. wtf.

There seems to be some next-level idiocracy shit happening on this planet... soon we'll be watering plants with BrawndoGatorade. Ya know, plants need electrolytes too...  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAqIJZeeXEc

.. brought to you by ibminer. *smh*

[Hispo]

Another proof we may be devolving as species.

[kaggie]

"We've already convinced these morons to take horse dewormer and shit themselves. What next?"

This can't be a serious argument against ivermectin.

If it is, then how would anyone justify any vaccine ever? Most of that is cultivated in chicken eggs. Most drugs are tested in animals first before human trials, because generally there is similar biology. Maybe people who say ivermectin is horse dewormer are also against every medicine? Both humans and horses take penicillin, so you should never have penicillin? Most people understand that the amount of medicinal dose would vary between a 300 kg horse and an 80 kg human. Imagine the argument, "Stop breathing horse air" -- sounds silly, doesn't it?

I don't know whether ivermectin works against covid (and have never considered taking it myself), but "ivermectin is horse dewormer" as an argument seems quite ... iffy.

[DrWho42]

literally taking the piss

[Foxpup]

I don't know whether ivermectin works against covid (and have never considered taking it myself), but "ivermectin is horse dewormer" as an argument seems quite ... iffy.

The argument against ivermectin isn't that it's used in horses, but that it's a dewormer, and viruses aren't worms. The only reason anti-vax morons are taking horse dewormer specifically, is because veterinary drugs aren't as tightly controlled as human drugs. Human deworming drugs (including human formulations of ivermectin) are available, but only by prescription, and very few doctors are stupid enough to prescribe a dewormer for a virus.

[kaggie]

The argument against ivermectin isn't that it's used in horses, but that it's a dewormer, and viruses aren't worms.

Ok, but ivermectin is also a useful anti-parasitic and anti-inflammatory agent beyond worms. Ivermectin as dewormer causes paralysis in worms in both humans and horses. It has a number of possible side effects, so should be used very carefully (if ever). Due to the high standard of living most of us have, we don't contend with these parasites.

Malaria isn't a "worm" either and ivermectin is used as a treatment: https://malariajournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12936-015-0618-2

Ivermectin is also a topical cream with anti-inflammatory properties against rosacea:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6409879/

There are also uses for head lice and blepharitis (an eye condition):
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34173370/

So, yes, it is a horse dewormer, but it is also more than that. Whether ivermectin is useful for covid requires additional evidence (especially considering there are many possible side effects), but "it's horse dewormer" is a weak argument.

[tvbcof]

...
Ok, but ivermectin is also a useful anti-parasitic and anti-inflammatory agent beyond worms. Ivermectin as dewormer causes paralysis in worms in both humans and horses. It has a number of possible side effects, so should be used very carefully (if ever). Due to the high standard of living most of us have, we don't contend with these parasites.
...

I'm going to bet that, in the future, people will be surprised at how much we current 'high standard of living' populations are 'contending' with various kinds of parasites.  Especially of those of the phyla protozoa (which Ivermectin can also be quite effective against.)

[o_e_l_e_o]

Whether ivermectin is useful for covid requires additional evidence (especially considering there are many possible side effects), but "it's horse dewormer" is a weak argument.

The people taking it for COVID aren't being prescribed a human formulation of this drug - they are taking the horse paste formulation, because generally doctors and other people who understand science and read evidence aren't stupid enough to prescribe drugs that don't work.

If someone was stupid enough to use an antibiotic which was specifically dosed and combined with other ingredients to make a formulation specifically targeted for, say, fish, which they bought in a pet store, then they are taking fish antibiotics. If someone eats a can of dog food - sure, it might still have chicken in it, but they are still eating dog food.

[tvbcof]

Whether ivermectin is useful for covid requires additional evidence (especially considering there are many possible side effects), but "it's horse dewormer" is a weak argument.

The people taking it for COVID aren't being prescribed a human formulation of this drug - they are taking the horse paste formulation, because generally doctors and other people who understand science and read evidence aren't stupid enough to prescribe drugs that don't work.
...

The disappointingly small minority of doctors who use Ivermectin and other early treatments claim that they lose almost zero patients, and those they do tend to have gotten treatment very very late.

The reason why it was important for corporate owned medicine and the hospitalist doctors that no treatment was authorized is that if it was, the EUA for the vax would not be legally possible.  Hence the bizarre attack on ivermectin and a bunch of other highly effective treatment options.  And hence the kinds of death numbers they needed to help panic the peeps with the plandemic psy-op and get them running to get an experimental gene therapy needle in their arm.

Most doctors are smart enough to know that they won't have a good career trajectory if they go against the corp/gov medical system.  Thankfully there were enough brave and ethical doctors that hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved.  If you count the peeps in India it could be millions.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Cool story. I'm absolutely certain that for the first time ever you'll be able to present some evidence to support your nonsense ramblings.

[Ultegra134]

masks

The latest data suggest quite strongly that masks are vital in reducing the spread. Airborne transmission is almost exclusively over a short distance over a short timeframe. If you can't socially distance, then masks are hugely protective.

That is indeed correct, it's a pretty logical point as well, but I don't expect anti-vaxxers to accept it. Let me also point out that it's not the first time masks are introduced due to a pandemic, they were also used during Influenza, in 1918, with conspiracy theorists still acting clever back then. On top of that, in China, even before Covid-19 appeared, it was common to wear a face mask in public, even if you were simply sick with the flu.

[tvbcof]

Cool story. I'm absolutely certain that for the first time ever you'll be able to present some evidence to support your nonsense ramblings.

There are many interview with doctors presenting their results.  People who use only safe (e.g., censored) sources of information such as the mainstream corporate news, youtube, facebook, twitter, etc might not see them as easily, but even here some info gets through.  Rogan interviewed Dr. McCullough for instance and that got quite a bit of visibility even through the attempts to censor it.  McCullough is an academic physician with massive experience designing and running trails so he used his qualifications to design and run a variety of explorations into the subject of early treatments.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There are many interview with doctors presenting their results.

Interviews are meaningless. Everyone has an opinion, many of them are worthless.

such as the mainstream corporate news, youtube, facebook, twitter, etc

You think these are the sources that actual doctors use? Lol. Not only do you try to lecture people when you have no evidence, but you can't even judge what constitutes evidence. Peak Dunning Kruger in action.

Rogan interviewed Dr. McCullough

Case in point. Lol again.

You go and take your health advice from Joe Rogan and people who tell you to drink your own piss. Non morons will continue to look at the evidence from thousands of trials from hundreds of countries involving hundreds of millions of patients.

[Gyfts]

....

Dr. McCullough is a cardiologist, professor at a medical school, and has the most research publications in the world in his field dealing with cardiology and nephrology, according to him. I have not seen anyone doubt his credentials, so I accept that he is telling the truth about his academic and research career. He isn't a conspiracy theorist, he's qualified. You might disagree with his opinions, but again, not a nutjob.

Joe Rogan isn't a medical doctor, he just interviews them, and mostly what Dr. McCullough emphasized during his interview was the need for early treatment in case someone did in fact get Covid. Vaccines will not stop infection anymore, so in the case that someone, vaxxed or not, does end up getting a serious infection, it's worth looking into treatment that would prevent someone from landing in the hospital. Because at the point of hospitalization, it's probably too late for any treatment plan to work.

Molnupiravir works, but it's expensive and Merck has exclusivity for many markets, if I understand correctly. Wouldn't be terrible if there was a cheaper alternative.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Oh, you mean this guy? https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/doctor-fired-spreading-covid-misinformation-170237445.html

While McCullough said that doctors were probably afraid to show up to the event, one of Oklahoma's top infectious disease physicians, Dr. Anuj Malik, director of infection prevention and control at Ascension St. John, said that the doctors he spoke to were not afraid to attend. They were just not interested in sitting through what would be seen as a “politically-motivated, ideological speech by a modern-day quack.”

He was fired for spreading lies about COVID, and then the healthcare system which fired him took out a restraining order against him because he lied and continued to claim affiliation and use titles they granted after they fired him.

[Gyfts]

Oh, you mean this guy? https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/doctor-fired-spreading-covid-misinformation-170237445.html

While McCullough said that doctors were probably afraid to show up to the event, one of Oklahoma's top infectious disease physicians, Dr. Anuj Malik, director of infection prevention and control at Ascension St. John, said that the doctors he spoke to were not afraid to attend. They were just not interested in sitting through what would be seen as a “politically-motivated, ideological speech by a modern-day quack.”

He was fired for spreading lies about COVID, and then the healthcare system which fired him took out a restraining order against him because he lied and continued to claim affiliation and use titles they granted after they fired him.

What exact lies has McCullough told? You understand it's considered Covid misinformation to suggest that masks don't work very well, or suggesting that children aren't particularly vulnerable to Covid-19 and don't need to get vaccinated or boosted.

I recall seeing some of the most deranged conspiracy theorists on many other forums, probably some here too, suggest the COVID data could not be trusted, such as child hospitalization rates, because the way data collection worked at these medical institutions was that anyone with a positive COVID case was counted as being hospitalized due to COVID, with no distinction between that and hospitalization with COVID.

Here is Dr. Fauci saying what the conspiracy theorists have been saying for over a year, just recently.

https://www.newsweek.com/fauci-children-hospital-covid-omicron-1664676

Speaking to MSNBC's Ayman Mohyeldin, who was filling in for Rachel Maddow on Wednesday night, Fauci suggested that some of the children currently being treated at medical facilities were hospitalized with COVID as opposed to "because of COVID." He added that some children who are currently listed as being in hospital with COVID may actually be receiving treatment for "a broken leg or appendicitis," rather than for a severe reactions to the virus.

If you said that child hospitalizations were over inflated, that was "COVID misinformation."

It's not very convincing to me that someone gets fired over such matters. And you might be right, he could have made demonstrably false statements which warrants being fired, but it's also true that anyone that goes against the traditionally accepted COVID narrative will be thrown out on the streets.

Recall when Dr. Fauci was included in an email with Francis Collins, who conspired for "a quick and devastating published take down" of three epidemiologists that had the audacity to question the efficacy of lockdowns.

https://www.aier.org/article/fauci-emails-and-some-alleged-science/

These "fringe" epidemiologists were from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford.

And as we all know, lockdowns have been largely ineffective.

Guess those epidemiologists were involved in COVID misinformation at the time.

[suchmoon]

[...]

So you don't know why McCullough was fired but something something Fauci?

I can't wait until someone (Al Gore?) invents a tool to search the internet, this would make people so much better informed.

[Gyfts]

[...]

but something something Fauci?

We know why he was removed, COVID disinformation. And COVID disinformation changes depending on whatever people like Dr. Fauci wants to say. Regardless of whatever alleged disinformation he may or may not have spread, character attacks of a physician who is the most published author in cardiology and nephrology seems perfectly in line with people who don't want to hear what he has to say. His qualifications are not in dispute.

And by the way, he could be a quack. I just have not seen any legitimate arguments that he is. If you watch his interviews, his focus is on pre-hospital treatment of COVID patients if they get infected. He's not an anti-vaxxer.