Just for Fun > Non-Hockey Chatter

Coronavirus

<< < (379/428) > >>

Bullfrog:
Ya, that's pretty good. I can't speak to the science either, but the pro-ivermectin cause follows just about every typical pro-conspiracy tactic. The in-vitro/in-vivo (in a petri dish vs. in a person/animal) grift is a super common one. Realistically, cancer has been cured in-vitro. There are tonnes of things that'll kill cancer cells in a dish. They often fail to mention it'll also kill you in the process.

The meta-analysis tactic is another common one. A meta-analysis basically being a review/summary of the prevailing studies on a subject. They either don't use them or they misuse them (as explained in the article you posted.) You're going to get false results if you include junk trials in your meta-analysis. There could be 1000 studies proving raspberries are healthy, but if there's one (usually of dubious quality) mildly suggesting they're poisonous, guess which one they cite?

Pharmacokinetics: a generally basic concept that in order for something to be "medicine", it has to do its job and safely. Firstly, you have to prove it has affect in-vitro. That is, if ivermectin can be proven to stop COVID in a lab study, then it MIGHT be worthwhile to further study. Lots of studies conspiracy theorists cite are simply proof-of-concept studies. That is, in vitro, they show possible benefit. They then interpret that as "obviously this is the hidden cure." But after an in-vitro study is successful (and of a high quality), then they have to move on to other studies and most don't get past this. Real scientists then go "well, it looked promising but didn't pan out." Which, to whack-jobs, reads as "big pharma is hiding the cure!" For in-vivo studies (in animals/humans), it has to do a few things to be successful: 1. it has to get to the site: certain cells, organs, etc. 2. it has to have effect (it has to work). 3. it has to get to the site with sufficient quantity to do it's job. 4. it has to do all this while being safe and not causing harm. It's this 4th one where lots of potential treatments fail. Chugging gasoline will likely meet the 1st three for a GI virus, but it's obviously not going to meet the 4th.

I'm sure there are tonnes of effective cures for various diseases out there, but they can't meet that 4th requirement of being safe.

It's essentially the same in reverse. That is, things that the FDA, WHO, etc. deem as safe are often claimed to be poisonous, such as glyphosate (RoundUp) or aspartame (sweetener.) Some of these things can be dangerous in-vitro, but not in-vivo.

Animal studies are also often misused or interpreted (in both ways). 1. safe in animals therefore safe in people. 2. harmful to animals therefore harmful to people. I mean, this is so easily debunked. A component in chocolate is harmful in dogs yet I can consume buckets full.

Some good reading or Ivermectin from my favourite source: (Science-Based Medicine)
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/?s=ivermectin&category_name=&submit=Search

Bender:
Oilers' Archibald diagnosed with heart condition after having COVID-19
https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2200646

We really don't need any more examples of how being young and healthy doesn't mean you should avoid getting vaccinated or that rates of myocarditis in vaccinated individuals is similar to that in unvaccinated individuals who go on to get covid. We already saw it in Marco Rossi. That's at least two in a group of probably less than 1000 total players in the NHL, and none that we know of who had the shot.

Rossi had no choice but these are preventable now.

Peter D.:
Indoor ball hockey league is back.  Beauty.  You have to show proof of vaccination to enter the building and play.  Sure.  So why is it, that being the case, we are not allowed to use the dressing rooms to change?!  Instead we have to either get ready outside (okay on a balmy October night, not so much when December rolls around) or in a corner at the arena for everyone to see.  We are all shoulder to shoulder on the bench, breathing on each other, amongst another group of players (the other team).  So what's the issue?  If we can't do that now -- when everyone is confirmed to be vaccinated -- then when are we ever going to get that back?

Yet on the flip side, banquet halls don't require proof of vaccination, so it was no issues for my in-laws to be at a wedding reception last night with a hundred people, whether vaccinated or not. 

None of this makes sense to me, and hasn't for a long while.

OldTimeHockey:

--- Quote from: Peter D. on October 04, 2021, 12:34:55 PM ---Indoor ball hockey league is back.  Beauty.  You have to show proof of vaccination to enter the building and play.  Sure.  So why is it, that being the case, we are not allowed to use the dressing rooms to change?!  Instead we have to either get ready outside (okay on a balmy October night, not so much when December rolls around) or in a corner at the arena for everyone to see.  We are all shoulder to shoulder on the bench, breathing on each other, amongst another group of players (the other team).  So what's the issue?  If we can't do that now -- when everyone is confirmed to be vaccinated -- then when are we ever going to get that back?

Yet on the flip side, banquet halls don't require proof of vaccination, so it was no issues for my in-laws to be at a wedding reception last night with a hundred people, whether vaccinated or not. 

None of this makes sense to me, and hasn't for a long while.

--- End quote ---

I think this is the biggest reason the last 20% have so many issues with the vaccine. The lack of clear information.

On one hand, I understand why guidelines are constantly shifting and changing. Everyone is learning as they go here.

On the other, I think a good portion of the posturing was and is political and it's caused mass confusion for many.

I'm 100% in favour of the vaccine and the greater safety. I'm also tired of so many rules in place that don't make sense. I was at the dentist today. One person had to wear a hazmat suit. The other only needed gloves and a mask. The next one needed a full face visor. They're all in the same space? Which one is it?

In regards to dressing rooms at arenas. My daughter only lost dressing room use for a short period last summer. Since then, they have had full access to the rooms as long as they have the space to distance. But, a small training rink in town has not been allowed to use their rooms. They were told it had something to do with ventilation.

Nik:

--- Quote from: OldTimeHockey on October 04, 2021, 01:00:42 PM ---I think this is the biggest reason the last 20% have so many issues with the vaccine. The lack of clear information.

--- End quote ---

I think it's giving a lot of that last 20% too much credit to say their opinions are as coherent as "Public Health information has at times been inconsistent and later revised resulting in a chaotic jumble of rules, therefore I'm going to assume that despite the near universal medical recommendation for getting the vaccine also may be based on faulty or premature basis."

Even if that were a reasonable position to take, there's a pretty good number of them who think it's got Bill Gates' brain microchips in it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version