THE Political Thread (ALL Political Discussion Here - See Rules, P. 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 3171, 3172, 3173, 3174, 3175, 3176  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48937
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:49 am    Post subject:

Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
I know it’s not good for faith in democratic society but next dem to lose to gop in red state or not needs to cry election foul.


No. Definitely not. Simply engaging in the same destructive activities of the GOP because you want to fight fire with fire is highly counterproductive. But if Democrats can factually demonstrate policies and activities that have proven to suppress the voters, then they need to present those facts and work to eliminate those factors.

I get it but times are different. We will never get back to how it used to be. These are the new rules.


Sinking to the GOP's basest tactics isn't reacting to "new rules". It just makes things worse, and more importantly it achieves absolutely nothing.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 57448
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:59 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
I know it’s not good for faith in democratic society but next dem to lose to gop in red state or not needs to cry election foul.


No. Definitely not. Simply engaging in the same destructive activities of the GOP because you want to fight fire with fire is highly counterproductive. But if Democrats can factually demonstrate policies and activities that have proven to suppress the voters, then they need to present those facts and work to eliminate those factors.

I get it but times are different. We will never get back to how it used to be. These are the new rules.


Sinking to the GOP's basest tactics isn't reacting to "new rules". It just makes things worse, and more importantly it achieves absolutely nothing.


DMR
You and I don't agree on much but in this case I agree 100%
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Halflife
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 7184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 11:56 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
I know it’s not good for faith in democratic society but next dem to lose to gop in red state or not needs to cry election foul.


No. Definitely not. Simply engaging in the same destructive activities of the GOP because you want to fight fire with fire is highly counterproductive. But if Democrats can factually demonstrate policies and activities that have proven to suppress the voters, then they need to present those facts and work to eliminate those factors.

I get it but times are different. We will never get back to how it used to be. These are the new rules.


Sinking to the GOP's basest tactics isn't reacting to "new rules". It just makes things worse, and more importantly it achieves absolutely nothing.

i felt both the McConnel and Cruz reelections were fishy. Especially McConnell. You can even throw Lindsay Grahams in there. Just saying we see zero penalties for doing so. dems need to take advantage of what has been laid out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48937
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 12:17 pm    Post subject:

Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
I know it’s not good for faith in democratic society but next dem to lose to gop in red state or not needs to cry election foul.


No. Definitely not. Simply engaging in the same destructive activities of the GOP because you want to fight fire with fire is highly counterproductive. But if Democrats can factually demonstrate policies and activities that have proven to suppress the voters, then they need to present those facts and work to eliminate those factors.

I get it but times are different. We will never get back to how it used to be. These are the new rules.


Sinking to the GOP's basest tactics isn't reacting to "new rules". It just makes things worse, and more importantly it achieves absolutely nothing.

i felt both the McConnel and Cruz reelections were fishy. Especially McConnell. You can even throw Lindsay Grahams in there. Just saying we see zero penalties for doing so. dems need to take advantage of what has been laid out.


Then the Dems need to find evidence of alleged there's something beyond "fishy" and prove the misconduct or fraud. But resort to a back and forth of "You're cheating", "No! YOU'RE cheating!", "NO! YOU are!" gets no one anywhere. You can't inflict penalties without actual cause.

(see . . . this is the "echo chamber" in action. )
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 57448
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 12:31 pm    Post subject:

Regarding the California recall. I don't think the landslide for Newsome was for him per se. I think it was the people's vote to save democracy. It was a vote against Trumpism. Hopefully, the rejection of Trumpism will resonate nationwide.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Halflife
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 7184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 12:48 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Halflife wrote:
I know it’s not good for faith in democratic society but next dem to lose to gop in red state or not needs to cry election foul.


No. Definitely not. Simply engaging in the same destructive activities of the GOP because you want to fight fire with fire is highly counterproductive. But if Democrats can factually demonstrate policies and activities that have proven to suppress the voters, then they need to present those facts and work to eliminate those factors.

I get it but times are different. We will never get back to how it used to be. These are the new rules.


Sinking to the GOP's basest tactics isn't reacting to "new rules". It just makes things worse, and more importantly it achieves absolutely nothing.

i felt both the McConnel and Cruz reelections were fishy. Especially McConnell. You can even throw Lindsay Grahams in there. Just saying we see zero penalties for doing so. dems need to take advantage of what has been laid out.


Then the Dems need to find evidence of alleged there's something beyond "fishy" and prove the misconduct or fraud. But resort to a back and forth of "You're cheating", "No! YOU'RE cheating!", "NO! YOU are!" gets no one anywhere. You can't inflict penalties without actual cause.

(see . . . this is the "echo chamber" in action. )

Easy. Look for fraud, just let people know they are looking
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 9927
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 12:53 pm    Post subject:

Thank you California and your voting systems

Some guy came in here trying to paint Georgia Voting Crimes as a Hoax.. LMAO
Servers were wiped - data all destroyed.. the same day or next day after a Court agreed to allow investigators access to the servers..

Gee HOAX..

*Sidenote.. for many years I never watched Television..other than Lakers and some random XMC etc
I was always confused how humans could sit around like zombies and watch a show every week about a zombie apocalypse... Then after Trumptard/MAGA Terrorists I realized that humans life in America is a zombie apocalypse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33139
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:21 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
kevin61 wrote:


There’s very few if any of us here, so if you don’t here from us, don’t assume that there isn’t one.

But I’ll give you one quickly.

In California voter fraud is largely irrelevant because it’s a one party state. Does it occur, probably, but not at a level that can effect the outcome, so the point is largely moot. Swing states are where this is relevant, not California.
That said, mailing it unrequested ballots to every registered voter is an invitation to fraud.


Voter fraud is not relevant anywhere, whether it's California or Michigan. There is no evidence that it is a problem. None. Mail-in voting is not an invitation to fraud. I live in a state where we can only vote by mail and we've done so for years. No issues. None. You are spreading disinformation, which is why it's difficult for people in this thread to take conservatives seriously.

Quote:
The left has no problem questioning an election outcome when they lose. The Russian Collusion hoax of 2016 and the Abrams election in Georgia are a perfect example. But when the tables are turned, it’s just those “crazy conservatives”.


Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate that lost the election, conceded the very next day. Collusion with the Russians is not a "hoax," as the very long and detailed Mueller Report indicates. The Russian state intervened in the election to help Trump. So you are once again spreading disinformation. With that said, Trump won more votes in the states he needed to win the EC. There you go, a guy from the left just freely admitted it. I did so way back in 2016, as did the vast majority of people on the left.


Also, the results of those elections were accepted, but merely questioned. No one en mass rejected the results, rioted on the steps of Congress to overturn those results, physically threatened public officials, overturned century long historical norms, filed frivolous lawsuits resulting in sanctions or disbarment, became subjects of FBI/DOJ investigations as a result of their efforts to get their candidate elected or continued to espouse conspiracy theories with disproven factual backing.

One party lives in a fact based reality, the other lives in a fairy tail where any opposing view immediately is responded to with claims of violations of HIPAA, violations of constitutional rights and unbridled persecution by a network of pizza ordering pedophiles.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48937
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:30 pm    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
One party lives in a fact based reality, the other lives in a fairy tail where any opposing view immediately is responded to with claims of violations of HIPAA, violations of constitutional rights and unbridled persecution by a network of pizza ordering pedophiles.


Ummmmm . . . you forgot the part about drinking babies' blood . . .
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33139
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:32 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
kevin61 wrote:
Oh, how about a conservative moderator just for kicks too?


Kevin seems to think DancingBarry had aspiring moderators fill out an application to be a Mod then he tossed out all the applications except for the liberal ones. lol

FWIW, way back when all of us became Moderators it was well before there was a Politics thread on LG and before any political discussion at all was allowed on LG.

So none of us knew each others politics. And DancingBarry didn't know if we were left, right, middle or none of the above.

But as it turned out we are almost all on left. I don't think that's a coincidence but it wasn't because there was a liberal check box prior to becoming a mod either.


Kevin.... and all others in here too... should know that I am the only liberal in my family (both parents and my two brothers are avid Fox News watchers and each voted for Trump) and that I have six individuals I call my best friends, and four of them are Republican. Its come to a point where we simply just do not discuss politics. I no longer have the patience of researching news articles or studies to counter their nonsense. A lie is easy, the truth is much harder.

Point is, I, as a mod or as a poster, do not live in an echo chamber. I am very much aware of the false information that is constantly disseminated in the GOP spheres, the arguments that are repeated verbatim from Fox News (under the claim of supposed independent thought) and how exhausting it is to take a fact based approach with people who live in those delusional spheres of perceived persecution, because of the defensiveness that one has to overcome simply to have an honest conversation while trying to call out uninformed representations for what they are. It is also the reason we, as mods, have run out of patience for dealing with those same individuals who would attempt to spread the same disinformation in this thread. Not only do we not have the time to counter every false claim (because they are endless), but we also do not want to risk that someone enter this thread, walking away believing some of that information to be true to their ultimate detriment simply because we or another poster didn't get to it in time to save that individual from absorbing it.

Above all, the most sacred rule of this thread is that we must have fact based discussions. Above any other rule, the rule stands that misinformation, trolling and propaganda will not be tolerated. At the present time, one party rather than the other seems to align with such efforts. That is neither of our making or in any other way our fault.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DancingBarry
Editor-in-Chief
Editor-in-Chief


Joined: 07 Sep 2001
Posts: 38660
Location: O.C.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:45 pm    Post subject:

Lol on the politics and living in an echo chamber. My wife was registered Republican all her life until January 6. She did not vote for Trump either time and found she had very little in common these days with Republicans. She is DONE with the party and what was left of it. Done forever. DONE. Want to get her blood boiling? Turn on Fox News for a few minutes. Bring any of these atrocious Covid discussions around her. I dare you.

My son was conservative. He was more educated and articulate than any conservative I've ever met. (I've literally been around most levels of the right... my die hard in-laws, one wears Ayn Rand shirts, the other has gone QAnon...and my brother is a pretty typical educated conservative, as well.) But my son was way more nuanced and knowledgeable than anyone I've been around. He has a gift. But that was 3 years ago for my son. He is no longer a conservative. Quite liberal on many things. He did not vote for Trump and can no longer stand Republicans. He swats weak-ass conservative AND liberal takes like Mutombo.

My daughter, well, she's a raging liberal.

Think we haven't had some great discussions at my house over the years? It's never been hostile. It's been nuanced, educated, don't bring fluff, bring facts. Take on other people's perspectives. My mother loves coming over to hear us. You have no idea how educated on conservative politics they are. But, yes, they found they no longer had anything in common with Republicans these days. They've been DONE... DONE! (I don't know if I can say this more emphatically) ... for quite a while.

Seriously, when GW and Dan Quayle are looking at the party like it's full of divisive idiots, you've got big problems.

Aside from RBG's passing and what happened after that... Trump will likely be the best thing that has happened to Democrats in a long time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48937
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:58 pm    Post subject:

DancingBarry wrote:
Lol on the politics and living in an echo chamber. My wife was registered Republican all her life until January 6. She did not vote for Trump either time and found she had very little in common these days with Republicans. She is DONE with the party and what was left of it. Done forever. DONE. Want to get her blood boiling? Turn on Fox News for a few minutes. Bring any of these atrocious Covid discussions around her. I dare you.

My son was conservative. He was more educated and articulate than any conservative I've ever met. (I've literally been around most levels of the right... my die hard in-laws, one wears Ayn Rand shirts, the other has gone QAnon...and my brother is a pretty typical educated conservative, as well.) But my son was way more nuanced and knowledgeable than anyone I've been around. He has a gift. But that was 3 years ago for my son. He is no longer a conservative. Quite liberal on many things. He did not vote for Trump and can no longer stand Republicans. He swats weak-ass conservative AND liberal takes like Mutombo.

My daughter, well, she's a raging liberal.

Think we haven't had some great discussions at my house over the years? It's never been hostile. It's been nuanced, educated, don't bring fluff, bring facts. Take on other people's perspectives. My mother loves coming over to hear us. You have no idea how educated on conservative politics they are. But, yes, they found they no longer had anything in common with Republicans these days. They've been DONE... DONE! (I don't know if I can say this more emphatically) ... for quite a while.

Seriously, when GW and Dan Quayle are looking at the party like it's full of divisive idiots, you've got big problems.

Aside from RBG's passing and what happened after that... Trump will likely be the best thing that has happened to Democrats in a long time.


That's awesome DB. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at one of your family gatherings.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Halflife
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 7184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:14 pm    Post subject:

its an itty bitty win but Trump has to face E. Jean Carrol in her defamation suit against him. She says he raped her. He defamed her while president.

The only speed bump is that judges are still trying to decide if he is immune from the suit.

We are used to nothing happening to him but maybe, like the stormy case this opens a pandora's box of discovery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kevin61
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:41 pm    Post subject:

MODERATOR NOTE: This post discusses non-CDC approved treatments. Do not take invermectin. To prevent COVID, get vaccinated. -CL

Omar Little wrote:
kevin61 wrote:
[list=][/list]
Omar Little wrote:
I was quite civil. And I’m not really after agreement. Agreement is something you try to reach if there’s something subjective that’s of value to a group, like, where should we go to dinner. Trying to get to some sort of agreement on basic facts is tiresome and a tactic designed to pull an argument into ideological shallow water and drown the opponent in feces. I’m happy to discuss opinion and interpretation, but not to the degree where we treat horse dewormer and vaccines on equal footing, either objectively or subjectively.


That’s a straw man, you can do better than that.

Where is your data that shows that people use the promise of Invectrimin as a treatment for COVID to shun the vaccine? You posit that by believing in one, you must reject the other, that is not necessary, or true.

Yes, there may be some who believe the Invectrimin, or horse dewormer as you call it, has positive benefits when treating the early stages of COVID, so what? What’s more, Invectrimin isn’t as you pejoratively call it, merely a “horse dewormer”, it is a medication used on humans to treat malaria.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2015/press-release/

Yes, it’s not just something for our four legged friends.

Admittedly, it has not been approved by the FDA for COVID, but there are countless examples human medications repurposed to treat other afflictions, Viagra is a much cited example. Is Invectrimin one ? We have only anecdotal evidence that suggest it may be. What we do know is that it is well tolerated and given in the proper doses, has extraordinarily few side effects.

Treatments for the virus are evolving day by day and inquiry begins from anecdotal evidence. The fact is, that the “Party of Science” isn’t so.


Ok, so we’re going to have to fight to get to objective facts. The massive buying and use of ivermectin in formulations for animals is both real and quite public, and it’s not part of a scientifically based approach. Quite the opposite, which you know. I have zero problems with researchers looking at a wide variety of drugs and combination of drugs for treating covid. And they have looked at ivermectin. Thus far limited research has yielded no conclusive benefit by evidentiary standards. Which hasn’t stopped a hoard of people (almost exclusively from the right wing anti vaxx community) from buying and using and evangelicizing it across media and social media. All to not take a safe, heavily studied, with a massive real time data base and staggeringly good efficacy, vaccine, due to a wild litany of reasons that do not in whole or in part conform with any known or implied facts or evidence.

Btw, both worms and malaria are examples of parasitic infection. They are not viruses, and are thus not a equivalent to treating viral infection, similar to how antibiotics are not antiviral medicine.



“Ok, so we’re going to have to fight to get to objective facts.”
There’s no fight, let’s go.

“The massive buying and use of ivermectin in formulations for animals is both real and quite public, and it’s not part of a scientifically based approach. Quite the opposite, which you know.”
What do you mean by scientifically based approach? My definition would be one that has no use for data which is collected by scientist. Below I’ve linked several studies which show positive outcomes when treating COVID-19 with Ivermectin. I’m sure you can find others with contrary findings; such is the nature of scientific inquiry. But to make the assertion that there is no science to support it’s potential efficacy is entirely incorrect.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652439/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3888155/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7886121/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7698683/

[b]“I have zero problems with researchers looking at a wide variety of drugs and combination of drugs for treating covid. And they have looked at ivermectin. Thus far limited research has yielded no [b]conclusive benefit by evidentiary standards.”[/b]
See above
(If no conclusive benefit by evidentiary standards means full FDA approval, I concede your point.)

“Which hasn’t stopped a hoard of people (almost exclusively from the right wing anti vaxx community) from buying and using and evangelicizing it across media and social media. All to not take a safe, heavily studied, with a massive real time data base and staggeringly good efficacy, vaccine, due to a wild litany of reasons that do not in whole or in part conform with any known or implied facts or evidence.”

Where is your evidence that people are shunning the vaccine because they believe that Ivermectin will cure them? The most widely cited reason among anti-vaxxers for not using the vaccine is fear of its side effects.
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/07/15/why-wont-americans-get-vaccinated-poll-data
The side effect most cited was autism. Of course, this lunacy has been promoted for years by none other than Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vocal liberal.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-robert-f-kennedy-jr-distorted-vaccine-science1/
Here’s another staunch conservative anti-vaxxer with a Twitter following of over 22 million sharing her thoughts.
https://twitter.com/NICKIMINAJ/status/1437532566945341441

“Btw, both worms and malaria are examples of parasitic infection. They are not viruses, and are thus not a equivalent to treating viral infection, similar to how antibiotics are not antiviral medicine.”

I appreciate you trying to enlighten me on Ivermectin’s proscribed uses. As I stated earlier, I’m aware that this “horse de-wormer” is only indicated for use as an anti-parasitic in humans.
As I also stated, drugs are routinely repurposed for off-label use by physicians.
https://joppp.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40545-020-00282-8

Ivermectin has also shown to have anti-viral properties in several studies.
Here are a few:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30266338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3888155/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26752081/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 88891
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:00 pm    Post subject:

Again, you refuse to engage on the subject but go oblique. Here are some facts:

Ivermectin is an anti parasitic that has only demonstrated antiviral cab abilities in vitro and unfortunately at doses that are impracticable because they are toxic.

No study in manageable dose has been demonstrated to have significant affect on Covid 19.

All the treatment both after the fact and prophalactically in the US is being conducted by anti vaxx people, and much of it is using animal products and doses.

The vaccine is demonstrably both safe and effective.

You have no argument.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kevin61
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332

PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:19 pm    Post subject:

Sorry, I gotta laugh.

You’re really something. I’m “oblique “ when I answer your statements point by point and offer citations to support?
You offer no direct refutation with cited facts, but instead throw out statements without any citations. You are clever and quasi-eloquent but not genuinely curious.
I have come to the conclusion that any substantive dialog with you is not in the cards. You have your beliefs and you’ve found your niche as moderator of this group of like minded leftist, that’s terrific. Sorry I wasted both your time and mine. I’ll let you have the last word.

Be well and good luck.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 26676
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 12:39 am    Post subject:

kevin61 wrote:

I appreciate you trying to enlighten me on Ivermectin’s proscribed uses. As I stated earlier, I’m aware that this “horse de-wormer” is only indicated for use as an anti-parasitic in humans.
As I also stated, drugs are routinely repurposed for off-label use by physicians.
https://joppp.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40545-020-00282-8

Ivermectin has also shown to have anti-viral properties in several studies.
Here are a few:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30266338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3888155/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26752081/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22417684/


You do know using the same logic you just explained. Someone could recommend ginger as a treatment for AIDS.
Not all viruses are the same. And something having anti-viral properties doesn't make it an effective treatment against all viruses.

But lets play out your reasoning. Ivermectin is a cure for COVID. But the FDA explicitly says there is no research proving that because ...

Some say it's because they are in the pocket of vaccine makers because they are big pharma.
But wait, who makes Ivermectin? A small mom and pop shop called MERCK. 48 billion in revenue last year.

If you have some time. Google "Herman Cain Award".

Here's what NAT Geo had to say:
Quote:
What science tells us

While some studies suggest reduced risk of death, and others hint at fewer COVID-19 patients progressing to severe disease after taking ivermectin at an early stage of infection, the evidence is shaky. “We don't know whether ivermectin is helpful or not in the fight against COVID-19,” says Stephanie Weibel, a biologist at the University of Wuerzburg in Germany. “Trustworthiness of the pool of available studies is limited.”

In a recent review of 14 ivermectin studies, Weibel and her colleagues found that often the trials enrolled few patients or weren’t designed well, sometimes leading researchers to overestimate ivermectin’s impacts. She encourages more robust clinical trials, like the one underway at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom.

Even Merck, an ivermectin manufacturer, in a February 2021 statement said that its own analysis of the scientific literature didn’t support the drug’s use against COVID-19. However, the argument that supporters sometimes make is that even if ivermectin use may not provide obvious benefits, it can’t hurt.

“If there isn’t evidence that the product works, then any risk the product might convey is unacceptable,” says Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and former associate commissioner at the FDA. “We have people who have gotten ill from ivermectin, who’ve wasted a bunch of money for no proven benefit, and the concern is that ivermectin is diverting people from things that actually work: vaccines, masks, and social distancing.”

Also, ivermectin supporters, who possibly weren’t able to acquire prescriptions for the drug from their physicians, may resort to the animal-version stocked in farm supply stores, not knowing the difference. The recommended dose for animals is much higher, and if people ingest ivermectin at that high dose, they’re likely to be poisoned, says Michael Teng, a health virologist at the University of South Florida.

Some vaccine sceptics are also resorting to ivermectin to prevent getting COVID-19, even though there is no strong scientific evidence to support such behavior and physicians warn against using ivermectin for extended periods. As of now, the FDA states that ivermectin should only be used or prescribed for COVID-19 in a clinical trial setting, which often involves follow-ups and health monitoring for the enrolled participants.


https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/the-shaky-science-behind-ivermectin-as-a-covid-19-cure

It's sad to see people cherrypick what science to believe in. Ignoring vaccines that have amazing results being used on more than 3 billion people. In favor of a drug that hasn't been proven to be effective.
_________________
"Anybody have that same fire, that same passion that you have for the game?"

Kobe: "Westbrook plays mean. He plays mean like I did."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Halflife
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 7184

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:56 am    Post subject:

I saw where most of the dems/Biden want to raise taxes across the board to pay for the huge package. I am curious how much they are cutting military spending. Can’t wait to see the details.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 3291
Location: 921SD

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:12 am    Post subject:

kevin61 wrote:
Be well and good luck.


Yeah, yeah . . .

Quote:
Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19

COVID-19. We’ve been living with it for what sometimes seems like forever. Given the number of deaths that have occurred from the disease, it’s perhaps not surprising that some consumers are turning to drugs not approved or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

One of the FDA’s jobs is to carefully evaluate the scientific data on a drug to be sure that it is both safe and effective for a particular use. In some instances, it can be highly dangerous to use a medicine for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 that has not been approved by or has not received emergency use authorization from the FDA.

There seems to be a growing interest in a drug called ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans. Certain animal formulations of ivermectin such as pour-on, injectable, paste, and "drench," are approved in the U.S. to treat or prevent parasites in animals. For humans, ivermectin tablets are approved at very specific doses to treat some parasitic worms, and there are topical (on the skin) formulations for head lice and skin conditions like rosacea.

However, the FDA has received multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention, including hospitalization, after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for livestock.

Here’s What You Need to Know about Ivermectin
The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals. Ivermectin is approved for human use to treat infections caused by some parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea.
Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing.
Taking large doses of ivermectin is dangerous.
If your health care provider writes you an ivermectin prescription, fill it through a legitimate source such as a pharmacy, and take it exactly as prescribed.
Never use medications intended for animals on yourself or other people. Animal ivermectin products are very different from those approved for humans. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dangerous.
What is Ivermectin and How is it Used?
Ivermectin tablets are approved by the FDA to treat people with intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis, two conditions caused by parasitic worms. In addition, some topical forms of ivermectin are approved to treat external parasites like head lice and for skin conditions such as rosacea.

Some forms of animal ivermectin are approved to prevent heartworm disease and treat certain internal and external parasites. It’s important to note that these products are different from the ones for people, and safe only when used in animals as prescribed.

When Can Taking Ivermectin Be Unsafe?
The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19 in people or animals. Ivermectin has not been shown to be safe or effective for these indications.

There’s a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay to take large doses of ivermectin. It is not okay.

Even the levels of ivermectin for approved human uses can interact with other medications, like blood-thinners. You can also overdose on ivermectin, which can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hypotension (low blood pressure), allergic reactions (itching and hives), dizziness, ataxia (problems with balance), seizures, coma and even death.

Ivermectin Products for Animals Are Different from Ivermectin Products for People
For one thing, animal drugs are often highly concentrated because they are used for large animals like horses and cows, which weigh a lot more than we do—a ton or more. Such high doses can be highly toxic in humans. Moreover, the FDA reviews drugs not just for safety and effectiveness of the active ingredients, but also for the inactive ingredients. Many inactive ingredients found in products for animals aren’t evaluated for use in people. Or they are included in much greater quantity than those used in people. In some cases, we don’t know how those inactive ingredients will affect how ivermectin is absorbed in the human body.

Options for Preventing and Treating COVID-19
The most effective ways to limit the spread of COVID-19 include getting a COVID-19 vaccine when it is available to you and following current CDC guidance.

Talk to your health care provider about available COVID-19 vaccines and treatment options. Your provider can help determine the best option for you, based on your health history.


FDA

GTFO

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigJosh951
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 12 Feb 2012
Posts: 2167

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:16 am    Post subject:

kevin61 wrote:
Sorry, I gotta laugh.

You’re really something. I’m “oblique “ when I answer your statements point by point and offer citations to support?
You offer no direct refutation with cited facts, but instead throw out statements without any citations. You are clever and quasi-eloquent but not genuinely curious.
I have come to the conclusion that any substantive dialog with you is not in the cards. You have your beliefs and you’ve found your niche as moderator of this group of like minded leftist, that’s terrific. Sorry I wasted both your time and mine. I’ll let you have the last word.

Be well and good luck.


The poor, ganged up upon conservative. You linked Nicki Minaj's twitter and say you listed cited facts? lmao Polls and a celebritiy's twitter is anything but that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48937
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:33 am    Post subject:

BigJosh951 wrote:
kevin61 wrote:
Sorry, I gotta laugh.

You’re really something. I’m “oblique “ when I answer your statements point by point and offer citations to support?
You offer no direct refutation with cited facts, but instead throw out statements without any citations. You are clever and quasi-eloquent but not genuinely curious.
I have come to the conclusion that any substantive dialog with you is not in the cards. You have your beliefs and you’ve found your niche as moderator of this group of like minded leftist, that’s terrific. Sorry I wasted both your time and mine. I’ll let you have the last word.

Be well and good luck.


The poor, ganged up upon conservative. You linked Nicki Minaj's twitter and say you listed cited facts? lmao Polls and a celebritiy's twitter is anything but that.




I didn't notice that one. She was soundly debunked by the Trinidad government.

Example number 5,987,986 why the "I do my own research" rubes are both ridiculous and dangerous. Searching for random links on the internet that support a presupposed conclusion is not research. And even if one pretends to be unbiased and looks at links that refute the presupposed conclusion, that is still not meaningful research. Research is conducted by trained and educated specialists over an extensive period of exhaustive investigation—not spending your free time Googling (bleep).

And hiding behind, "I'm being the reasonable one" nonsense doesn't change that.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 12736

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:47 am    Post subject:

All these drive-by conservatives sound like the same person.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 9927
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:25 am    Post subject:

Can Ivermectin treat Polio? asking for a friend
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 3291
Location: 921SD

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:35 am    Post subject:

ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Can Ivermectin treat Polio? asking for a friend


. . . maybe if you believe hard enough and are a true patriot . . .



Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 22013
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:48 am    Post subject:

kevin61 wrote:
Sorry, I gotta laugh.

You’re really something. I’m “oblique “ when I answer your statements point by point and offer citations to support?
You offer no direct refutation with cited facts, but instead throw out statements without any citations. You are clever and quasi-eloquent but not genuinely curious.
I have come to the conclusion that any substantive dialog with you is not in the cards. You have your beliefs and you’ve found your niche as moderator of this group of like minded leftist, that’s terrific. Sorry I wasted both your time and mine. I’ll let you have the last word.

Be well and good luck.


Good luck to you as well. Everyone else should google "psychological projection." You're welcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 3171, 3172, 3173, 3174, 3175, 3176  Next
Page 3172 of 3176
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB