GlockSpock

Moderna has one and it is fully approved by both the FDA, Fauci, and Kamaliden.

Lol. I have no reason to delete you.

Posts hidden unless another mod disagrees.

Sorry Greg, I like you and all but I don’t think TGO is the place for that.

I think he was calling all of us wussies for not getting the vaccine or contrarily commies for getting the vaccine. I never got to figure out which one.

Very sorry for your losses. Regarding 11,000 deaths from the shots (all three tallied), you can find as much data as you'd ever want by querying VAERS. https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html I searched and found the following: 5,310 Deaths Keep in mind that these are unverified to actually be in any way related to receiving the vaccine. You could technically, I think, report your 2 friends as deaths. I think your other friends could also all report those 2 friends as deaths. In other words, the data is there but view it all as sorta a clump of data rather than a source of data. There are also the following "side effects" listed on this dataset: DEATH OF PET FEAR OF DEATH MATERNAL DEATH DURING CHILDBIRTH NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE

Touche. That is exactly a valid question. You wouldn't know individually whether or not you would have fared better/worse if those people had not been vaccinated. However, you can look at the numbers and also discuss things with local doctors/ICU/etc and generally find that that majority of people in ICU/dying are unvaccinated. That's been my local experience, but I also haven't talked to anyone that's fessed up to taking Ivermectin. If you trust a lot of the research shown, statistically people who are vaccinated are less likely to develop a severe infection. @MacGyver reinforced several pages or several dozen pages back in one of the threads the sheer amounts of data we have for this specific topic.

Please though, do not interpret my questioning of Ivermectin as me being against it. I am not a doctor nor have I studied medicine. If people want to do studies on it I'd love for them to prove it is effective in the treatment of COVID. I just don't think a few cases here nor there is a large amount of evidence that it works. I'll ask again just to prove a point. If Ivermectin was given to 2-3 people and the died of COVID, would that be enough to convince you that it doesn't work? I'll answer that myself to say big pictures have to be looked at instead of a small crop of the big picture.

I'm glad they are well again however I sincerely would like to ask the following: 1) What evidence do you have to support that it cured them? This post goes into more detail regarding my thinking, but how might they have fared had they not taken it? 2) Regarding the entire group of people, how do you know there aren't side effects? If it is indeed the "same" as prescription formulas just in different quantities and taken within typical prescription fashion (quantity and length of treatment), then of course I would expect it to be as safe as a prescribed regiment if taken correctly. But if it is taken in higher quantities or for longer than typically prescribed, who is to say that it doesn't cause organ damage, etc? I guess my entire argument is summed as the following: Does "it cured them" hold up to a single person taking Ivermectin while having COVID if they get better? What if the deathrate from COVID is 1% and then if 1,000 people with COVID take Ivermectin and 10 of them still die?

Well, seeing as how USPS now delivers to my house at 8:30PM now, I'm guessing they don't want to have to fire anyone.

https://nerdist.com/article/matrix-resurrections-morpheus-dead-changed-laurence-fishburne-absence/?amp Just in case you didn’t get what I was talking about.

Congrats. I hear you are getting replaced by a much younger, in better shape, and better looking version of yourself @Links2k.

I was mostly curious about what he was inferring.

Yea. Like I said, please do tell.

Please do tell?

I don’t support anyone that does not want it to be forced to get it. This extends all the way to being against “creating a 2nd class citizen” too. I just want to ask the right questions when it comes to data.

What if addition Kung-fu (or in this case, an extra column on your excel spreadsheet that you posted) showed that vaccinated people were 10x less likely to die? I pulled that number out of nowhere, but if the data showed that would that change anything?

This post caught my attention for quite a few reasons. As anyone with half a brain knows, you can sorta tell anything with a set of numbers if you know how to point them the right direction. I set out to do some simple math to show why it was that I thought the chart actually really supported the idea of vaccination but I was actually surprised at how the numbers came out. Now, the numbers could sway based solely upon the fact I pulled the estimated population off Wikipedia for Israel. If it is lower or higher for the official calculations shown in your graph, that would slightly alter what I'm about to say. I picked the percentages and cases from the very bottom (total and average for each). I think the general analysis that I did would hold up to any of the age groups though. I will simply summarize my calculations. If you have a population, lets say 1,000 people. Lets say that 95% of them are vaccinated. That means 950 vaccinated and 50 were not. Lets say for arguments sake you have 50 cases in the vaccinated and 25 cases in the vaccinated. Does that mean vaccinated people are twice as likely to catch COVID? Of course not! What it really means is that 50 people out of 950 vaccinated caught COVID, or 5.2%. It also means 25 people out of 50 vaccinated caught COVID, or 50%. So by those numbers, it would essentially reduce your chances of catching COVID to 1/10th of what it would be unvaccinated. Now, my numbers were much less drastic, ending at a whopping .01% difference. This is assuming that the data was correct and I calculated the things correctly, by all means I'm open to correction if someone spots an error. But what concerns me about the data, if it were posted by someone (not you, whomever originally created it) attempting to prove that vaccines are ineffective, is that it does not show anything at all about hospitalizations, deaths, and long term injuries. What if adding that data into columns skews the "meaning" of the original post? The other piece of the missing puzzle is that .21% or so seems extremely low, what if without the vaccinated 84.4% that total cases were actually 1-2% or even higher (5-10x .21%). In other words, what if the people shown in that graph that caught COVID were extremely susceptible with immune issues and would generally have caught COVID whether or not they received the vaccine. @MacGyver You are a huge data person, any thoughts?

This is about to get interesting if it turns out to be true. Wonder if it will stand.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04374019?term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&draw=3&rank=14 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04482686?term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&draw=3&rank=17 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04510194?term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&draw=4&rank=26 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04885530?term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&draw=4&rank=29

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04729140?term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&draw=2&rank=9

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=Ivermectin&cntry=US&state=&city=&dist=

Here is the thing about "did it work". On a case by case basis, it is hard to determine efficiency. Many people I know that had COVID didn't even know they had it. Guess what? That fact means nothing to the 30 year olds in ICU right now and are fighting for their life. I say that to simply say that on a case by case basis, you never know how someone (an individual) would have fared without "treatment". If you give Ivermectin to a single person with COVID and they die, does that mean Ivermectin does not work? Does that mean it is fatal itself? If you give water to someone with COVID and they feel better the next day, does that mean the water cured them? What if you give an abundance of water to a single person with COVID and they die of water poisoning, does that mean water should be withheld from COVID patients? There are so many different variables to "did it work". Dosage amount, length of treatment, unlimited variables of individual health, etc. This is why studies are important. Taking a double blind study of 1,000 people and then analyzing the results will provide a more accurate answer to "did it work".

I will put this in plainer terms. Some of the people that are calling people sheep/sheeple for taking a vaccine are then they themselves taking medication sold for livestock.

I’m confused…simply because twice you said 22/44!