What is?

[RobGMN Premium Member]

ALL THREE OF YOU COMPLETELY IGNORE SHIT. GOD DAMN HOW DO YOU PEOPLE LIVE THROUGH EACH DAMN DAY WITHOUT WALKING INTO WALLS OR INTO TRAFFIC?????

WHEN DID I SAY IT WAS APPROVED? I DIDN'T
WHEN DID I SAY "PEOPLE HAVE TOLD ME"? I DIDN'T
WHEN DID I SAY JOE ROGAN? I DIDN'T

SEEMS TO ME LIKE YOU ARE READING SHIT AND TAKING IT AS FACT. PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU THINK IT HELPS YOU LOOK COOL. JOE ROGAN, DRINKING PEE, HORSE MEDICINE, GOD.

1/3rd of the worlds human population has taken it. It is ALSO used to treat animals.

I have posted all of this response and this is what the three of you saw:

Joe Rogan said to drink piss, god rules all, Trump is my god, you must take this ivermectin as Joe Rogan said it is approved for eradicating all forms of COVID. Ignore Fauci and Biden as they are the Devil. Republicans want to eat your babies.

YOU posted the following.

As I have said before. You don't need to speak for me. I am not an "anti-vaxer" and I never said I don't trust these entities when it comes to the existing COVID vaccines. I never said I trust anyone else over them either. You really have to stop grouping everyone with opinions, facts or other all into the same group if they chose to not be democrats or liberals.

The NIH AND WHO state the efficacy of ivermectin against COVID... then say not to use it because there is not enough data. How do they know it's effective then? Either they do have data or they don't, which is it? They know WAAAAAYYYYYYY more about Ivermectin then they do the current vaccines as it has been used for a very long time alllllllllllllll around the world.

YOU have yet to show where the NIH and WHO have stated that Ivermectin is efficacious with regards to COVID. YOU said "The NIH AND WHO state the efficacy of ivermectin against COVID". it's quoted above. Did you forget?
YOU also claimed the proof is and always will be on the internet.
So, share with us what you read from the NIH or WHO that says Ivermectin works for COVID.

'Seems to us like you are making up shit and claiming it is fact, while we are looking at facts and info from legit sources, and countering your bullshlt with them. If what you say is not bullshilt, you should be able to back it up easily, like we can with what WE say.

"1/3 of the world population" has used it? Got a source for that claim?

As for Joe Rogan - he's become the poster boy for pushing Ivermectin. If you believe Ivermectin is the right way while a vaccine is the wrong way, you are goign to get lumped in with Joe. It's inevitable.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

I ask a question to you liberals. What news isn't "fake news"? What is a trustworthy news source?

I am not 411. Find it yourself.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I ask a question to you liberals. What news isn't "fake news"? What is a trustworthy news source?

I am not 411. Find it yourself.

News that can be verified is far from "fake news".
Saying the election was stolen through fraud without any proof ever is "fake news".
Saying the events of Jan 6th happened, while being able to provide photographic and video evidence from literally dozens of assorted sources is "real news".

Saying the NIH and WHO have declared Ivermectin as efficacious in dealing with COVID without being able to prove it is "fake news".
Posting quotes direct from the websites of NIH and WHO that say Ivermectin has not been proved efficacious is "real news".

Do you see the difference in just those two examples, or are you still confused about "real" versus "fake"?


Of course, I post and see metalhead's quote about if the pythagorean theorem could be proved, it would be a law.
Fecking hilarious. Great example of not knowing. "Pythagorean theroem is fake news". HAHAHAHA

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

News that can be verified is far from "fake news".
Saying the election was stolen through fraud without any proof ever is "fake news".
Saying the events of Jan 6th happened, while being able to provide photographic and video evidence from literally dozens of assorted sources is "real news".

Saying the NIH and WHO have declared Ivermectin as efficacious in dealing with COVID without being able to prove it is "fake news".
Posting quotes direct from the websites of NIH and WHO that say Ivermectin has not been proved efficacious is "real news".

Do you see the difference in just those two examples, or are you still confused about "real" versus "fake"?


Of course, I post and see metalhead's quote about if the pythagorean theorem could be proved, it would be a law.
Fecking hilarious. Great example of not knowing. "Pythagorean theroem is fake news". HAHAHAHA

I am curious just how much information is edited, redacted, omitted, or modified by your trusted news sources.

NIH:

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines - PMC

Repurposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials. We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

WHO:

WHO advises that ivermectin only be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials

www.who.int

American Journal of Therapeutics: Which sites from both WHO and NIH;

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19... : American Journal of Therapeutics

mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemoprophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, COVID-19 infection. Data sources: We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were...

journals.lww.com

The NIH states in the link that Ivermectin has effectiveness against COVID. They state a lot of things good and bad or other. Seriously, stop blowing the lefts diickk!! All major parties have done and or continue to study Ivermectin against COVID.

Can you dirty wet gashes also read where these three links show Ivermectin being used specifically in humans or do you just want to bash Joe Rogan because some split-tails on your liberal TV programs say Joe Rogan Bad, him take horse medicine. Morons.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I am curious just how much information is edited, redacted, omitted, or modified by your trusted news sources.
The only relevant word here is "modified". Facts are no longer facts if they are modified. Critical thinking and due diligence should be applied to anything you read, see, hear that is questionable.
If you see an advert for a 1,000 Watt car amp for $20, do you question it, or run right out and buy it? Smart people question it and do their research. Gullible ones don't.
Have you noticed that miracle diet pills sell in the millions? Or that preachers fly in private jets that they own?

NIH:

http://[URL][URL][URL][URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/

[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
This is an article shared on the NIH website that reviews other studies that have been done and collates the metadata to suggest a result. The conclusion states: Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. This is not the NIH stating that Ivermectin works; it is not even the article AUTHORS stating it works.
*Moderate certainty of the evidence means that the likelihood is moderate that the effect will be different enough from what the research found that it might affect a decision.

WHO:

http://[URL][URL][URL][URL]https://...used-to-treat-covid-19-within-clinical-trials

[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
31 March 2021
The current evidence on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients is inconclusive. Until more data is available, WHO recommends that the drug only be used within clinical trials.
I'm not sure that I would consider this as proof the WHO has said Ivermectin is efficacious against COVID; do YOU?

American Journal of Therapeutics: Which sites from both WHO and NIH;

http://[URL][URL][URL][URL]https://...mectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx

[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
This is the exact same article you pasted a link to above. Repeating the info doesn;t make it any different. The conclusion is the same as I pasted above.

The NIH states in the link that Ivermectin has effectiveness against COVID. They state a lot of things good and bad or other. Seriously, stop blowing the lefts diickk!! All major parties have done and or continue to study Ivermectin against COVID.
The NIH has said no such thing. This article is not an NIH study or the results of an NIH study. Here's the disclaimer since you'll think i am lying:
This disclaimer relates to PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Bookshelf. These three resources are scientific literature databases offered to the public by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM). NLM is not a publisher, but rather collects, indexes, and archives scientific literature published by other organizations. The presence of any article, book, or document in these databases does not imply an endorsement of, or concurrence with, the contents by NLM, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), or the U.S. Federal Government.

Can you dirty wet gashes also read where these three links show Ivermectin being used specifically in humans or do you just want to bash Joe Rogan because some split-tails on your liberal TV programs say Joe Rogan Bad, him take horse medicine. Morons.
I know you are trying real hard, but posting stuff that doesn't prove your thesis and then acting like you are superior only makes you look worse in the eyes of people who know better than to just accept your drivel as accurate.
Nothing you have shared here proves that the NIH or WHO has declared Ivermectin as efficacious in dealing with COVID.
You may desperately WANT it to, but it just doesn't. All the namecalling and hand-wringing you can muster will not change that.
And Joe Rogan makes good money due tot the number of viewers he reaches. You can rest assured that there are people who take his advice because he is famous and therefore "must be right". Again, look at the sheer volume of people who send money to a preacher because they saw him on TV. It's BILLIONS of dollars.
if you think Joe's audience is far too smart to simply listen to him as an authority, then YOU my friend, are absolutely the gullible one.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

That's right... read every word... study all of it so you all can continue to argue. How did I know you just wanted to keep arguing.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

I wouldn't trust a damn thing you post at this point Rob. I put shit in front of you so you can read it. Nope... you just want to argue. No retention, no comprehension, no intelligence what so ever. You pick and choose when to be literal just so you have something to argue about.

 

[Jesus Christ]

Rent-a-Cop Rob is really going at it today!! LOL

 

[Jesus Christ]

I wouldn't trust a damn thing you post at this point Rob

Who does anymore? but yet here he is day after day trying to enforce a car audio forum so that "misinformation" isnt spread around about his democrats that he claims not to support....lol...... weird strange people in this world

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

That's right... read every word... study all of it so you all can continue to argue. How did I know you just wanted to keep arguing.

You DO understand what argument, debate, and discourse ARE, yes?
Hint: They are not you posting your side of the argument, and then everyone reads it and says "He's SO correct!". That may be what your parents did for you as a child, but in the grownup world when there is an argument/debate/discourse, there will be words spoken, responses made, responses to those responses, and on.

Sorry you aren't getting the participation trophy that you expect just for putting up a post.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Rent-a-Cop Rob is really going at it today!! LOL

Big talker on the internet, but a big p*ssy when the bluff is called.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

FACTS: COVID is on the way out.
FACTS

You DO understand what argument, debate, and discourse ARE, yes?
Hint: They are not you posting your side of the argument, and then everyone reads it and says "He's SO correct!". That may be what your parents did for you as a child, but in the grownup world, when there is an argument/debate/discourse, there will be words spoken, responses made, responses to those responses, and on.

Sorry you aren't getting the participation trophy that you expect just for putting up a post.

I see what you do Rob. You want to argue so even if someone gives you what you want you will dissect it and use what you think will allow you to continue to argue. You have one goal. To argue. It's fine. Stop asking for proof, facts or other. You already have all you will ever need.

 

[Jesus Christ]

but a big p*ssy when the bluff is called

what bluff? LOL

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

what bluff? LOL

One hint: Real Estate broker.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

FACTS: COVID is on the way out.
FACTS

I see what you do Rob. You want to argue so even if someone gives you what you want you will dissect it and use what you think will allow you to continue to argue. You have one goal. To argue. It's fine. Stop asking for proof, facts or other. You already have all you will ever need.

I'll ask this with genuine curiosity: If you don't want to argue, why do you post false info in a thread that has been nothing BUT argument/debate/discourse for hundreds and hundreds of posts?

Do you REALLY expect to be gladhanded and backslapped by others here who post bullshlt too?
What is the benefit you achieve from doing it? Honest question.