Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

astralcodexten.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 805 posts

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#391

Post by moduspol »

manwe150 wrote: post #324
moduspol wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experts involved in building / maintaining GPS haven't admitted to lying to him about it to preserve the use of GPS for people deemed more important, gone back and forth on whether or not he needs to use two GPS devices (instead of one) for the safety of others, and those experts' recommendations haven't led to policies that have destroyed the livelihoods of his or his friends' families--sometimes with unclear ti…

Not sure that’s the most comforting analogy to pick. GPS is maintained and controlled by the US military. They can shut it off, used to secretly make it intentionally inaccurate, have dual-band devices to protect against failures of GPS by using competitors, etc

Perhaps, although I didn't pick the analogy, and even accepting at face value what you're saying: clearly there is justifiably a much higher level of trust in GPS than public health advice, and for good reason: its scope is limited and it's had a much better track record.

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#393

Post by gruez »

listless wrote: post #381
romeros wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WHO has no other option than being inaccurate. Society needs a simple answer. Do this. Do that etc. Put on a mask. Wash your hands. Practice social distancing. Use approved vaccines. Take booster shots etc are pretty simple to follow. Likewise don't take non approved stuff. Easy to understand and simple to follow. Nuances will likely hurt and confuse the common man. That's why the news and celebs and politicians etc…

This is clearly satire and good satire at that. I’m sorry this site has not recognized this for the great social commentary that it is. You have my vote.

poe's law strikes again

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#394

Post by rory »

271828182846 wrote: post #252

> All the health officials in the world will shout “horse dewormer!” at you and compare you to Josef Mengele. Well, as a German I feel obligated to recommend those officials to read up on Josef Mengele and then reconsider throwing that name around so casually.

He means it as a metaphor for "they'll say you're extremely evil," and Mengele is the most evil scientist that's also a household name. Treating any name like it's Voldemort isn't a helpful norm for a society to uphold.

I'm pretty sure Scott is Jewish, so I imagine he's aware of Mengele's work.

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#395

Post by toolz »

The real story (in my opinion) behind Ivermectin are the studies not being conducted. Here you have a ton of studies claiming to have found benefit with a worldwide, massively available drug that has practically zero risks for most people (and it's an extremely well understood drug) and we don't have first world countries conducting RCTs to understand it better.

So you have to ask yourself - when do we get high quality RCTs, who funds them and why? This to me is a clear cut indicator that we have very maligned incentives for health science. How can we be this far into a global pandemic, with all of this funding and not have multiple high quality RCTs on this drug? It's sad to say the least. Even if Ivermectin ends up being fairly weak or completely ineffective - surely there's something to learn here...

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#396

Post by toolz »

HelloNurse wrote: post #389
DoreenMichele wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, as the author cites from another researcher, the trials are a strong piece of evidence for "add[ing] ivermectin to mass drug administration programs." In other words, global medical welfare, where we just give everyone a bunch of a cheap and effective medications to counteract the most prolific diseases. When they invented antibiotics, people began predicting "the end of disease." Fast forward a few decades…

Wouldn't we risk force-evolving ivermectine resistant parasites with the same mechanism as antibiotic resistant bacteria?

The CDC estimates that _at least_ 30% of all anti-biotic prescriptions are inappropriately prescribed. I'd wager an over-prescription of Ivermectin (that by some unknown characteristic appears it would save massive numbers of lives) isn't likely to evolve parasites (which evolve much more slowly than bacteria to begin with) to be resistant in a dangerously meaningful way given what we see with bacteria resistance.

This is of course just a gut feeling and not a studied understanding.

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#397

Post by mewpmewp2 »

jesterson wrote: post #271
Nursie wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not "trying to make a personal offence", I am explaining why you may find people mock you. Your view of the situation on the ground is incorrect. The studies you are claiming have not been done are a mere google search away. In fact in this case the link at the top of the HN discussion contains a lot of relevant information. Here's the major question I have for folks like yourself who are still on about ivermecti…

I wasn't soliciting for an explanation why people are trying to mock - too much studying of psychology provided enough information to answer this question. The answer, as it may come at a surprise for you, is not related to plausibility of statements. But that's totally different matter. As for your question, let me give you a very simple answer. As a layman in certain area, I see few facts - several families who I k…

Which government is that? The one who paid.

I'm aware of frequent vaccine complications, but haven't heard of government doing any payouts.

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#398

Post by peakaboo »

toolz wrote: post #395

The real story (in my opinion) behind Ivermectin are the studies not being conducted. Here you have a ton of studies claiming to have found benefit with a worldwide, massively available drug that has practically zero risks for most people (and it's an extremely well understood drug) and we don't have first world countries conducting RCTs to understand it better. So you have to ask yourself - when do we get high quali…

About 1.5 years ago, ivermectin was discussed in "conspiracy" channels like Reddit, and many people were helped by it.

The mass media ignored it for over a year and when they did started covering it, they said it was a horse dewormer.

The fact is, what people think is trustworthy news today is pure propaganda. You cannot make an informed decision based on what you read in the mass media.. It's all completely controlled, supporting whatever the big corporations wants to push on you.

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#399

Post by [deleted] »

toolz wrote: post #395

The real story (in my opinion) behind Ivermectin are the studies not being conducted. Here you have a ton of studies claiming to have found benefit with a worldwide, massively available drug that has practically zero risks for most people (and it's an extremely well understood drug) and we don't have first world countries conducting RCTs to understand it better. So you have to ask yourself - when do we get high quali…

[deleted]

Re: Ivermectin: Much More Than You Wanted to Know

#400

Post by tristor »

I don't understand the point of the image of the meth seizure when discussing this study [1]. The last name is the same, but if you understand Mexican surnames, it is strongly unlikely that the two different people are in any way closely related. I like reading Scott's writing, but this really detracts from the overall quality of the article, because it seems like a vaguely racist dig without any relevance.

[1]: https://www.biomedres.info/biomedical-research/effects-of-iv...

Post reply on HN