Conclusively proven to not work with the paper that was originally used to support it withdrawn due to data issues that sure look like fraud.
Also anti trump bias ldo
The meta analysis you cite I believe includes that paper, which fucks it all up.
Sorry going by memory and couldn’t find a good summary article I read about it.
Thank you very much. I’ll dig into that.
Looks like I found it: Huge study supporting ivermectin as Covid treatment withdrawn over ethical concerns | Medical research | The Guardian
This will be fun if the guy ever answers the last question I asked him.
It’s a really bizarre take imo. Are there really a lot of people out there who aren’t getting the vaccine because it’s only under emergency approval but wound get it if the vaccine had the normal approval? Iggy isn’t backing up this claim with any numbers.
It sure seems like the vaccine-hesitant people aren’t going to give a rip about the finer points of the FDA’s approval status because they’re mainlining Fox News anti-vaxx hysteria and they the think the FDA is run by lizard people.
Like, if you tell your Facebook aunt that the Moderna vaccine now has the FDA’s Full Authorization instead of Energency Use Authorization, is she gonna run out and get the vaccine?
There’s a great video of some random woman being interviewed by the vaccine who makes a big deal about it not being fda approved. When asked if she’ll take it if was approved in a few months she immediately had new reasons not to take it
Yea the real solution is for companies to require employees to be vaccinated.
That’s not going to happen because capitalism
I think some companies have it as a requirement but yea, it won’t be enough.
So I just went to Trump’s website and read this statement from him. Just an absolutely amazing statement blaming the vaccine hesitancy on the Biden admin. Before anybody asks. this isn’t Onion. This is real.
link here:
Well if people aren’t taking the vaccine because they don’t trust the election results then fuck’em * infinity.
I don’t think the people that aren’t taking the vaccines would be taking them in Trump was in office, either. They would just have another excuse, much like how the FDA approval won’t move them to take the vax either.
So basically Trump moved his Twitter to the news section of the website lol
Kinda assumed he had Parler. Is that still a thing?
Jfc. This makes me so angry. And how did the whole family get Covid?
5 years old. Dad is a Sheriff’s Deputy.
https://twitter.com/ggreeneva/status/1417148037533741056?s=21
Haven’t followed this thread is a long time
Me and moms fully vaxxed moderns but she is high risk. Do I need to go back to being super duper cautious because of the delta variant?
In California which is 64% vaxxed based on a quick google
Oh yeah and I take care of her for those unaware
Mom should be fine, although it couldn’t hurt for her to wear a mask in crowded, enclosed spaces.
Even with Delta, the likelihood of a vaxxed, mask wearing person becoming seriously is probably very minimal.
Pfizer and Moderna double shotted people are generally safe from any variants known so far.
Doesn’t mean you or she won’t catch it, but the odds of death or severe illness are pretty miniscule.
It’s all speculative, so I don’t think there’s any data that will prove or disprove his point. But I thought the most compelling pieces were:
I also think it’s reasonable to believe that taking away a major anti-vax talking point (“These vaccines aren’t even approved by the FDA”) will have a net positive impact on people’s willingness to take the vaccine. Like, if you believe Facebook is a major channel for vaccine misinformation, then there’s a decent chance that argument becomes censorable on Facebook once the vaccine is approved, whereas now it is just a true statement that could dissuade people from getting the shot.
I can see this argument, but the FDA is already giving an exception for COVID in terms of how it’s acting. I don’t think there’s any other drug/supplement where the FDA actively and publicly encourages people to take it even though it’s not authorized. That’s one of Matty’s points - that it’s inconsistent for the FDA to publicly cheerlead a drug they haven’t yet approved. If they think it’s safe enough to endose, that’s a signal that it’s safe enough for them to authorize.
