You’re mostly wrong there too. ChrisV says he won’t take it w/o prescription and I think that’s all I said regarding him. He won’t go out and take it. The other stuff you’re thinking about was all about Bobman. It was Bobman who was using ivermectin as an example in an abstract discussion and you were being wrong about what he was saying.
MB saying a medicine as no downside and has possible upside is defending it to any rational person.
3 Likes
Is that what Bobman said about ivermectin?
No, you’re not. You’re making wild unsupported assertions.
This threatening me with communal judgement that I’m DEFENDING THE BAD THING isn’t going to work on me because I’m not as terminally insecure as you are.
7 Likes
Chris is a solid poster but this is a weird hill to die on.
Also MB, you don’t have to reflexively fight CN on every hill. You will have much better spots.
5 Likes
Soccer is incredibly boring. How about that?
2 Likes
You were aghast that he was accused of pro-ivermectin posting, which he most definitely is doing.
To describe it as a “freeroll” or “no downside” is most definitely pro-ivermectin posting, even if he also hedges by saying he won’t take it himself without a prescription.
3 Likes
Going to push back on this though. People know Acetaminophen. Yeah, they may ignore the directions or try to kill themselves with it or something, but Facebook rumors that ivermectin can help with covid are obviously a danger at this point. I have no idea how many people are actually getting injured by it and people like that Rolling Stones author lying about it are not good for credibility here, but PSAs against taking it seem pretty reasonable imo.
i’m both surprised and strangely relieved there isn’t an ivermectin thread on first page
I think the danger is less in taking invermectin and more in thinking it will save you and not going to a hospital or doing the normal things with a much greater chance to save you while waiting for the invermectin to kick in.
It’s just a bad idea for anyone who would think about taking it, to do so.
3 Likes
You’re viewed as an enabler, displaying the sort of thinking that creates a safe space for bad ideas in the same way that the media’s bothsiderism creates a safe space for all the dangerous radical Republican ideas.
People who have lived through 9/11 truthrerism, birtherism, and Trumpism increasingly have little appetite for tolerating that sort of thinking. You are facing pushback against an opinion deemed politically incorrect. That pushback is the sort of discourse that should be permissible on this forum.
1 Like
If only all Ivermectin slappies were as pro-ivermectin as he (ChrisV) is. How great would that be?
1 Like
Wow, you mean that someone can talk out of both sides of his mouth? This rigmarole reads a whole lot like, “While I personally believe 9/11 was carried out by Al-Qaeda, I’m just saying that there are a lot of unanswered questions that need further investigation. People are saying things, and I certainly don’t believe those people, but also, they have a point and we should investigate their concerns seriously.”
6 Likes
Um, that’s like exactly how the argument was structured before the studies were done. It was basically “Ivermectin is pretty safe, and there’s some seemingly plausible reason to believe that it might work, so we might as well try it since we don’t really have anything better to offer”.
The only difference is now that we have pretty convincing evidence that is most likely doesn’t work.
Ivermectin: it’s probably better for you than bleach!
12 Likes
youdontsay.jpg
My take is that there’s a lot of Devil’s Advocate gameplaying going on ITT, which is like the internet’s #1 favorite pastime. It’s probably harmless.
1 Like
Well you may want to have a look at this again.
I guess you can. I’m glad we agree on that.
wow, you sure got me melk. thanks for your contribution.