COVID 19: Violence; Threats; Criminal Activity

[Sanch]

One of the reasons I care about vaccinations? Well, the hospitals are full to bursting with unvaccinated people in the ICU's. Which means a few things:

-We, as taxpayers and insurance rate payers have to pay for their stupid derpy decisions. Ain't none of them or their families is about to pay all their cost personally.

-A lot of my friends and family members who are in the medical field are getting worked hard and burned out

-Because of unvaccinated idiots clogging up the hospitals, there's a lot less emergency care available to go around for those who aren't stupid idiots

-And then there's the fact that if people don't take on the responsibilities that are necessary to the exercise of freedom, they will lose that freedom.

For a moment I thought you were talking about obese people and cigarette smokers who voluntarily overeat and burn poison into their lungs several times each day and havemade up the majority of people in hospitals for the last 50 years. And mentioning freedom, I thought you were proposing we ban smoking or large bottles of soda.

This confused me because I've seen threads on here in the past ridiculing things like soda bans/taxes and smoking bans in private residences as tyranny.

Then I realized this was a COVID thread. Carry on.

[45dotACP]

tech issues, triple tap

[45dotACP]

duplicate post

[45dotACP]

Fair, I suspect personalities may vary slightly - probably for the best if I abandon that conversational thread.


That said, I came to this thread because one of my second order acquaintances was physically assaulted by someone in NC, because she had the gall to appear in public wearing a mask. It was the 'normal' commentary about being a cowardly sheep ect, that escalated to some open hand slapping.

I am sure that there was more going on with the attacker and hopefully the situation than I heard about, but I was curious to see if anyone has apocryphal confrontations spurred by mask wearing (or not wearing masks). I was just home on R&R, and as I previously mentioned I am pretty pro masks in public. When I am carrying, I tend to work pretty hard to avoid confrontation and escalations, but the idea that my mask choice could spark something off without much else made me take some time to play the "what-if" game, because you really don't have the opt-out-neutral option.

Not exactly. We have to enforce visitor restrictions for people with active COVID however, and it results in shouting matches/threats to sue the hospital on the regular and occasionally folks jump the shark to bomb/shooting threats.

Spitting, pushing, or physical contact actually seems more rare than bomb threats, because for whatever reason, people think that they can just say whatever the fuck they want and get away with it because freedom of speech (not true btw) but physical contact probably means they leave in cuffs.

Also these people are almost all unvaccinated by choice.

Very often they are spouting nonsense that runs the gamut from "Ivermectin works" (perhaps believable to the less educated), all the way to "Bill Gates invented this virus to depopulate the earth" (typically associated with mental illness)

I've never had someone threaten me with violence for not wearing a mask. I've been threatened for asking people to wear one.

Charming that your friend gets lectured on cowardice by a man who would strike a woman.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Sanch]

Very often they are spouting nonsense that runs the gamut from "Ivermectin works" (perhaps believable to the less educated)

I prefer not to list my educational background but I came across several published scientific studies that proposed a valid biochemical pathway for ivermectin to potentially reduce COVID infection, with small sample size results showing some potential promise. Ivermectin can block viral proteins from entering the host cell nucleus, as part of it's master plan to trick the cell into making viral proteins. If the viral proteins can't get into the nucleus, they can't reproduce. And Ivermectin blocks one of the proteins that is involved in facilitating transport of viral particles into the nucleus.

However, on CNN, it's just a "horse dewormer for the red hats"

If the ivermectin was approved for use with COVID, then it puts the FDA in a bind for emergency use authorizations on vaccines.

I don't know if ivermectin does anything for COVID, but early small studies are promising and I do know there's billions of dollars at stake as well as incalculable political control to show it doesn't.

Here's a technical excerpt from a published study that explains the pathway in more detail:



Regarding its role as an antiviral agent, its efficacy has been demonstrated on several viruses, both in vitro and in vivo. Among the many mechanisms by which it performs its function, the most consolidated one sees ivermectin as an inhibitor of nuclear transport mediated by the importin α/β1 heterodimer, responsible for the translocation of various viral species proteins (HIV-1, SV40), indispensable for their replication (Wagstaff et al. 2011; Wagstaff et al. 2012). This inhibition appears to affect a considerable number of RNA viruses (Jans et al. 2019; Caly et al. 2012), such as Dengue Virus 1-4 (DENV) (Tay et al. 2013), West Nile Virus (WNV) (Yang et al. 2020), Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus (VEEV) (Lundberg et al. 2013), and Influenza (Gotz et al. 2016). In addition, ivermectin has been shown to be effective against the Pseudorabies virus (PRV, with a DNA-based genome), both in vitro and in vivo (Lv et al. 2018), using the same mechanism. Caly et al. (Caly et al. 2020) have recently shown that the drug also inhibits the replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro, however not clarifying how it occurs. Since the causative agent of COVID-19 is an RNA virus, it can be reasonably expected an interference with the same proteins and the same molecular processes described above.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7251046/



I find the information about Ivermectin to be very compelling with my limited education and I'm saddened that any scientists who study this will be run out of the industry and blackballed from future research grants. The same people dismissing Ivermectin as "horse dewormer" were the same people saying there was no way COVID came from a lab in China because it was politically expedient at the time to make that claim.

[45dotACP]

I prefer not to list my educational background but I came across several published scientific studies that proposed a valid biochemical pathway for ivermectin to potentially reduce COVID infection, with small sample size results showing some potential promise. Ivermectin can block viral proteins from entering the host cell nucleus, as part of it's master plan to trick the cell into making viral proteins. If the viral proteins can't get into the nucleus, they can't reproduce. And Ivermectin blocks one of the proteins that is involved in facilitating transport of viral particles into the nucleus.

However, on CNN, it's just a "horse dewormer for the red hats"

If the ivermectin was approved for use with COVID, then it puts the FDA in a bind for emergency use authorizations on vaccines.

I don't know if ivermectin does anything for COVID, but early small studies are promising and I do know there's billions of dollars at stake as well as incalculable political control to show it doesn't.

Here's a technical excerpt from a published study that explains the pathway in more detail:



Regarding its role as an antiviral agent, its efficacy has been demonstrated on several viruses, both in vitro and in vivo. Among the many mechanisms by which it performs its function, the most consolidated one sees ivermectin as an inhibitor of nuclear transport mediated by the importin α/β1 heterodimer, responsible for the translocation of various viral species proteins (HIV-1, SV40), indispensable for their replication (Wagstaff et al. 2011; Wagstaff et al. 2012). This inhibition appears to affect a considerable number of RNA viruses (Jans et al. 2019; Caly et al. 2012), such as Dengue Virus 1-4 (DENV) (Tay et al. 2013), West Nile Virus (WNV) (Yang et al. 2020), Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus (VEEV) (Lundberg et al. 2013), and Influenza (Gotz et al. 2016). In addition, ivermectin has been shown to be effective against the Pseudorabies virus (PRV, with a DNA-based genome), both in vitro and in vivo (Lv et al. 2018), using the same mechanism. Caly et al. (Caly et al. 2020) have recently shown that the drug also inhibits the replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro, however not clarifying how it occurs. Since the causative agent of COVID-19 is an RNA virus, it can be reasonably expected an interference with the same proteins and the same molecular processes described above.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7251046/



I find the information about Ivermectin to be very compelling with my limited education (which involved studying all of the concepts in that technical explanation, such that it made sense the first time I read it without needing to look up any of the words).

Good for you, I can read a study too. Wanna know what I saw on that one?

The drug itself does have use for humans, and there has been some in vitro effect shown against COVID-19, but how effective it is in humans for COVID-19 (the study you mention above only says in vitro and in vivo for "a number of viruses" but does not specifically mention any in vivo effect for COVID as there currently is no evidence for that.)

Ivermectin is being studied currently (IIRC the PRINCIPLE study is currently underway at Oxford University), so if it actually works, great otherwise most studies have been small, inconclusive, falsified, or pre-publication. Take from that what you will, but how you do a study matters.

Regardless, most of the patient's I've cared for have tended to not share with me whether they took ivermectin pre-admission and usually I don't care, but the ones who have been taking it (that I know of) have not seen anywhere near the benefit that is being proposed by it's proponents, neither as a prophylactic, nor as a treatment when they became symptomatic.

So it is neither a cure for COVID, nor "Just a horse de-wormer", as it does have human usage, and language matters. CNN is being intellectually dishonest, but what can you expect from the media?

FWIW, I really hope it does work. I even hope it works to the level of the extremely optimistic but very probably incorrect studies. But I'm all out of fucking hope lately because I'm half convinced that if suddenly it was a cure for COVID with a high efficacy rate (like the vaccine), that suddenly nobody would want to take it because of whatever goalpost moving I've come to expect from arguing myself blue in the face with some people.

[Sanch]

Good for you, I can read a study too. Wanna know what I saw on that one?

Regardless, most of the patient's I've cared for have tended to not share with me whether they took ivermectin pre-admission and usually I don't care, but the ones who have been taking it (that I know of) have not seen anywhere near the benefit that is being proposed by it's proponents, neither as a prophylactic, nor as a treatment when they became symptomatic.

FWIW, I really hope it does work. I even hope it works to the level of the extremely optimistic but very probably incorrect studies.

I dont intend this reply to be snarky, you clearly are more educated than I am. If you did have patients who took Ivermectin pre-admission, and did not see any benefit, that is meaningless. Your sample consists of a selection bias of people who were admitted to an inpatient unit. By definition, nothing they tried worked, or they wouldn't have met the criteria for an inpatient admission.

It would be necessary to know what number of people in your community, potential patients, that took ivermectin to be included in the denominator. e.g. X Patients who took Ivermectin were admitted divided by Y total people in the community experiencing symptoms who took Ivermectin compared to a control group of Patients who did not take ivermectin divided by symptomatic non-ivermectin takers in the local community. Without the denominator, then we would say 100% of patients admitted to your hospital would have seen zero benefit from Ivermectin.

Further, I would suspect a confounding bias such that people who care about their health and live healthy lifestyles, such as not smoking, not being obese, exercising, are likely to have taken the vaccine (and likely to drive electric vehicles, be vegans, and vote Democrat). Whereas those unvaccinated are likely to be overweight, smokers, drink too much alcohol and soda. Not all, but enough to shift the results significantly. I base this on subjective firsthand experience, although my bias wouldn't impact the study, we'd need to adjust for social history factors when making comparisons, which would be difficult.

I find that many health care workers in the last 18 months have experienced selection bias similar to police officers. Whereby cops see the worst of the worst of society on a daily basis, and when they do see regular people, it's on the worst days of their life. So cops tend to meet new people in their personal life with suspicion, since 90% of the people they meet (who aren't coworkers) are shitbags. So the assumption is 90% of the people they meet in their personal life are shitbags, too.

Healthcare workers are seeing tons more patients. Wow! Our hospital is full! Look at all of these 30 year olds on ventilators! Without realizing there's hundreds of thousands or millions of others in their community who are not on ventilators, and that even if the hospital leveraged a TJC waiver to setup hundreds of hallway "beds", the fraction of people in the community is so small that are being hospitalized that the government response of lockdowns and printing trillions of dollars is not warranted.

My fear is not of my death, nor of the death of my loved ones. My fear is that the reaction globally to COVID will mirror that of Sep 11th, which we just had the 20th anniversary, with multiple presidents including the current "mission accomplishing" this mess, but the Patriot Act and erosion of the 4th amendment will remain in perpetuity.

To relate this back to the original topic, my fear is the government will provoke people to violence and then expand their powers based on this, and it will make the Patriot Act look like... something that isn't so bad, but with a witty analogy.

[VT1032]

For a moment I thought you were talking about obese people and cigarette smokers who voluntarily overeat and burn poison into their lungs several times each day and havemade up the majority of people in hospitals for the last 50 years. And mentioning freedom, I thought you were proposing we ban smoking or large bottles of soda.

This confused me because I've seen threads on here in the past ridiculing things like soda bans/taxes and smoking bans in private residences as tyranny.

Then I realized this was a COVID thread. Carry on.

If there was a comparable vaccine that would, with a high degree of certainty, eliminate obesity or cigarette-related health issues, this would possibly be a valid comparison/argument, but there isn't, so it's not. There is a world of difference between a shot to the arm and major lifestyle changes required to solve obesity or quit smoking. Also, you can't give obesity or lung damage to someone else. Smoking is actually not a bad comparison. Last time I checked, you can't smoke in many public places, for the good of public health...

[HeavyDuty]

Bill Gates invented this virus to depopulate the earth

Is there a Gofundme for this?

[backtrail540]

Is there a Gofundme for this?

Microsoft?