He doesn’t even seem antivax… listening to the controversial podcasts… he just sounds more curious about it… asking questions and talking to people shouldn’t be a bad thing…
To me the quests seem to have some credentials and they have/had concerns over some aspects of how Covid is being treated, how the vacine is being administered, and how Covid restrictions are beign handled. They are interesting points and might be worth considering. I for one have been curious since the begining why Ivermectine was just banned fast with a smear campaign instead of doing actual trials and showing it doesn't work against Covid.
None of this is antivax or utter bullshit in my mind
Like Jordan Peterson rambling about climate change?
> I for one have been curious since the begining why Ivermectine was just banned fast with a smear campaign instead of doing actual trials and showing it doesn't work against Covid.
I you actually cared about that, then you'd know that trials were conducted and the data did not warrant a recommendation. For example, early results where discussed here in April 2020: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7172803/
Sorry but, by insinuating a smear campaign you are now the one who's spreading bullshit.
Yeah, Peterson isn't authority on climate change, but does that mean he shouldn't say what he thinks about it? Also I was refering to the supposed antivax episodes. I haven't listened to the Peterson episode. As I said I haven't listened to JRE since it became Spotify exclusive expect for these two episodes.
Sorry you need to help me with the link you provided. I tried skimming it and I just saw that ivermectine showed promise and that due to higher than usual dosage more research is needed.
>Sorry but, by insinuating a smear campaign you are now the one who's spreading bullshit.
Again what bullshit? If we have a drug that shows promise, but as soon as people start talking about it all news agencies start telling how the drug is "a horse dewormer" and implying that only idiots would even consider using "a horse dewormer" on humans when it is literally our best antiparasitic that has been used for decades on humans and animals. Obviously don't take any drugs that are made for animals, but I don't understand why potential treatment was dimissed so hard out of hand at a time when didn't have enough vaccines for everyone in need and we have bunch of Ivermectine in every pharmacy around the world.
> Caly et al. at Monash University in Australia recently published a paper in Antiviral Research, reporting that ivermectin, a medication widely used for the treatment of certain parasitic diseases in humans and livestock animals, inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture (Caly et al., 2020). *Despite the authors' cautious conclusion that ivermectin "warrants further investigation for possible benefits in humans,"* the paper has excited widespread interest on medical and veterinary websites, which often incorrectly describe the drug as a treatment or cure for COVID-19. These inappropriate statements led to a warning by the US FDA, that *ivermectin in veterinary products should not be used for human therapy*
The letters and the author of the original paper all seem to be concerned about the dosage being higher than what is used to treat parasites and the amount could potentially be toxic which in their words: "important reason to be very cautious in considering ivermectin as a therapeutic for viral infection in human patients."
Again I ask you to help me with finding the section that says the drug fails to meet criteria for further studies?
EDIT: I tried to highlight the interesting points, but I can't figure it out so I will just put the two quotes here:
1. Despite the authors' cautious conclusion that ivermectin "warrants further investigation for possible benefits in humans,"
2. ivermectin in veterinary products should not be used for human therapy
Although he is right that there should be more focus on holistic approaches to help instead of just "TAKE THIS FUCKING VACCINE OR ELSE", which is kind of what it has been here in Canada. Meanwhile a large percentage of Canadian (and obviously Americans) are overweight, eat like shit, and don't exercise at all. All things which significantly increase the chances that someone, even if they're young, will have adverse effects from the COVID virus.
I also don't think he's necessarily antivax, but he's not innocent on this point.
The blessing and curse of having the worlds information at our fingertips is that we can usually find the data, groups and echo chambers to mirror any narrative.
If you were hesitant about certain medical procedures, you now have access to groups and data that can and will reaffirm that you should not undergo that procedure because of X, Y & Z.
Wether X, Y & Z are directly relevant, or even statistically probable - it doesn’t matter anymore. Group think, peer pressure, societal pressures and desires to be “free” and “independent” etc start to reign.
The backlash against Spotify is warranted - it’s just a large corporation that people can condem and refuse to do business with. Same with governments.
Perhaps not exactly the same analogy, but muslims won’t generally use the services offered by a Church, or some people might go see their Shaman over a GP, or vegans will avoid the meat-heavy BBQ place. We have our beliefs, some are misguided, some are dangerous. Covid is pretty dangerous, and deadly to certain demographics.