SARS-2-CoV (COVID-19)

[E4 No More]

15 minutes ago, btq96r said:

What restrictions are there on legal prescriptions of ivermectin?   I know there's a lot of medical literature boo-hoo'ing it, but those are references and quite frankly, peer pressure, not prohibitions.

St. Thomas in Murfreesboro is refusing it for my disabled daughter claiming that it is not on their approved protocol.

[ReeferMac]

I don't have links handy but have read multiple accounts of Drs being threatened with their license being pulled, people being refused when requesting. Being the internet, I'd say maybe 50% likely to be true.

Irrespective, why any pressure? Even if a medicine acts as a placebo but does no harm???

... Thats the crux (or one of them for me at least), that makes it hard for me to be passive. I cannot fathom any reason why (other than....) Theres at least a half dozen things like that, surrounding the whole 'rona issue. Stuff doesn't just 'not add up', it all points to something. Maybe that makes me a tin foil conspiracists, but until I see a logical argument that connects all the dots better, I'm gonna run with it.

[btq96r]

2 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

St. Thomas in Murfreesboro is refusing it for my disabled daughter claiming that it is not on their approved protocol.

I can absolutely believe facility authorities are doing such.  Local CMO's are probably skeptical, or just afraid to step out from cover.  My experience in working with physicians is they generally don't like to deviate from guidance their applicable professional association puts out on high button issues.  Having what an accrediting body says the standard is helps defend against malpractice in courses of treatment.

I'm just unaware of government restrictions as RefeerMac talked about.

[Erik88]

Wow.

"The Biden administration will announce that all employers with 100+ employees must either mandate vaccines or test weekly. The requirement for large companies to mandate vaccinations or weekly testing for employees will be enacted through a forthcoming rule from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that carries penalties of $14,000 per violation, an administration official told The Associated Press."

 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/health/coronavirus/biden-will-encourage-vaccine-mandates-and-testing-in-speech-on-state-of-covid-19-pandemic/

 

[GlockSpock]

14 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Wow.

"The Biden administration will announce that all employers with 100+ employees must either mandate vaccines or test weekly. The requirement for large companies to mandate vaccinations or weekly testing for employees will be enacted through a forthcoming rule from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that carries penalties of $14,000 per violation, an administration official told The Associated Press."

 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/health/coronavirus/biden-will-encourage-vaccine-mandates-and-testing-in-speech-on-state-of-covid-19-pandemic/

 

This is about to get interesting if it turns out to be true. Wonder if it will stand.

[Omega]

1 hour ago, btq96r said:

I can absolutely believe facility authorities are doing such.  Local CMO's are probably skeptical, or just afraid to step out from cover.  My experience in working with physicians is they generally don't like to deviate from guidance their applicable professional association puts out on high button issues.  Having what an accrediting body says the standard is helps defend against malpractice in courses of treatment.

I'm just unaware of government restrictions as RefeerMac talked about.

When you have the FDA telling people, and doctors no...

https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/product-safety-information/faq-covid-19-and-ivermectin-intended-animals

Quote

Q: Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19?

A: No. While there are approved uses for ivermectin in people and animals, it is not approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. You should not take any medicine to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless it has been prescribed to you by your health care provider and acquired from a legitimate source. 

A recently released research articleExternal Link Disclaimer described the effect of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2 in a laboratory setting. These types of laboratory studies are commonly used at an early stage of drug development. Additional testing is needed to determine whether ivermectin might be appropriate to prevent or treat coronavirus or COVID-19.

 

[Omega]

6 minutes ago, GlockSpock said:

This is about to get interesting if it turns out to be true. Wonder if it will stand.

I don't doubt it, as I stated above, we received notice yesterday, the SECDEF memo was dated 7 Sep and is DOD wide.  

 

Edit:  Anyone hear that the fence is going back up around the Capitol, I am sure it's not related though.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Omega
Add info.

[Links2k]

3 minutes ago, Omega said:

 

 

Edit:  Anyone hear that the fence is going back up around the Capitol, I am sure it's not related though.

The fence is for the rally planned on 18 September. 

[btq96r]

33 minutes ago, Omega said:

When you have the FDA telling people, and doctors no...

https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/product-safety-information/faq-covid-19-and-ivermectin-intended-animals

 

Yeah, I've seen that and can believe that a great many physicians would read it and think if they go counter to it, they'll either be not giving the best treatment based on their knowledge base, or opening themselves to litigation for ignoring it.

Maybe it's because I work in administrative side of a physician practice and have been privy to debates on (non-COVID) policies and protocols during meetings, but the ivermectin debate is really overblown to me.  If your physician has read up on it, understands the pros/cons, that's when I'd be fine having it recommended if I were a patient.  Now, not many physicians get sufficient admin time to be well versed to the point of an opinion in something so debatable.  So for them, recommending it without due diligence on their part, or just because a patient is clamoring for it wouldn't be cool in my mind. 

Everyday doctors are very smart and can digest information in medical journals a lot faster than us who aren't trained as such...but they have a limited amount of working time, and most of it is spent on clinical shifts, not admin time or research to dive into the details of what amounts to experimental efforts.  I have no problem believing plenty of physicians don't understand ivermectin well enough and don't feel comfortable prescribing it counter to official warnings from the FDA, CDC, or their professional associations.

Edited September 9, 2021 by btq96r

[Grand Torino]

 Employers can set any requirement for work in Tennessee.  You wife has the option of not working there if she does not want to. Not sayin' this to be ugly. It's just the way it is. It kind of like no shoes, no shirt, no service. I'm pretty sure an employer can fire you without cause as well as long as it's proven not discriminatory. 

[mikegideon]

2 hours ago, ReeferMac said:

I agree with you 110%

Its why some folks (myself included), are so upset about the fedgov restricting people from taking it. People who wish to are being forced to use veterinary products off label because of the actions of our government. Its available in pill form in blister packs for about 5 bucks per course of treatment (India handed it out to millions). Why is the government doing that?

Forbidden subject on TGO. It involves politics, and men that have sex with their mothers.

Edited September 9, 2021 by mikegideon

[gregintenn]

BUCK FIDEN!!!

[mikegideon]

6 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

BUCK FIDEN!!!

Yep. That's one of those men.

BTW... I think he's bucking himself.

Edited September 9, 2021 by mikegideon

[E4 No More]

My disabled daughter that is in the hospital with COVID is getting better. They have taken her off of the oxygen mask and put her on the regular oxygen cannula. They have a "step plan" for getting her out of the hospital.

My grandsons appear to be getting better although their damned doctor just prescribed medicine for them today.

On another note, my wife, who had the J&J vaccine, is officially COVID positive. There's no way to tell if she's one of the 28% that the vaccine didn't work for or just part of the 7% of break-out cases. She has told me that she's scared since she has several co-morbidities. We are now hoping that the claim from J&J that the shot will at least make her symptoms only minor to moderate is accurate. Her doctor has her going in for some therapy on TUESDAY.

So out of my household of 8, 5 have, or had, COVID. The un-vaccinated 13-year old granddaughter has shown no signs of it although she mostly stays upstairs or wears a mask while downstairs. My other daughter, who has terrible lungs and is also vaccinated with the J&J vaccine, doesn't have it either, but she's wearing a mask religiously. Then there's me that got the Moderna shots when the VA offered them to me and is now hoping that I'm not one of the 5% that the vaccine doesn't work on.

[MacGyver]

6 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

My disabled daughter that is in the hospital with COVID is getting better. They have taken her off of the oxygen mask and put her on the regular oxygen cannula. They have a "step plan" for getting her out of the hospital.

My grandsons appear to be getting better although their damned doctor just prescribed medicine for them today.

On another note, my wife, who had the J&J vaccine, is officially COVID positive. There's no way to tell if she's one of the 28% that the vaccine didn't work for or just part of the 7% of break-out cases. She has told me that she's scared since she has several co-morbidities. We are now hoping that the claim from J&J that the shot will at least make her symptoms only minor to moderate is accurate. Her doctor has her going in for some therapy on TUESDAY.

So out of my household of 8, 5 have, or had, COVID. The un-vaccinated 13-year old granddaughter has shown no signs of it although she mostly stays upstairs or wears a mask while downstairs. My other daughter, who has terrible lungs and is also vaccinated with the J&J vaccine, doesn't have it either, but she's wearing a mask religiously. Then there's me that got the Moderna shots when the VA offered them to me and is now hoping that I'm not one of the 5% that the vaccine doesn't work on.

Prayers continued for y’all.  I’m sure her doctor will suggest it - but monoclonal antibodies really seem to help so long as they’re delivered in the first 10 days.

Hopefully by Tuesday this is a complete non-issue for her. 

Do let me know if y’all need anything. 

[user1776]

Well, Biden's just announced that all companies with >100 employees will be FEDERALLY MANDATED to require all employees to vaccinate or get tested weekly. 

[ReeferMac]

From the most vaxxed nation on the planet...

Why would a government want to force this on their population?!?!?!

[Raoul]

On 9/7/2021 at 11:55 PM, user1776 said:

All emotion aside, what are the facts you are basing your criticism on?

In my well-researched and educated opinion, this vaccine sort of sucks at being a vaccine. 

1. It doesn't prevent you from getting COVID-19 nor does it keep the virus from replicating in your body (although it does make you more likely to be asymptomatic... thereby inadvertently making you into a superspreader as you walk around not realizing you're sick because you don't get COVID tests daily)
2. It doesn't keep you from spreading it (see above)
3. There are tons of reported side effects/complications from taking the vaccine, with one of the key doctors behind mRNA technology expressing concern over the spike proteins used in the vaccine delivery technology + stories of spike proteins being found in places they weren't expected to be found in some people who've had the vaccine
4. It makes the most severe symptoms less severe... but so does being healthy (losing weight, eating better) and being healthy has not been associated with any negative side effects besides needing to buy new clothing perhaps

So if you want to take the vaccine for the benefit of #4 (a personal benefit applicable only to you) that's certainly your choice. But you aren't doing me any favors by getting the vaccine, so I invite you to dismount from your high horse

So you're chicken. Figures.

[user1776]

10 minutes ago, Raoul said:

So you're chicken. Figures.

I get it now... you can't handle logic so you resort to insults. What in my post points to me being a chicken... not wanting to subject myself to risks for a potential benefit I can get other ways? 
 

Edited September 9, 2021 by user1776

[Raoul]

16 minutes ago, user1776 said:

I get it now... you can't handle logic so you resort to insults. What in my post points to me being a chicken... not wanting to subject myself to risks for a potential benefit I can get other ways? 
 

Cluck

[mikegideon]

Are y'all working up to a bromance?

[user1776]

On 9/9/2021 at 5:31 PM, mikegideon said:

Are y'all working up to a bromance?

No, I can't stand stupid 
 

Anyway, back to the topic it seems like the stage has been set for more companies to follow suit with these mandates esp after what Biden announced today. I wonder how many will allow for weekly tests, and of those that allow it how many will cover the cost or pass it on... sad times that some people are applauding this "nanny" / "police force" approach to government.

Edited September 23, 2021 by user1776

[mikegideon]

2 minutes ago, user1776 said:

No, I can't stand stupid 
 

Anyway, back to the topic it seems like the stage has been set for more companies to follow suit with these mandates esp after what Biden announced today. I wonder how many will allow for weekly tests, and of those that allow it how many will cover the cost or pass it on... sad times that some people are applauding this "nanny" / "police force" approach to government.

There's gonna be return fire. I'm kinda anxious to see what it will be.

[GlockSpock]

1 hour ago, ReeferMac said:

From the most vaxxed nation on the planet...

Why would a government want to force this on their population?!?!?!

This post caught my attention for quite a few reasons. As anyone with half a brain knows, you can sorta tell anything with a set of numbers if you know how to point them the right direction. I set out to do some simple math to show why it was that I thought the chart actually really supported the idea of vaccination but I was actually surprised at how the numbers came out.

Now, the numbers could sway based solely upon the fact I pulled the estimated population off Wikipedia for Israel. If it is lower or higher for the official calculations shown in your graph, that would slightly alter what I'm about to say. I picked the percentages and cases from the very bottom (total and average for each). I think the general analysis that I did would hold up to any of the age groups though. I will simply summarize my calculations.

If you have a population, lets say 1,000 people. Lets say that 95% of them are vaccinated. That means 950 vaccinated and 50 were not. Lets say for arguments sake you have 50 cases in the vaccinated and 25 cases in the vaccinated. Does that mean vaccinated people are twice as likely to catch COVID? Of course not! What it really means is that 50 people out of 950 vaccinated caught COVID, or 5.2%. It also means 25 people out of 50 vaccinated caught COVID, or 50%. So by those numbers, it would essentially reduce your chances of catching COVID to 1/10th of what it would be unvaccinated.

Now, my numbers were much less drastic, ending at a whopping .01% difference. This is assuming that the data was correct and I calculated the things correctly, by all means I'm open to correction if someone spots an error. But what concerns me about the data, if it were posted by someone (not you, whomever originally created it) attempting to prove that vaccines are ineffective, is that it does not show anything at all about hospitalizations, deaths, and long term injuries. What if adding that data into columns skews the "meaning" of the original post?

The other piece of the missing puzzle is that .21% or so seems extremely low, what if without the vaccinated 84.4% that total cases were actually 1-2% or even higher (5-10x .21%). In other words, what if the people shown in that graph that caught COVID were extremely susceptible with immune issues and would generally have caught COVID whether or not they received the vaccine.

@MacGyver You are a huge data person, any thoughts?

Edited September 9, 2021 by GlockSpock

[Quavodus]

2 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Wow.

"The Biden administration will announce that all employers with 100+ employees must either mandate vaccines or test weekly. The requirement for large companies to mandate vaccinations or weekly testing for employees will be enacted through a forthcoming rule from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that carries penalties of $14,000 per violation, an administration official told The Associated Press."

 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/health/coronavirus/biden-will-encourage-vaccine-mandates-and-testing-in-speech-on-state-of-covid-19-pandemic/

 

I know this virus is serious but, this administration just keeps on pissing people off. Apparently he's not been watching videos at College ballgames. He's not real popular right now. They've been calling this a pandemic for awhile. If it was one, hospitals would be trying to hold on to their workers, instead of letting them walk. I've not heard of some guy with a wagon full of bodies, saying, "bring out your dead".