I guess it's time to talk about the NIH...

[dneal]

Three posts in a row. Chuck's triggered.

We've already been through the "practicing physician" thing. I showed you his bio from the NIH when he was made director of NIAID. He got his degree, did his residency, and been with NIAID ever since.

More ICU nurse stuff which still isn't relevant. I didn't blame Fauci for 800k deaths. I suggested the possibility of his responsibility, if it turns out the virus is from a lab leak he funded. Maybe an investigation could determine that? It's called "reasonable suspicion".

Infection rates in various states and China have nothing to do with the thread. More of your adding things that are irrelevant to "prove" some irrelevant point.

"Other voices", and a NYT article. Surprise. Liberal NYT rushes to Fauci's defense. Note they don't dispute the validity of the email, just the opinions of "top doctors". And you cry about Tucker and Fox. I don't cite either, but you continually cite CNN and NYT. Who has the confirmation bias? Who is searching for stuff to shore up their opinion?

Let's look at the letter HERE

Just a bunch of "Fauci's a great guy" lip-service stuff. I wonder if they are relying on NIH funding for anything? Just a thought... What they don't address (like you, Chuck) is the subject of this thread. Collins and Fauci conspiring to hide their funding of bat corona research, lab leak possibility, and smearing of leading epidemiologists.

Letter of Support for Anthony Fauci
A statement from the scientific and public health communities to the American public in support of Dr. Anthony Fauci

Dr. Anthony Fauci has served the USA with wisdom and integrity for nearly 40 years. Through HIV, Ebola, and now COVID, he has unswervingly served the United States guiding the country to very successful outcomes. He has our unreserved respect and trust as a scientist and a national leader.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Fauci has provided the American political leadership and the public with sagacious counsel in these most difficult of times. His advice has been as well informed as data and the rapidly evolving circumstances allowed. And importantly, he has given his advice with humility, being clear about what we know and what is unknown, but requires judgment. He has consistently emphasized the importance of mask-wearing, social distancing and vaccination. These are standard and necessary public health measures that we all support.

Scientists can and do express dissenting viewpoints, but a right to an opinion does not mean the opinion is right. We are grateful that Dr. Fauci has consistently stated the science in a way that represents the facts as they emerge, without unwarranted speculation.

Sadly, in these politically polarized times where misinformation contaminates the United States’ response to the pandemic, routine public health measures have become unnecessarily controversial, undermining the effectiveness of our country’s response.

We deplore the personal attacks on Dr. Fauci. The criticism is inaccurate, unscientific, ill-founded in the facts and, increasingly, motivated by partisan politics. It is a distraction from what should be the national focus – working together to finally overcome a pandemic that is killing about 500,000 people a year. We are grateful for Dr. Fauci’s dedication and tireless efforts to help the country through this pandemic and other health crises.

[Chuck Naill]

He sees patients. That's what a practicing physician does...LOL!! Did you think it meant something else?

Your medical knowledge is next to kindergarten. You advocated Ivermectin and didn't know what dosages, adverse events, or contraindications yet it should be employed in your opinion.

Yet, if Tucker and Rand think Fauci is a fool, you fall all over yourself to post.

[dneal]

He’s a bureaucrat.

You haven’t done anything but scoff at ivermectin. “Cattle wormer”, you called a Nobel prize winning drug. You said it wasn’t an antiviral, and I showed you the study of many antiviral uses.

No, I’m not a doctor; so I haven’t advocated dosage. I’ll let my doctor do that for me. But that’s just another deflection on whether or not it is effective against Covid. Deflection. It’s all you do.

And lastly, you summon ghosts of Tucker again. Looks like you’re the only one who is watching him, since you seem to know what he says.

I posted the documents, and the not-Tucker reporting. You post CNN and NYT fluff pieces. Blue kook-aid to gulp while you hide out in your echo chamber.

[Chuck Naill]

He sees patients. Ivermectin has not been studied in clinical trials to determine efficacy in treating Covid-19 virus is what I said.

All the stuff you posted is from similar sources as Tucker. Anyone who thinks otherwise can validate.

[dneal]

He is not the attending physician, and he doesn't have a practice. He's a bureaucrat - an SES level bureaucrat. He doesn't have time for anything other than "making a round" with the practicing physician. It's as dumb as arguing a General is a "fighting man", because he visits the actual fighting men.

I have shown you many studies that indicate ivermectin treats COVID. "Clinical trials"? Not in the sense of testing drugs you sell so you don't get sued later, but certainly there is clinical data. What happened to your fire-fighting analogy? Not useful anymore?

And what you said was "Cattle wormer", with a bunch of "lol's" and emoticons.

"Similar sources" as Tucker? Good luck demonstrating that lie. MSN? Daily Mail? Yes, please validate. Better yet: "Cite the post". That usually has you running away and hiding.

Have you derailed yet another thread to your satisfaction now? Isn't it time for you to go pray at the altar of CNN? I think Fauci is on giving another sermon about masks or something.

[Chuck Naill]

He sees patients. He is an infectious disease doctor. It is what they do. They consult. No one makes rounds anymore except hospitalists and consultants, in general.

No clinical trials or FDA approval, period.

[dneal]

You're like a monkey on a football field, who has torn down the goal posts and is running around in circles. I just call out what yard line you're on, until you move on to the next.

Bless your heart.

So back on topic:

Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci conspired to discredit three leading epidemiologists. Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci conspired to label a likely lab-leak possibility a "conspiracy theory". You don't have to believe me. You just have to read their emails, which were first obtained by the not-Tucker and not-conservative BuzzFeed and WashPost.

Anthony Fauci lied about funding bat corona virus research. Anthony Fauci lied about "gain of function", through semantics.

Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, at a minimum, destroyed their own credibility and by extension the credibility of their organizations.

[Chuck Naill]

Ignorance is bliss.

[dneal]

Ignorance is bliss.

That would explain your blissfulness, bless your heart.

[TSherbs]

spam?

[Chip]

Hemp oil, ivermectin, and the laying on of hands.

[dneal]

Speaking of ivermectin, two new studies have been published regarding the efficacy of ivermectin.

The first looks at reduction of mortality when comparing Remdesivir to Ivermectin as treatment.

Conclusion: Ivermectin use was associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 compared to remdesivir. To our knowledge, this is the largest association study of patients with COVID-19, mortality and ivermectin. Further double-blinded placebo-controlled RCTs with large samples are required for definite conclusion. In the future, if more publications are published with the similar result to the current analyses, the certainty of evidence will increase.

The second was a Brazilian study with a population of 150k+. A small dose of ivermectin was given for two consecutive days every two weeks. Infections (compared to those who didn't take ivermectin as a prophylactic) were less than half (3.7% v 8.2%). Hospitalization rate was 1.6% v 3.3%, and mortality was 0.8% v 2.6%.

This is not surprising. Ivermectin was already showed that it was better at inhibiting 3CL protease than Remdesivir or other new antivirals (3CLPro), and better at blocking spike protein binding locations.

Brazil has investigated ivermectin anti-viral properties against Dengue, Zika, etc... and ivermectin has been positively correlated with effectiveness against other viruses.

So why has everyone been so critical of even looking into ivermectin? I dunno. Might have something to do with it being out of patent and costing pennies per dose, where things that don't work as well (Remdesivir) are several hundred dollars.

For those that don't lie about watching YouTube videos, here's John Campbell explaining the two papers.

[Chip]

Here's a recent paper from the evil government conspiracy. Note that they are examining it as a treatment for severe cases, rather than as a preventative measure.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278625/

More from the criminal conspiracy.

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consum...event-covid-19

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Just released full data this week

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115869

[Chip]

Ivermectin Does Not Reduce Risk of Covid Hospitalization, Large Study Finds

“At some point it will become a waste of resources to continue studying an unpromising approach,” one expert said.

By Carl Zimmer
March 30, 2022

The anti-parasitic drug ivermectin, which has surged in popularity as an alternative treatment for Covid-19 despite a lack of strong research to back it up, showed no sign of alleviating the disease, according to results of a large clinical trial published on Wednesday.

The study, which compared more than 1,300 people infected with the coronavirus in Brazil who received either ivermectin or a placebo, effectively ruled out the drug as a treatment for Covid, the study’s authors said.

“There’s really no sign of any benefit,” said Dr. David Boulware, an infectious-disease expert at the University of Minnesota.

The researchers shared a summary of these results in August during an online presentation hosted by the National Institutes of Health, but the full data set had not been published until now in The New England Journal of Medicine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/h...e=articleShare

[Chuck Naill]

Ivermectin Does Not Reduce Risk of Covid Hospitalization, Large Study Finds

“At some point it will become a waste of resources to continue studying an unpromising approach,” one expert said.

By Carl Zimmer
March 30, 2022

The anti-parasitic drug ivermectin, which has surged in popularity as an alternative treatment for Covid-19 despite a lack of strong research to back it up, showed no sign of alleviating the disease, according to results of a large clinical trial published on Wednesday.

The study, which compared more than 1,300 people infected with the coronavirus in Brazil who received either ivermectin or a placebo, effectively ruled out the drug as a treatment for Covid, the study’s authors said.

“There’s really no sign of any benefit,” said Dr. David Boulware, an infectious-disease expert at the University of Minnesota.

The researchers shared a summary of these results in August during an online presentation hosted by the National Institutes of Health, but the full data set had not been published until now in The New England Journal of Medicine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/h...e=articleShare

Two thoughts, one is how many have died because of poor information regarding ivermectin, and, those that want to believe in it's efficacy will not be swayed by this study. Apparently 600k have died in Brazil, second only to the US.

[dneal]

One study showing effectiveness is not conclusive, and neither is one study not showing effectiveness.

You partisan morons have politicized medicine. Well done.

[724Seney]

One study showing effectiveness is not conclusive, and neither is one study not showing effectiveness.

You partisan morons have politicized medicine. Well done.

The irony is one cannot even begin to imagine how many bogus, totally ineffective........ and potentially dangerous medications Chuck has tried to peddle over the years!
For someone who has made a fortune visiting doctors offices & hospitals, with donuts and other bribes, preaching his newest miracle drug, his horror over the ivermectin matter is just another example of how well these bozos have perfected the art of hypocrisy.

[Chuck Naill]

More from Timothy Snyder:
"Trump was unlike other breakers in that he seemed to have no ideology. His objection to institutions was that they might constrain him personally. He intended to break the system to serve himself — and this is partly why he has failed. Trump is a charismatic politician and inspires devotion not only among voters but among a surprising number of lawmakers, but he has no vision that is greater than himself or what his admirers project upon him. In this respect his pre-fascism fell short of fascism: His vision never went further than a mirror. He arrived at a truly big lie not from any view of the world but from the reality that he might lose something.

Yet Trump never prepared a decisive blow. He lacked the support of the military, some of whose leaders he had alienated. (No true fascist would have made the mistake he did there, which was to openly love foreign dictators; supporters convinced that the enemy was at home might not mind, but those sworn to protect from enemies abroad did.) Trump’s secret police force, the men carrying out snatch operations in Portland, was violent but also small and ludicrous. Social media proved to be a blunt weapon: Trump could announce his intentions on Twitter, and white supremacists could plan their invasion of the Capitol on Facebook or Gab. But the president, for all his lawsuits and entreaties and threats to public officials, could not engineer a situation that ended with the right people doing the wrong thing. Trump could make some voters believe that he had won the 2020 election, but he was unable to bring institutions along with his big lie. And he could bring his supporters to Washington and send them on a rampage in the Capitol, but none appeared to have any very clear idea of how this was to work or what their presence would accomplish. It is hard to think of a comparable insurrectionary moment, when a building of great significance was seized, that involved so much milling around."

https://verbasparsa.org/2021/01/11/t...imothy-snyder/

[dneal]

And again we see Chuck introduce his favorite demagogue. He’s unable to follow the topic of the NIH conspiring to control narratives because it doesn’t comport with the world view he’s been told to have.