The Ivermectin discussion

I know using bleach is extreme but I use it as an example of the dangers of pseudo science for exactly that reason. I don't think anybody is pushing bleach on this thread. Thankfully drinking bleach is stupid and most people are clued in enough to recognise that. However Invecterim is more sophisticated. It is approved for use in humans. However not for Covid treatment. Many of the tactics used to persuade people to drink bleach are the same as less dangerous drugs. Its a very good tool for educating people on the pitfalls of listening to pseudo science.

You really should try to let this go. For a while you seemed to accept that we should wait to see what comes out of the Oxford trial but now it's back to the big bad FDA and by implication all the other co-conspirators.

If I say "they wouldn't" you say "Ah-hah! Gotcha! Ivermectin cannot possibly be effective!"

If I say "because they're currently developing a new drug that would be in patent and therefore much more profitable" you say "Ah-hah! Gotcha! You're just a conspiracy theorist!"

If I say "because Merck has a large amount of capital invested in Moderna, and an effective therapeutic could put the kibosh on that much more lucrative revenue stream" you go to the conspiracy theorist thing again.

You see how that's a no-win situation for me, when you are utterly and completely convinced, in the absence of any definitive proof, that Ivermectin does not and cannot work for Covid-19?

Merck didn't say Ivermectin was not effective. They did not run any studies on it. They said there was no meaningful evidence of it effectiveness in Covid-19 therapy or prevention. And that's what the issue is here, because there isn't any definitive answer one way or the other, yet.

What is becoming clearer by the day is that the mRNA therapies act more as a pre-loaded therapeutic than any type of traditional vaccine, so we are going to need to find additional therapeutics if we want to stop people dying, regardless of their vaccination status. And double-plus-pro-vax people are going to have to let go of "the vaccine is the full and complete answer and anything else is blasphemous snake oil".

Well the problem is your point about them developing a new drug instead at best shows a lack of understanding of the pharmaceutical industry and at worst its pure and utter conspiracy. Developing a new drug generally takes a long time, takings a huge investment to develop mass manufacturing, develop the supply chain. In short its an incredibly expensive and risky process. The vast majority of new drugs don't make it to market as they fail some where in development.

Repurposing a new drug is relatively cheap and risk free in comparison as you have the vast majority of the required supply chain already in place. So if a company is given the choice between guaranteed money(Repurposing an existing drug) and potentially no money(developing a new drug) and the potentially no money option involves a lot more time and money its obvious they'll go with the cheaper less risky option.

Of course there is the potential that Invecterim could be found to effective against Covid however you can literally say that about anything. You can't prove a negative. Until then its an unlicensed drug for treatment in Ireland and no one should be taking it. Thats why I call it snake oil a scam etc, what else you expect me call the promotion of a drug for a treatment its not approved for.

I mean this stuff is easy ...

Classic case of Muppetry . They'll take some experimental crap because tucker Carlson told them it's grand but not the trialled and tested and verified vaccine.

Growing where ?

Earlier in the thread you were saying it was great for developing countries. Now you quoting and heralding fools in wealthy countries who have free no cost access to the best vacines available.

It's nonsense. So much mental gymnastics. What will be the next project when this all flitters out ?

Are you actually John ?

Genuine question. Seems to be Hocking the videos.

Developing a new drug generally takes a long time, takings a huge investment to develop mass manufacturing, develop the supply chain. In short its an incredibly expensive and risky process. The vast majority of new drugs don't make it to market as they fail some where in development.

Yeah. All good points. Completely negated, of course, by the $1.5bn grant they got from the US govt to develop said new drug. 🤷‍♀️

It still doesn't guarantee it will succeed. The new drug could fail testing. The 1.5 billion is meaningless if it fails testing. If you say the FDA would approve it regardless your back to conspiracy theories.

If Invecterim was effective at treating Covid, it wouldn't take much to get it to market. It's a known quantity in many respects however not when it comes to Covid. And again the supply chain infrastructure is largely already in place. Thats the time consuming bit.

If Invecterim was really effective Merck would take the money from Invecterim now and until the new drug is not only FDA approved but also is manufactured in sufficient quantities to be more profitable than Invecterim. Its the most profitable option. Take the 1.5 billion and pocket the Invecterim profits win win. But of course they don't because knowingly promoting an ineffective drug would end them up in court.

Clearly haven't a clue of the definition buddy. I'm here since 2008. Although there appears to be a multitude of reregs around these days .

Why do you keep spelling it "Invecterim"?

Anyway, what you have here is your own assumptions and suspicions. Same as me. And since Ivermectin is still in trial for Covid, we're not going to know for a bit, either way. I don't see how being hostile to a specific drug that may or may not work benefits anyone. You're not going to convince the doctors who are advocating it on the back of the existing evidence and their own experience, and you're certainly not going to convince the very small number of people who are ingesting horse paste. So you're left preaching to people whose view is "wait and see", which makes you come off as a bit too hard-line, considering that, once again, the jury is still out.

Nobody is pushing or recommending anything. People are discussing Ivermectin and emerging stories/data about it.

Anyway, too much reporting and stuff in this thread now. I'm out. Enjoy.