I was gonna write something much longer about this ridiculous ivermectin push that people like Matt Taibbi and the rest of the new reactionary right has been involved in.
So sorry to see you pushing a pro-vaccine position on this issue and highlighting the Oxford study-to-be which is guaranteed to come to the same erroneous negative conclusion as it did with hydroxychloroquine - tip: follow the money. Had you taken the time to actually research the data on Ivermectin (most of which is available here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/) you'd have seen that the global experience supports the use of Ivermectin rather than the big Pharma/WHO cartel profiting from dubious gene therapy products which neither confer immunity nor prevent transmission of C-19 and the complication rate of which (per VAERS - https://vaers.hhs.gov/) far exceeds that of any prior vaccine product allowed to remain on the market.
It was sad, but predictable that the issue would become bound up in right-wing NeoCon & ultra right-wing politics ('liberal' is a misnomer... they don't exist in the mainstream American political system) since it was utterly predictable that, whatever the merits of any particular treatment method, its endorsement by one side or the other automatically discredited it to the other. Sadly, Taibbi decided to discuss this issue rather than make the case for Ivermectin & equally sadly, Yasha decided to address this from the 'right-far-right' spectrum, rather than to do due diligence and report on the reality.
I have not pursed Ivermectin's method of action but its action as an anti-viral has been recognized for a decade or more when it was tried (in the laboratory, I believe) against SARS CoV-1 & MERS and found to be active. I've reviewed the data supporting its use & safety (after millions of doses over decades) and believe it to be a better bet than the gene therapy offered as 'vaccinations' and am currently utilizing it according the FLCCC's 'I-MASS' protocol.
The I-MASS protocol is prophylactic & I've been on it for many months at this point - I've no intention of taking the faux 'vaccine' gene therapy. I'm a retired physician.
About "pro-vaccine" position -- it is all about costs versus benefit, correct.
People are HAPPY to be vaccinated and be free of fear of dying by slowly suffocating.
All else is -- just a noise. Including spreading "information," without any supporting logic and justification, that Matt Taibbi's has suddenly morphed in a right-winger.... a la despicable Likudnik Bari Weiss ;-))
Your people may be happy to be vaccinated, but my people will not live in a state, study at a university or take a job at a company that mandate vaccination. We see it as an undeclared world war against people. We'll see who will win.
Hi Yasha, I know what you mean about Taibbi, and big pharma, and Cuba.
But, to be fair, when you write...
"It's all about opening up a new front in the ongoing culture war: they’re holding up ivermectin as proof of how totalitarian and evil the libs are."
...that seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Even down here in New Zealand it's all a bit strange on the topic.
Being married to a nurse (30 years at the job) I'm able to access someone with a bit of knowledge and professional detachment. Also, as it happens, I was visiting my doctor this week to check out some sun damage on my hands (too much surfing 😳).
I asked both...they both said the same thing:
"It's confusing as to why the topic of off-label medicine is such a big deal".
The doctor said that her colleagues are all confused as to why they can't have access to something that looks like it works (in NZ is not available for prescription). She directed me to this recent peer-reviewed meta-analysis paper:
As I was leaving the doc said something like "it's pretty weird when we can't prescribe stuff that might help".
Just sayin'
Doubly weird when you scroll down a page like https://ivmstatus.com/ and see the Ivermectin in treatment packs in other countries?
Interestingly, I believe it was one of the authors of that paper my doctor pointed me to, that finally convinced the UK to relent and think about doing a study:
From the linked BBC article:
"...The drug has become controversial after being promoted for use across Latin America and in South Africa, despite being so far unproven. Previous studies of Ivermectin have generally been small or low quality..."
The reason it is unproven is because it costs money to do massive studies. There is no financial incentive to do a massive study.
These comments don't have much to do with the substance of this piece. As least not what I appreciate about it. Which is the degree to which people are eagerly whipped into a frenzy for their particular point of view. Maybe not new, but the deepest kind of culture I have seen. And I agree that certain journalists are deliberately, or accidentally on purpose, feeding that frenzy.
There's a baseless rant. In case you haven't noticed, there's a fascization of the world going on. It's being carried out by people who claim to be fighting fascism and imply that they are protecting us from unstoppable threats. This means that they do not want this disease to be easily curable. Even their so-called vaccines are designed to fail (e.g. if a variant immune to the vaccine appears) if it meets their needs. It may be profitable for Big Pharma, but that's just a side effect
It's unfortnate you have chosen---and yes it is a choice--- to disparage something you likely know little about, but then to politicize it too when your apparent arch-nemesis "that goddamned TAIBBI again!" writes something about it.... ah well, we are all individuals when it is said and done, eh wot?
Now I could be stepping up to the firing squad here but I studied, yes, researched and studied Ivermectin long before starting on it myself. Which I did, one year ago. The science, the rigorous statistical analysis, is pointing to its efficacy as being actually BETTER than any of these vaccinations with no side effects. So there's that. It just happens to smother the SARS-Cov-2 spike protein quite handily.
Now I'm 70 years old, have my mental faculties about me, and will stand and debate you point by point (but non-politically) on this if it doesn't turn into a feces-flinging free-for-all of ego vs ego and disparagement.
For the record, I am likely further 'left' than you. The doc who has been fighting for Ivermectin's recognition most famously, Pierre Kory, is a long-time Democrat---for what that's worth. The source for a basic working knowledge of this drug is FLCCC.net. That's Front Line Covid Critical Care. These are highly respected, top in their fields doctors. And quite international in scope.
You will find that there have been many stop and go trials and outright national OTC prescriptions of this drug in 3rd world countries. Mexico is one of the latest after a stop and go start. Malaysia just said yea, various Indian states have had undeniable positive results; Peru has had remarkable results too; but like in every country where the drug was under political pressure, their case rates and mortality climbed the cliff---only to fall right off once Ivermectin was reintroduced. Anyway, you can either rip into me or actually look at the source which will lead you to other sources.
I really enjoy the vast majority of your writing, I love learning about things I know very little or nothing about, and your life experience(s) and variety of geographic locales visited will continue to fascinate me. Conversely I could teach you more about Alaska ("as if," I know...) than likely anybody else you might ask for information of it most anywhere---because I've lived it and because I love it. So I know it from end to end, onside and out, life and death, for 70 years, working mostly on its salt waters, out to Attu and to the Canadian border on the Arctic Ocean. I know when to be confident and when to shut up and listen.
Just saying, I have a head start on you re: Ivermmectin. I hope you will look into it further.
Yasha I was very sorry to see you wandering out of your expertise zone on this one, and inadvertently passing on some misleading assertions. If you or your readers would like a non partisan source of expert information about Ivermectin, I suggest looking either at TrialSite News, or at the evidence gathered by high level front line care experts, either Dr Kory at the FLCC, or Dr Tess Lawrie at the UK equivalent. Dr Lawrie's credentials and a relevant article can be accessed at the following link. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Theresa-Lawrie
I would also like to flag up the naivete of your closing reference to 'an unproven... treatment'. If you had any experience of working in government policy circles, you would know very well that what counts as 'proven' or 'unproven' is NOT just a scientific research issue: That if there is sufficiently strong interest in one side or another of a policy issue, research can very easily be - and often is - selectively approved or criticised accordingly, because there are ALWAYS unanswered questions. Every good piece of serious research raises many new questions - this is the nature of the subject. Check out the wonderful episode of the British TV comedy 'Yes Minister' about one particular piece of inconvenient research findings, in which the sharp old civil servant explains to the Minister how to rubbish a piece of research and prompt the researcher to modify the conclusions in the desired manner, without even having bothered to read the report.
Your work on weaponising immigrants has been very insightful, and is what prompted me to subscribe to your substack. But sadly this article about Ivermectin is extremely ill informed and shallow, therefore dangerous, because some of your readers could be harmfully mislead by the remarks you have passed on.
Matt Tiabbi is no expert on the medical issues either, but at least his article is within his area of expertise relating to the US media and its censorship behaviours.
Please get back to writing about the stuff on which you have so much valuable new insight to offer.
The point about the "simplified reactionary culture war" is possibly well founded, however, the Ivermectin vehicle you have used to illustrate it seems ill founded.
There is a growing body of evidence from research that Ivermectin is a useful prophylactic against SARS-CoV-2 infection. For instance:
"Conclusion: Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg with a gap of 72 hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic."
"Conclusions: Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified."
sure. like i wrote, “Maybe ivermectin will be proven to have some positive effects. But the people pushing this new ivermectin narrative don’t care about public health, one way or another. It's all about opening up a new front in the ongoing culture war: they’re holding up ivermectin as proof of how totalitarian and evil the libs are.”
There is little doubt that the "right" is using the suppression of proven effective remedies and prophylactic treatments as an attack vector on "libs", just as the Democrats engaged the first steps culture war under the covid rubric as part of their campaign to oust Trump by focusing first on his support for HCQ and then on his eschewing of face masks. Neither side in this cares about health, they score points for political purposes based on a calculus of what will gain them most in the electoral and sponsorship stakes.
There are only two sides: 1) the elites who think they own the world – all of its resources and all of its people, and 2) the rest of us.
The rest is politico-psychodrama designed to beguile and manipulate populations into passively assisting the elites get wealthier and advancing the interests of one elite group over another. As they stand now, left and right have no meaning apart from being different faces of the same bent coin.
just to be clear, we can find different studies to cite. here's a recent one — a double-blind, randomized trial that found it did nothing:
"In this randomized clinical trial that included 476 patients, the duration of symptoms was not significantly different for patients who received a 5-day course of ivermectin compared with placebo (median time to resolution of symptoms, 10 vs 12 days; hazard ratio for resolution of symptoms, 1.07).
The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand effects on other clinically relevant outcomes."
As above: "Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance"
Strange article -- I think that Matt's article was written with objectivity and integrity -- on topic of current record / interest (including interest among censors ;-)) ). And even stranger sentences a la placing a despicable Likudnik Bari Weiss together with Matt... !!! :
- "I was gonna write something much longer about this ridiculous ivermectin push that people like Matt Taibbi and the rest of the new reactionary right has been involved in."
- "Culture war — that's what this the sudden embrace of ivermectin by the new respectable/reactionary right is all about."
- "But that’s what reactionaries like Taibbi and Bari Weiss and Brett Weinstein are doing."
- And -- at the end: "Next up: get your Hate, Inc. silver ion supplements! They'll protect you from liberal Silicon Valley censorship!"
Despite that "Hate!" is truly on more masterpiece among Matt Taibbi's wonderful and perfectly timed books.
In summary -- Matt Taibbi is now sorted into a --- "reactionary right" - an assertion without any ( ANY ) discernible logic, evidence and support. Somewhat similar to TYT's Cenk & Ana despicable accusations against Aaron Mate.
I’m sorry you take offense at my characterization of a guy you clearly very much respect. But I indeed group Matt in with those people. That’s what he’s become these days.
Yasha, any labeling, especially quite insulting/offensive labeling, need at least rudimentary justification (logic used, facts, evidence, pattern) -- yet you have so far provided - none at all ?!?!
I didn’t explain my background and all the details in my head.
The fitness industry is loaded with people using pharma/herbs off label. From performance to longevity and in between. I dislike how the government often makes them illegal without research after a scare story. Then gurus go “it works look the government is liars”. Sometimes they work and sometimes they cause major health problems but ultimately both parties cause an absolutist distrust in institution. I was emotional about censorship coming from that background.
I disagree with censorship. I think if an idea is weak it shouldn’t need the might of a thousand swords. If an idea is strong it can hold up to criticism. By blocking an idea it gives fuel to its believers but bickering over which possible wrong idea is right or wrong when there’s a solution already seems kind of fruitless.
That all being said publically funded “private” big pharma can fuck itself then get machine gunned and then it can fuck those holes, choke on its blood and die in a gutter covered in covid laced feces.
When any discussion on safe treatments was banned and sick people not given any treatment, and just told to quarantine, it stopped being important whether someone was on the political right or left. I never thought I would like American evangelicals, but the time has come that I hope they will save us from mandatory vaccination.
Yasha, while I understand your point and I'm not an anti-vaxer, but just to point out that India has been rolling out Ivermectin because many millions have not had access to vaccines. Numerous reputable studies have been done in India and Ivermectin has proven to have anti-viral properties which have proven some effectiveness. It's very cheap as well. I know that it must sound odd that an anti-parasitic drug should have anti-viral qualities, but apparently that's the case. I discovered this on a channel "Dr John Campbell" on Youtube. He's not an anti-vaxer. He is quite a reliable health professional who has been doing lot of research on COVID and what's been happening in the last 18 months. He's not prone to conspiracy. Check it out. I think you will find it interesting.
thanks, yeah. people have been whipped up into this ONE TRUE CURE AGAINST THE OLIGARCHY frenzy. it's depressing and scary to watch. but the exploitative culture wars are only speeding up. and why not? people are atomized, traumatized by a year of isolation, totally distrustful of anything that smacks of authority, and they themselves have no real political movement or political community to join or meaningfully be part of in their daily, offline, actually lived lives. so the media and political vampires are out there exploiting this vacuum and weakness and instability, selling their exploitation as empowerment and democracy. i totally understand and sympathize with people caught up in this madness — which isn't even about ivermectin, not when you get down to it.
i don't have much to add beyond what i wrote. and really what can i — a grossly incompetent loser leftist berated by his own subscribers! ha! — really do?
Hey Pierce — You can abuse me all you want but you better keep things respectful when addressing other people in my comment sections. Get ahold of yourself.
So sorry to see you pushing a pro-vaccine position on this issue and highlighting the Oxford study-to-be which is guaranteed to come to the same erroneous negative conclusion as it did with hydroxychloroquine - tip: follow the money. Had you taken the time to actually research the data on Ivermectin (most of which is available here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/) you'd have seen that the global experience supports the use of Ivermectin rather than the big Pharma/WHO cartel profiting from dubious gene therapy products which neither confer immunity nor prevent transmission of C-19 and the complication rate of which (per VAERS - https://vaers.hhs.gov/) far exceeds that of any prior vaccine product allowed to remain on the market.
It was sad, but predictable that the issue would become bound up in right-wing NeoCon & ultra right-wing politics ('liberal' is a misnomer... they don't exist in the mainstream American political system) since it was utterly predictable that, whatever the merits of any particular treatment method, its endorsement by one side or the other automatically discredited it to the other. Sadly, Taibbi decided to discuss this issue rather than make the case for Ivermectin & equally sadly, Yasha decided to address this from the 'right-far-right' spectrum, rather than to do due diligence and report on the reality.
NOTE: Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"? - Matt Taibbi [https://taibbi.substack.com/p/ivermectin-can-a-drug-be-right-wing-ca7?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxMTExOTI0LCJwb3N0X2lkIjozODAxODcyMiwiXyI6InptdjdPIiwiaWF0IjoxNjI0NjY5OTcxLCJleHAiOjE2MjQ2NzM1NzEsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0xMDQyIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.0Jy88dVRnDdIXp2ZEUFgaSbBfZe9Rvk1otZdZdxSKAo]
I have not pursed Ivermectin's method of action but its action as an anti-viral has been recognized for a decade or more when it was tried (in the laboratory, I believe) against SARS CoV-1 & MERS and found to be active. I've reviewed the data supporting its use & safety (after millions of doses over decades) and believe it to be a better bet than the gene therapy offered as 'vaccinations' and am currently utilizing it according the FLCCC's 'I-MASS' protocol.
The I-MASS protocol is prophylactic & I've been on it for many months at this point - I've no intention of taking the faux 'vaccine' gene therapy. I'm a retired physician.
About "pro-vaccine" position -- it is all about costs versus benefit, correct.
People are HAPPY to be vaccinated and be free of fear of dying by slowly suffocating.
All else is -- just a noise. Including spreading "information," without any supporting logic and justification, that Matt Taibbi's has suddenly morphed in a right-winger.... a la despicable Likudnik Bari Weiss ;-))
Your people may be happy to be vaccinated, but my people will not live in a state, study at a university or take a job at a company that mandate vaccination. We see it as an undeclared world war against people. We'll see who will win.
Hi Yasha, I know what you mean about Taibbi, and big pharma, and Cuba.
But, to be fair, when you write...
"It's all about opening up a new front in the ongoing culture war: they’re holding up ivermectin as proof of how totalitarian and evil the libs are."
...that seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Even down here in New Zealand it's all a bit strange on the topic.
Being married to a nurse (30 years at the job) I'm able to access someone with a bit of knowledge and professional detachment. Also, as it happens, I was visiting my doctor this week to check out some sun damage on my hands (too much surfing 😳).
I asked both...they both said the same thing:
"It's confusing as to why the topic of off-label medicine is such a big deal".
The doctor said that her colleagues are all confused as to why they can't have access to something that looks like it works (in NZ is not available for prescription). She directed me to this recent peer-reviewed meta-analysis paper:
https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Abstract/9000/Ivermectin_for_Prevention_and_Treatment_of.98040.aspx
As I was leaving the doc said something like "it's pretty weird when we can't prescribe stuff that might help".
Just sayin'
Doubly weird when you scroll down a page like https://ivmstatus.com/ and see the Ivermectin in treatment packs in other countries?
Interestingly, I believe it was one of the authors of that paper my doctor pointed me to, that finally convinced the UK to relent and think about doing a study:
From the linked BBC article:
"...The drug has become controversial after being promoted for use across Latin America and in South Africa, despite being so far unproven. Previous studies of Ivermectin have generally been small or low quality..."
The reason it is unproven is because it costs money to do massive studies. There is no financial incentive to do a massive study.
These comments don't have much to do with the substance of this piece. As least not what I appreciate about it. Which is the degree to which people are eagerly whipped into a frenzy for their particular point of view. Maybe not new, but the deepest kind of culture I have seen. And I agree that certain journalists are deliberately, or accidentally on purpose, feeding that frenzy.
thank, yes.
There's a baseless rant. In case you haven't noticed, there's a fascization of the world going on. It's being carried out by people who claim to be fighting fascism and imply that they are protecting us from unstoppable threats. This means that they do not want this disease to be easily curable. Even their so-called vaccines are designed to fail (e.g. if a variant immune to the vaccine appears) if it meets their needs. It may be profitable for Big Pharma, but that's just a side effect
It's unfortnate you have chosen---and yes it is a choice--- to disparage something you likely know little about, but then to politicize it too when your apparent arch-nemesis "that goddamned TAIBBI again!" writes something about it.... ah well, we are all individuals when it is said and done, eh wot?
Now I could be stepping up to the firing squad here but I studied, yes, researched and studied Ivermectin long before starting on it myself. Which I did, one year ago. The science, the rigorous statistical analysis, is pointing to its efficacy as being actually BETTER than any of these vaccinations with no side effects. So there's that. It just happens to smother the SARS-Cov-2 spike protein quite handily.
Now I'm 70 years old, have my mental faculties about me, and will stand and debate you point by point (but non-politically) on this if it doesn't turn into a feces-flinging free-for-all of ego vs ego and disparagement.
For the record, I am likely further 'left' than you. The doc who has been fighting for Ivermectin's recognition most famously, Pierre Kory, is a long-time Democrat---for what that's worth. The source for a basic working knowledge of this drug is FLCCC.net. That's Front Line Covid Critical Care. These are highly respected, top in their fields doctors. And quite international in scope.
You will find that there have been many stop and go trials and outright national OTC prescriptions of this drug in 3rd world countries. Mexico is one of the latest after a stop and go start. Malaysia just said yea, various Indian states have had undeniable positive results; Peru has had remarkable results too; but like in every country where the drug was under political pressure, their case rates and mortality climbed the cliff---only to fall right off once Ivermectin was reintroduced. Anyway, you can either rip into me or actually look at the source which will lead you to other sources.
I really enjoy the vast majority of your writing, I love learning about things I know very little or nothing about, and your life experience(s) and variety of geographic locales visited will continue to fascinate me. Conversely I could teach you more about Alaska ("as if," I know...) than likely anybody else you might ask for information of it most anywhere---because I've lived it and because I love it. So I know it from end to end, onside and out, life and death, for 70 years, working mostly on its salt waters, out to Attu and to the Canadian border on the Arctic Ocean. I know when to be confident and when to shut up and listen.
Just saying, I have a head start on you re: Ivermmectin. I hope you will look into it further.
Cheers.
Yasha I was very sorry to see you wandering out of your expertise zone on this one, and inadvertently passing on some misleading assertions. If you or your readers would like a non partisan source of expert information about Ivermectin, I suggest looking either at TrialSite News, or at the evidence gathered by high level front line care experts, either Dr Kory at the FLCC, or Dr Tess Lawrie at the UK equivalent. Dr Lawrie's credentials and a relevant article can be accessed at the following link. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Theresa-Lawrie
I would also like to flag up the naivete of your closing reference to 'an unproven... treatment'. If you had any experience of working in government policy circles, you would know very well that what counts as 'proven' or 'unproven' is NOT just a scientific research issue: That if there is sufficiently strong interest in one side or another of a policy issue, research can very easily be - and often is - selectively approved or criticised accordingly, because there are ALWAYS unanswered questions. Every good piece of serious research raises many new questions - this is the nature of the subject. Check out the wonderful episode of the British TV comedy 'Yes Minister' about one particular piece of inconvenient research findings, in which the sharp old civil servant explains to the Minister how to rubbish a piece of research and prompt the researcher to modify the conclusions in the desired manner, without even having bothered to read the report.
Your work on weaponising immigrants has been very insightful, and is what prompted me to subscribe to your substack. But sadly this article about Ivermectin is extremely ill informed and shallow, therefore dangerous, because some of your readers could be harmfully mislead by the remarks you have passed on.
Matt Tiabbi is no expert on the medical issues either, but at least his article is within his area of expertise relating to the US media and its censorship behaviours.
Please get back to writing about the stuff on which you have so much valuable new insight to offer.
The point about the "simplified reactionary culture war" is possibly well founded, however, the Ivermectin vehicle you have used to illustrate it seems ill founded.
There is a growing body of evidence from research that Ivermectin is a useful prophylactic against SARS-CoV-2 infection. For instance:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33592050/
"Conclusion: Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 μg/kg with a gap of 72 hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/
"Conclusions: Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified."
sure. like i wrote, “Maybe ivermectin will be proven to have some positive effects. But the people pushing this new ivermectin narrative don’t care about public health, one way or another. It's all about opening up a new front in the ongoing culture war: they’re holding up ivermectin as proof of how totalitarian and evil the libs are.”
There is little doubt that the "right" is using the suppression of proven effective remedies and prophylactic treatments as an attack vector on "libs", just as the Democrats engaged the first steps culture war under the covid rubric as part of their campaign to oust Trump by focusing first on his support for HCQ and then on his eschewing of face masks. Neither side in this cares about health, they score points for political purposes based on a calculus of what will gain them most in the electoral and sponsorship stakes.
There are only two sides: 1) the elites who think they own the world – all of its resources and all of its people, and 2) the rest of us.
The rest is politico-psychodrama designed to beguile and manipulate populations into passively assisting the elites get wealthier and advancing the interests of one elite group over another. As they stand now, left and right have no meaning apart from being different faces of the same bent coin.
just to be clear, we can find different studies to cite. here's a recent one — a double-blind, randomized trial that found it did nothing:
"In this randomized clinical trial that included 476 patients, the duration of symptoms was not significantly different for patients who received a 5-day course of ivermectin compared with placebo (median time to resolution of symptoms, 10 vs 12 days; hazard ratio for resolution of symptoms, 1.07).
The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand effects on other clinically relevant outcomes."
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389
As above: "Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance"
Hi Steven
Well, things are heating up on the topic, no doubt about it!! I just stumbled upon this legal notice.
It seems old news, as it is dated May 25th, but it is from a group of Indian lawyers:
https://indianbarassociation.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Legal-Notice-to-Dr.-Soumya-Swaminathan_Chief-Scientist-WHO-1.pdf
Topic seems familiar 😉
Strange article -- I think that Matt's article was written with objectivity and integrity -- on topic of current record / interest (including interest among censors ;-)) ). And even stranger sentences a la placing a despicable Likudnik Bari Weiss together with Matt... !!! :
- "I was gonna write something much longer about this ridiculous ivermectin push that people like Matt Taibbi and the rest of the new reactionary right has been involved in."
- "Culture war — that's what this the sudden embrace of ivermectin by the new respectable/reactionary right is all about."
- "But that’s what reactionaries like Taibbi and Bari Weiss and Brett Weinstein are doing."
- And -- at the end: "Next up: get your Hate, Inc. silver ion supplements! They'll protect you from liberal Silicon Valley censorship!"
Despite that "Hate!" is truly on more masterpiece among Matt Taibbi's wonderful and perfectly timed books.
In summary -- Matt Taibbi is now sorted into a --- "reactionary right" - an assertion without any ( ANY ) discernible logic, evidence and support. Somewhat similar to TYT's Cenk & Ana despicable accusations against Aaron Mate.
This is very close to madness - in my opinion.
I’m sorry you take offense at my characterization of a guy you clearly very much respect. But I indeed group Matt in with those people. That’s what he’s become these days.
Yasha, any labeling, especially quite insulting/offensive labeling, need at least rudimentary justification (logic used, facts, evidence, pattern) -- yet you have so far provided - none at all ?!?!
Yes, I did but have forgotten about it -- many thanks.
I like both of them but -- both Yasha and Evgenia have some old grudges against Matt which I don't fully understand and -- no longer want to... ;-))
Something that happened long ago and has nothing to do with current woke insanity.
Update - Matt's follow up on "right-wing" drug ;-))
Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"?
A potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists
Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"? - TK News by Matt Taibbi (substack.com)
Update and ALARM !! -- even the renown Glenn Greenwald has just joined his "reactionary right-wing" colleague Matt Taibbi....
See an interview on (oh my God - Fox !!) on Google censorship of ivermectin discussion while -- Oxford (a Big farma) is testing it...
The world is coming to an end... ;-))
IT’S TIME TO BUILD by Marc Andreessen IT'S TIME TO BUILD - Andreessen Horowitz (a16z.com)
https://a16z.com/2020/04/18/its-time-to-build/
Great point on Cuba’s vaccine. I must admit when I read his article it fed into some emotions.
I didn’t explain my background and all the details in my head.
The fitness industry is loaded with people using pharma/herbs off label. From performance to longevity and in between. I dislike how the government often makes them illegal without research after a scare story. Then gurus go “it works look the government is liars”. Sometimes they work and sometimes they cause major health problems but ultimately both parties cause an absolutist distrust in institution. I was emotional about censorship coming from that background.
I disagree with censorship. I think if an idea is weak it shouldn’t need the might of a thousand swords. If an idea is strong it can hold up to criticism. By blocking an idea it gives fuel to its believers but bickering over which possible wrong idea is right or wrong when there’s a solution already seems kind of fruitless.
That all being said publically funded “private” big pharma can fuck itself then get machine gunned and then it can fuck those holes, choke on its blood and die in a gutter covered in covid laced feces.
So many hucksters out there, I feel it’s become an honorable position these days.
I’m all for change, I’d like to know how. I’ll check out thee link.
I was referring to reading the Taibbi article. I sometimes type in mysterious riddles. Sometimes in public too.
there is no safe space anymore.
Say it I’m already broken
When any discussion on safe treatments was banned and sick people not given any treatment, and just told to quarantine, it stopped being important whether someone was on the political right or left. I never thought I would like American evangelicals, but the time has come that I hope they will save us from mandatory vaccination.
Yasha, while I understand your point and I'm not an anti-vaxer, but just to point out that India has been rolling out Ivermectin because many millions have not had access to vaccines. Numerous reputable studies have been done in India and Ivermectin has proven to have anti-viral properties which have proven some effectiveness. It's very cheap as well. I know that it must sound odd that an anti-parasitic drug should have anti-viral qualities, but apparently that's the case. I discovered this on a channel "Dr John Campbell" on Youtube. He's not an anti-vaxer. He is quite a reliable health professional who has been doing lot of research on COVID and what's been happening in the last 18 months. He's not prone to conspiracy. Check it out. I think you will find it interesting.
As far as I can tell Taibbi is writing about censorship. Which there's been a hell of a lot of. He's not making an "ivermectin push".
You obviously don't like the guy, but that's not a good reason for mischaracterizing his article.
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/ivermectin-can-a-drug-be-right-wing-ca7
"culture war" that is
thanks, yeah. people have been whipped up into this ONE TRUE CURE AGAINST THE OLIGARCHY frenzy. it's depressing and scary to watch. but the exploitative culture wars are only speeding up. and why not? people are atomized, traumatized by a year of isolation, totally distrustful of anything that smacks of authority, and they themselves have no real political movement or political community to join or meaningfully be part of in their daily, offline, actually lived lives. so the media and political vampires are out there exploiting this vacuum and weakness and instability, selling their exploitation as empowerment and democracy. i totally understand and sympathize with people caught up in this madness — which isn't even about ivermectin, not when you get down to it.
i don't have much to add beyond what i wrote. and really what can i — a grossly incompetent loser leftist berated by his own subscribers! ha! — really do?
no idea what you're talking about. as far as i can tell substack doesn't even allow the editing of comments, only deletions.
Hey Pierce — You can abuse me all you want but you better keep things respectful when addressing other people in my comment sections. Get ahold of yourself.
*drinks glass of water filled with microplastics, eats fish filled with mercury, sits in traffic for two hours surrounded by idling cars.
who else would know if not the cia!