Sweden abandoned their approach because it wasn't working though, didn't they?
They reverted to Lockdowns and restrictions.
Are they??
Victorian Covid Outbreak 2021
- Thread starter Magpie45
- Start date
- Tagged users None
They reverted to Lockdowns and restrictions.
Are they??
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Are they?
Do they?
Are they?
Are they?
That's a lot of factual statements you're making. None of which you provide proof for.
This whole "new covid pill is just repurposed Ivermectin" line of discussion that popped up recently made me interested and it actually fits quite nicely with Year 12 chemical structure lessons so I dove a little deeper to have a look at the molecular structure of the 3 chemicals:
Ivermectin (Merck):
Molnupiravir (Merck) & Paxlovid (Pfizer):
There's not a lot of similarity from an organic chemistry perspective. Also interesting that Merck, who make Ivermectin, are bothering to spend what is surely a significant amount of money in R&D to try and make a new covid treatment in molnupiravir considering they apparently already have a viable one.
Ivermectin (Merck):
Molnupiravir (Merck) & Paxlovid (Pfizer):
There's not a lot of similarity from an organic chemistry perspective. Also interesting that Merck, who make Ivermectin, are bothering to spend what is surely a significant amount of money in R&D to try and make a new covid treatment in molnupiravir considering they apparently already have a viable one.
Last edited:
Your a lost cause.
Like most on here, no matter what happens, your set in your ways and won't even take a step back to objectively think on your own. It is all about vaccination or GTFO.
- May 19, 2017
- 9,439
- 10,992
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
He is also a rabid Dan Andrews apologist, which is more sickening than most anything else I can think of.
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Amazing commentary here.
I'm a lost cause, won't tHiNk On My OwN and am a RABID Dan Andrew aPoLoGiSt.
Apparently, asking people to apply any form of logic or common sense to their thought processes is the wrong thing to do.
Much better to act emotionally and without fact.
Well that explains it then.
- May 19, 2017
- 9,439
- 10,992
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Or...just follow hundreds of pages littered with your knob munching of All things of the decree of Dan Andrews.
Hundreds of pages dont lie.
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
HUNDREDS of pages now. And of knob munching.
Not of asking people to take a moment and think about things, comparing Gladys and Dan doing almost the exact same things, yet Gladys did it with the benefit of knowing they didn't work.
No that would be FAR too reasonable and logical for you.
Better to call it KNOB MUNCHING.
Since obviously reacting emotionally and without fact is the better idea.
You could try providing some sort of evidence for your claims
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Do you find it interesting that this could be applied to some people on both sides of the argument spectrum?
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Are you saying he should... Do His Own Research?
Not from what I am reading.
Any links to studies which give us a good understanding of vaccinations, herd immunity or even low cost drugs such as Ivermectin, are quickly quashed.
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
You mean the pre-print studies that don't pass the peer review process aren't published, right?
Again, you spend all day sitting behind the computer so go google for yourself.
Again, just refute anything and everything.
I bet you have not even asked your very own GP about the drug?
- Banned
- #8,744
I'm yet to see an actual published study that shows these things. I'm fully prepared to adjust my thinking if/when these studies eventuate, that's part of the joy of learning. However, I'd prefer to base my opinion on current science, not try and predict future science.
What's your opinion on the current published studies on all of these matters (note: published, not pre-prints)?
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Why would I Google things that support your point of view, when everything I've seen or read suggests your point of view is against almost every mainstream scientific and regulatory bodies recommendations?
You're the one making statements of fact, if you can't (or won't) provide evidence to support those statements, why should anyone simply accept them?
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,101
- 50,731
- AFL Club
- Essendon
There's plenty of posts I don't refute.
Specifically, kingswood has done an amazing job of providing highly evidenced posts on the topic, and has the relevant credentials to do so. Gruffles has also made a number of high quality contributions.
I don't simply agree with them because they're on 'my team' though, I agree with them because they're able to provide evidence that clearly supports the statements they're making.
I bet you have not even asked your very own GP about the drug?
I have not, I didn't visit the GP for my vaccinations given I went to the State run hub locally. I spoke to the Nurse there, as does everyone.
I instead have a friend who's an ED Doctor at a major hospital here in Melbourne, that I did speak to, and of course, have Done My Own Research.
- Banned
- #8,748
lol so now its devolved from your types posting links to youtube videos, home made internet pages and discredited 'experts', into 'believe what i say, if you want a reason to believe im right then find it yourself on google'.
the desperation is obscene
- Banned
- #8,749
Do you expect a local GP to be an expert in the development and multi-phase testing and trials (on hundreds or thousands of people) of drugs currently being developed all across the globe, to combat a disease barely 2 years old?I bet you have not even asked your very own GP about the drug?
if so, you are not paying them nearly enough
You're making the claims, you should easily be able to provide proof.
