Comments by "MarcosElMalo2" (@MarcosElMalo2) on "Dr. John Campbell"
channel.
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I don’t think it’s some big government conspiracy. An official government agency is a bureaucracy, and even in an emergency there is a certain amount of inertia. Those pushing a big pharma conspiracy are going well beyond known facts: we know that the major pharmaceutical companies engage in shady marketing, but there is no proof whatsoever that Fauci and those working with him have ever received any “incentives”.
Also, it’s not like vitamin supplements isn’t a big business, either. They avoid making direct extravagant claims (although they pay others to suggest benefits of their supplements), and they don’t pay for major gold standard testing that might disprove their supplements hinted-at efficacy.
Also, make of this what you will: over the past couple of years, the “wellness community”, those practitioners and adherents of alternative medicine, have merged with Q Anon. The basis seems to be an irrational hatred and distrust of the government. There are rational reasons to not always put our complete faith in the government, but this cult is a rabbit hole of delusion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@politics4816 it’s because non-specialist physicians don’t want to go out on a limb until a treatment is examined by an expert like Dr. Lawrie, who has the competence (not to mention the authority) to tie together the bits and bobs of data coming in from ad hoc clinical “studies”. Studies in quotes, because more often than not, they’re being done in desperate circumstances with varying amounts of scientific rigor. Look at where the studies are being done, and you’ll see the worst pandemic hotspots, overwhelmed hospitals, and shortages of things like oxygen.
Keep in mind that while this has been going on, there’s probably ten or more other treatments also being extolled by quacks. If you’re wondering why it’s taken so long, it’s because it’s taken a certain amount of time for the signal of ivermectin to rise above the noise of quackery and pseudoscience.
Let’s be clear about what Dr. Lawrie is saying. She’s saying it’s 1) Probably safe, and 2) Probably effective. Highly probable, if you like. She is saying that this meets the level she requires for “pandemic license” to prescribe ivermectin. In addition to this, she mentions the hypothetical mechanisms by which ivermectin is effective, and supplies the data that seems to back up the hypotheses. The overall message is that while more study is necessary to understand exactly what is going on, there is enough data to proceed widely with treatment, even in non-desperate situations.
I was very skeptical about ivermectin, but Dr. Lawrie and her work is removing doubt. I’ll be overjoyed if my skepticism is proven wrong. I do not think I was wrong to be skeptical, however, given the amount of ignorance and disinformation surrounding the promotion of ivermectin (a lot of noise, little signal).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3