Will you be getting a COVID-19 vaccine?

**SLR** · 28-07-2021, 07:24

Originally Posted by Paul

Sounds like that South American study of a paltry 500 participants (half on a very specific dosage of IVM, half on placebo). I don't know what I'm talking about, but 250 participants on a very specific dosage doesn't sound as if it should be generalised. To me it sounds exactly like GFSA claiming that Anthony Altbekker's research of crime on a particular Saturday night at two police stations in Joburg = "4 times more likely".

But that's just me.

All the Ivermectin randomised clinical studies I've seen reported are fewer than 500 participants, including the largest with positive results from Egypt (400) which was withdrawn

**oafpatroll** · 28-07-2021, 07:33

I tested negative both times I had Covid while my wife and daughter tested positive. The first time I spent a week in bed 20+ hours a day and symptoms lasted > 3 months so I was pretty convinced that I was sick and it wasn't the flu. My doctor concurred and she seems 'pretty' switched on. Second time was milder but still way beyond any flu I've ever had. Severity of a disease and its ease of detection by testing don't seem to have any logical correlation to me. False negatives are apparently up to about 30% of tests due to factors including the timing of the test relative to date of infection.

**M43** · 28-07-2021, 07:37

Originally Posted by AK-Gunner

This post is a excellent example of a layman pondering without knowledge and understanding of the whys and causes. Too bad, this also produces collective nodding and murmur on the herds of likewise non-knowledgeable laymen who then make a collective decision: "The whole thing must be a hoax because I can not understand".

The basic problem is that people think their opinion matters and that their reasoning has value. Neither is true.

There is a Finnsish proverb:

Stupidity intensifies in a group of people.

Why is the test taken from so deep in your throat? Because it has been found to be the most effective way to verify contraction even in its early stage. See, no conspiracy hear either.

If you go and read all my posts then you will understand that I'm not pondering or wondering or in two minds or in desperately trying to understand.
I believed this is not a new virus from day one. I still believe so. The only thing new is that politicians / pharmaceutical companies and the media have added hype.

No amount of TV / News / scary stories is going to make me unsure and start pondering.
This is not a new virus, it never could or will wipe out humanity.
Vaccines won't change you DNA and allow aliens to control your mind.
Vaccines for flu also don't work.
All the above are facts that need no pondering.

If I was unsure I would have gotten vaccinated or tried to get some Ivermectin. I'm not going to do either.

**oafpatroll** · 28-07-2021, 07:48

Originally Posted by M43

If you go and read all my posts then you will understand that I'm not pondering or wondering or in two minds or in desperately trying to understand.
I believed this is not a new virus from day one. I still believe so.

There's the problem. No amount of belief in or against something makes it valid or logical. You may be right but it has nothing at all to do with how fervently you believe it.

**AK-Gunner** · 28-07-2021, 07:49

Originally Posted by oafpatroll

There's the problem. No amount of belief in or against something makes it valid or logical. You may be right but it has nothing at all to do with how fervently you believe it.

This.

**MSW2** · 28-07-2021, 07:50

Originally Posted by oafpatroll

I tested negative both times I had Covid while my wife and daughter tested positive. The first time I spent a week in bed 20+ hours a day and symptoms lasted > 3 months so I was pretty convinced that I was sick and it wasn't the flu. My doctor concurred and she seems 'pretty' switched on. Second time was milder but still way beyond any flu I've ever had. Severity of a disease and its ease of detection by testing don't seem to have any logical correlation to me. False negatives are apparently up to about 30% of tests due to factors including the timing of the test relative to date of infection.

And not being the correct tool for the job. Kinda useless. Perhaps just treating the symptoms as per other flu/cold kinda things is the answer. You are still here so we have at least one data point to show that approach working :)

**MSW2** · 28-07-2021, 07:51

Originally Posted by oafpatroll

There's the problem. No amount of belief in or against something makes it valid or logical. You may be right but it has nothing at all to do with how fervently you believe it.

As per all the believing in 'science' we are getting to do with nowadays :)

**Paul** · 28-07-2021, 07:59

Originally Posted by SLR

All the Ivermectin randomised clinical studies I've seen reported are fewer than 500 participants, including the largest with positive results from Egypt (400) which was withdrawn

Thanks. Interesting... Why is that? Is it just down to "no money=no honey"?

**oafpatroll** · 28-07-2021, 08:39

Originally Posted by MSW2

As per all the believing in 'science' we are getting to do with nowadays :)

Absolutely, the 'believing' is the problem. It's the enemy of rationality.

**AK-Gunner** · 28-07-2021, 08:52

Originally Posted by oafpatroll

Absolutely, the 'believing' is the problem. It's the enemy of rationality.

It's called relying on, not believing. 'Not believing' is a form of belief. Just like an atheist is a believer of "there is no God". I rely on science because there is no better alternative. Given people full freedom of making decisions based on their beliefs we would still think 25 year old is a senior citizen and we would still eat our food cold living in caves.