6 ms·

Many people pushing Ivermectin have a vested interest in proving the vaccines are unnecessary. It may work, but that's why you get recommendations for "vaccine

Many people pushing Ivermectin have a vested interest in proving the vaccines are unnecessary. It may work, but that's why you get recommendations for "vaccine made me magnetic" and other garbage like that whenever you search for videos. It's the same group that was pushing hydroxychloroquine as a miracle drug

throwaway4good 5y ago
It is and it is weird. What do these people (the promoters) get out of it? Attention? A more dedicated following?
- raphlinus 5y ago
  I think the most useful lens to understand the sociology of these kinds of questions is religious belief. And there is no shortage of people out there who want to convince others of their belief. The narrative for "the Ivermectin story" is particularly compelling, as it involves brave maverick doctors working selflessly to get the word out, suppression and censorship by shadowy organizations (big pharma fearing competition, the big Internet companies just lusting after the power of thought-control), and the empowerment of people to take medical decisions into their own hands. Incidentally, this was the exact same narrative as HCQ, and is being pushed by a lot of the same people. The end of the story may turn out differently, as the evidence on HCQ is overwhelming that it doesn't work, so you only see dead-enders pushing it, but there is a good chance that Ivermectin will turn out to be at least moderately effective, though the jury is still out.
  - Heyso 5y ago
    Religious belief. Exactly. And what are your religious beliefs ? Are you sure you have none ? Is there something or someone you would never doubt ?
- ds206 5y ago
  How about having a discussion? Not everything has to be so complicated lol
throwkeep 5y ago
> Many people pushing Ivermectin have a vested interest in proving the vaccines are unnecessary. What is their vested interest in a generic, cheap, decades old, off patent drug? Vested interests tend to be in new, patented treatments. That's where big pharma profit is. So let's try a rephrase: Many people pushing patented treatments have a vested interest in proving off patent alternatives are unnecessary. For example, here's Merck warning against using Ivermectin for Covid-19: https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use... Then a few months later, "Merck Announces Supply Agreement with U.S. Government for Molnupiravir, an Investigational Oral Antiviral Candidate for Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19" https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-with-u-s-government-for-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-candidate-for-treatment-of-mild-to-moderate-covid-19/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-...
- jiofih 5y ago
  Being proven right. That’s the anti-vac crowd’s dearest interest.
  - swader999 5y ago
    That's the wrong side to look at this from. These are just people on the fringe with little influence and funding. If ivermectin was authorized as a viable treatment the vaccines receiving emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been possible. There were and still are billions on the line.
    - raphlinus 5y ago
      I'm having difficulty understanding this line of reasoning. What does the authorization of ivermectin have to do with the vaccines? Xofluza, Relenza, and Tamiflu have been approved for treating influenza, and that has had no effect on the recommendation that people get their flu shots.
      - deleted 5y ago
raphlinus 5y ago
Ok, I was confused by this line of reasoning, so did some digging. I believe it's one of the popular antivax disinfo conspiracy theories. Here's my reading. The line of reasoning hinges on the vaccines being "experimental" and only being distributed under an Emergency Use Authorization, as opposed to a full approval. The FDA policies for EUA indicate they're only to be used when there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative. This makes a lot of sense - if (let's say) someone comes up with a new flu vaccine (an mRNA one, to continue this example, as that would be kinda exciting), you really want it to go through the full approval process instead of EUA, even if it is better. That's because we have plenty of good, approved flu vaccines. So, the theory goes, if we had an approved treatment for Covid, then the EUA for the vaccines would be illegal. And so that creates incentives for the pharmaceutical companies to suppress a miracle cure like (they claim) ivermectin. To anybody with the capacity for rational thought, this is obviously bullshit. We have fully approved treatments already, including remdesivir. The idea that a treatment for Covid, even a pretty good one, would make vaccines unnecessary makes no sense. I am fairly confident in making the following prediction. Full FDA approval for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines is likely by the end of the year[1], at which point the above line of reasoning will no longer be applicable. Antivaxxers will smoothly transition to another line of argument. I do think this "theory" is one reason you see a significant overlap between pro-ivermectin and antivax, for example in the comments of Bret Weinstein videos. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/covid-vaccines-what-full-fda-approval-means-for-you.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/covid-vaccines-what-full-fda...
- boredprograming 5y ago
  Yes. Anybody trying to rationalize not getting one of the extremely effective vaccines will be grasping at straws for any other effective treatment. It's a natural outcome. The vaccines are as effective as the one that eliminated smallpox. To be against it, you need some serious FUD
  - ghoward 5y ago
    FUD like the fact that the vaccines have had no completed studies on their long-term effects? Or being part of a demographic that has a low risk from COVID?
Heyso 5y ago
IMO vaccine are pushed as miracle drug. There is probably fanatic peoples in both though. You might also want to check remdisivir, drug that is not efficient, but they pushed it far enough to get a contract of 1 billion, and effectively 0.2 billion have been spent on it.
- boredprograming 5y ago
  The vaccines are a miracle drug. Less than one in a million people that have gotten both doses of mRNA vaccines have died of COVID. It's one of the biggest infectious disease success stories since the invention of penicillin
  - effie 5y ago
    Maybe, but do you know how many have died from the vaccine-induced side effects? How could we find this number?
    - boredprograming 5y ago
      Yes. Basically none. The vaccines have been given to almost a billion people. And side effects have been tracked. How can we find this number? We already have it. If there was anything dangerous within even 3 orders of magnitude of those that have died because they didn't get the vaccine it would be front page news. Get vaccinated
      - ghoward 5y ago
        What about long-term effects of the vaccines?
        spadez 5y ago
        I asked why Covid vaccines are absent from VAERS list of reportable AEFIs https://vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_Following_Vaccination.pdf https://vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_... And the person you are responding basically said that the new vaccines are so safe that it didn't have to be on that list. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27513984 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27513984 I don't mean this as a personal attack on that user, but It is really concerning how blind and apologetic some people are to the various things that can go wrong with a Vaccine.

throwaway4good 5y ago

It is and it is weird. What do these people (the promoters) get out of it? Attention? A more dedicated following?

raphlinus 5y ago
I think the most useful lens to understand the sociology of these kinds of questions is religious belief. And there is no shortage of people out there who want to convince others of their belief. The narrative for "the Ivermectin story" is particularly compelling, as it involves brave maverick doctors working selflessly to get the word out, suppression and censorship by shadowy organizations (big pharma fearing competition, the big Internet companies just lusting after the power of thought-control), and the empowerment of people to take medical decisions into their own hands. Incidentally, this was the exact same narrative as HCQ, and is being pushed by a lot of the same people. The end of the story may turn out differently, as the evidence on HCQ is overwhelming that it doesn't work, so you only see dead-enders pushing it, but there is a good chance that Ivermectin will turn out to be at least moderately effective, though the jury is still out.
- Heyso 5y ago
  Religious belief. Exactly. And what are your religious beliefs ? Are you sure you have none ? Is there something or someone you would never doubt ?
ds206 5y ago
How about having a discussion? Not everything has to be so complicated lol

throwkeep 5y ago

> Many people pushing Ivermectin have a vested interest in proving the vaccines are unnecessary. What is their vested interest in a generic, cheap, decades old, off patent drug? Vested interests tend to be in new, patented treatments. That's where big pharma profit is. So let's try a rephrase: Many people pushing patented treatments have a vested interest in proving off patent alternatives are unnecessary. For example, here's Merck warning against using Ivermectin for Covid-19: https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use... Then a few months later, "Merck Announces Supply Agreement with U.S. Government for Molnupiravir, an Investigational Oral Antiviral Candidate for Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19" https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-with-u-s-government-for-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-candidate-for-treatment-of-mild-to-moderate-covid-19/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-...

jiofih 5y ago
Being proven right. That’s the anti-vac crowd’s dearest interest.
- swader999 5y ago
  That's the wrong side to look at this from. These are just people on the fringe with little influence and funding. If ivermectin was authorized as a viable treatment the vaccines receiving emergency use authorisation wouldn't have been possible. There were and still are billions on the line.
  - raphlinus 5y ago
    I'm having difficulty understanding this line of reasoning. What does the authorization of ivermectin have to do with the vaccines? Xofluza, Relenza, and Tamiflu have been approved for treating influenza, and that has had no effect on the recommendation that people get their flu shots.
    - deleted 5y ago

raphlinus 5y ago

Ok, I was confused by this line of reasoning, so did some digging. I believe it's one of the popular antivax disinfo conspiracy theories. Here's my reading. The line of reasoning hinges on the vaccines being "experimental" and only being distributed under an Emergency Use Authorization, as opposed to a full approval. The FDA policies for EUA indicate they're only to be used when there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative. This makes a lot of sense - if (let's say) someone comes up with a new flu vaccine (an mRNA one, to continue this example, as that would be kinda exciting), you really want it to go through the full approval process instead of EUA, even if it is better. That's because we have plenty of good, approved flu vaccines. So, the theory goes, if we had an approved treatment for Covid, then the EUA for the vaccines would be illegal. And so that creates incentives for the pharmaceutical companies to suppress a miracle cure like (they claim) ivermectin. To anybody with the capacity for rational thought, this is obviously bullshit. We have fully approved treatments already, including remdesivir. The idea that a treatment for Covid, even a pretty good one, would make vaccines unnecessary makes no sense. I am fairly confident in making the following prediction. Full FDA approval for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines is likely by the end of the year[1], at which point the above line of reasoning will no longer be applicable. Antivaxxers will smoothly transition to another line of argument. I do think this "theory" is one reason you see a significant overlap between pro-ivermectin and antivax, for example in the comments of Bret Weinstein videos. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/covid-vaccines-what-full-fda-approval-means-for-you.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/covid-vaccines-what-full-fda...

boredprograming 5y ago
Yes. Anybody trying to rationalize not getting one of the extremely effective vaccines will be grasping at straws for any other effective treatment. It's a natural outcome. The vaccines are as effective as the one that eliminated smallpox. To be against it, you need some serious FUD
- ghoward 5y ago
  FUD like the fact that the vaccines have had no completed studies on their long-term effects? Or being part of a demographic that has a low risk from COVID?

Heyso 5y ago

IMO vaccine are pushed as miracle drug. There is probably fanatic peoples in both though. You might also want to check remdisivir, drug that is not efficient, but they pushed it far enough to get a contract of 1 billion, and effectively 0.2 billion have been spent on it.

boredprograming 5y ago
The vaccines are a miracle drug. Less than one in a million people that have gotten both doses of mRNA vaccines have died of COVID. It's one of the biggest infectious disease success stories since the invention of penicillin
- effie 5y ago
  Maybe, but do you know how many have died from the vaccine-induced side effects? How could we find this number?
  - boredprograming 5y ago
    Yes. Basically none. The vaccines have been given to almost a billion people. And side effects have been tracked. How can we find this number? We already have it. If there was anything dangerous within even 3 orders of magnitude of those that have died because they didn't get the vaccine it would be front page news. Get vaccinated
    - ghoward 5y ago
      What about long-term effects of the vaccines?
      - spadez 5y ago
        I asked why Covid vaccines are absent from VAERS list of reportable AEFIs https://vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_Following_Vaccination.pdf https://vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_... And the person you are responding basically said that the new vaccines are so safe that it didn't have to be on that list. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27513984 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27513984 I don't mean this as a personal attack on that user, but It is really concerning how blind and apologetic some people are to the various things that can go wrong with a Vaccine.