3 ms·

> Can you show any other vaccine which has long term, but not short term negative side effects, which this concern might be based on? I don't know. But we stil

> Can you show any other vaccine which has long term, but not short term negative side effects, which this concern might be based on? I don't know. But we still may be in the "short-term side effect" phase for the COVID vaccines. It hasn't even been a year. > Because this seems like whataboutism, and of course it's impossible to prove a negative, and people are dying while waiting. Not sure how it's whataboutism to point out that some people have lower risks of contracting serious COVID, and that their decision to take a very new vaccine may be different than someone who is more at risk for contracting serious COVID. If they miscalculate and die, well, that's their decision. > At bi-annual dosage rates, yes. Not daily or even weekly. Are the COVID/Ivermectin studies doctors are referencing for prescription dosages recommending daily Ivermectin use?

snovv_crash 5y ago
It's been over a year for the initial trials, no long term issues yet. How long seems reasonable to you? What are you basing this timeframe on? If covid is a low risk, then the vaccine, which is essentially just the immune response to covid without any of the actual viral damage, should be much more benign, yes? I'm failing to see the risk here. The treatment regimens in current Ivermectin studies are usually daily dosage, for which there are no long term studies for humans. Prophylactic usage of Ivermectin is all over the place, but seems to mostly be within 72h of exposure, so several doses per week, which also doesn't have long term studies. Staying on antibiotics for long periods is generally a bad idea due to disturbing the gut microbiota.