5 ms·

I’m surprised how blantant the narrative pushing is orchestrated. This example happened the other day on NBC news(main channel). So regardless of your stance on

by S_A_P 5y ago

I’m surprised how blantant the narrative pushing is orchestrated. This example happened the other day on NBC news(main channel). So regardless of your stance on ivermectin, this is what played the other day: Aaron Roger’s used ivermectin at the advise of Joe Rogan. Ivermectin is oftentimes used a horse dewormer. <cut to Pfizer commercial> Return from Pfizer commercial. Pfizer has announced a new Covid antiviral drug that combines mRNA therapy with a low dose HIV drug and has proven (some high 80s/90s number). Pfizer is asking for an emergency approval for treatment with Covid 19. Look, I don’t know if Ivermectin is effective for Covid or not. From what I have heard it seems like looking into it with an unbiased lens may be worth it. I don’t care if it is effective or not so much as I don’t think news and corporate interest should drive the national opinion. I’m not even that scared about the anti viral that Pfizer is pushing. HIV drugs have been around long enough to establish a safety profile and weigh the risk vs reward. I do think, that despite reports ivermectin has a pretty solid safety record. However safe HIV drugs are, the commercials for them list significant side effects. Again I hesitate to post this as someone thinks I’m pushing ivermectin as a legitimate therapy. I truly do not know… To me the sequence of the story commercial and the counter story made me feel a bit queasy.

akudha 5y ago
Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky describes in detail how the media lies, manipulates, twists the facts/truth to fit a particular narrative. He gives example after example after example. They also selectively ignore certain stories while simultaneously amplifying certain other stories. This has been going on for decades, this is nothing new. What is new is the medium and the cost. TV is still expensive even today, while internet is cheap, its reach is much larger and it has permanent memory. This is why we should support smaller independent outlets like TYT. We may or may not like their style, but they don't rely on corporate sponsors and that deserves respect. I am also happy about independent newsletter publishers (on substack, for example) - these are a drop in the ocean, but still a start. I can't name a single large publication (left, right, center, liberal, conservative... whatever) that I trust or respect :(
- ThunderSizzle 5y ago
  TYT may be smaller than Comcast, but it's not small. They received millions in VC funding, much of it partisan and political. That's about as far from independent as possible. An independent news source should be primarily funded by either non-patisans for good will or by viewers. I'll take Stephen Crowder over TYT any day. But either way, Stephen Crowder has much of an agenda to gain viewers as TYT - if your viewers support you, then more viewers is more support. If your viewers don't support you money-wise, then those interests are more indirect, such as a desire for implicit campaigning by donars, like TYT, or for corporate funding, like NBC/Fox.
  - nemothekid 5y ago
    There is a clear level of influence and responsibility that separates CNN from TYT, despite TYT being VC funded. That said I wouldn't trust anyone who gets their news from solely TYT (which has a progressive stance) and Stephen Crowder (who has a a right slant). Despite having more funding, I wouldn't be surprised if Crowder was competitive in revenue to TYT. If your goal is news then getting as close to the primary source is as important as possible, and unfortunately YouTube is making this even more difficult today. If your goal is interpretation you need to listen to a wide variety of experts to form an informed opinion that you can actually defend. Ultimately, every news outlet is beholden to someone and most have made editorial choices to more palatable to the demographic they have acquired over the years.
belltaco 5y ago
It all depends on the scientific evidence in the highest quality large clinical trials. Ivermectin has failed to show benefit, the Pfizer drug has. >I don’t care if it is effective or not so much as I don’t think news and corporate interest should drive the national opinion. Even more frightening is that a lot of people who think that don't have the same opinion on things like these that are way worse than anything NBC News does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAh4uS4f78o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAh4uS4f78o They always focus and nitpick on media that's mostly following the science, and ignore the other side pushing drugs with unsound studies as some kind of magic drugs. >From what I have heard it seems like looking into it with an unbiased lens may be worth it And do you really think every country where covid isn't as politicized, like India, Brazil (both of who have extensive experience using ivermectin and HCQ for other users), China, UK, European countries, Canada etc. haven't looked at it with an unbiased lens? Maybe listen to actual scientists with decades of drug development research experience instead of 'both siding' the conversation? E.g https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/ivermectin-covid-19-therapy https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/ivermectin-covid-1...
- ipaddr 5y ago
  What makes you think European and Canadian are less politicized over Covid? Canada usually waits for fda approval and data before it approves most things.
  - belltaco 5y ago
    They might be politicized internally, but they don't give a crap about Trump vs Biden, or red vs. blue. UK, Brazil and India have right wing govts, do you really think they would suppress real cures and destroy their economy and popularity of their leaders and parties due to lockdowns, hospitalizations, and the dead filling up burial grounds. If HCQ or IVR actually worked, a leader would have mandated it and would have become hugely popular for saving their country from a pandemic that other countries are getting roiled by. Imagine how much more popular Boris or Modi would become, it would literally seal their next election win. Or maybe IVR or HCQ aren't good drugs against covid and are hyped up for political reasons by some and then pushed by others who aren't capable of properly reading or understanding scientific studies. This conspiracy only makes sense to people who cannot think broadly, skeptically and logically.
jacobolus 5y ago
> I don’t know if Ivermectin is effective for Covid or not. From what I have heard it seems like looking into it with an unbiased lens may be worth it. People did look into this with an unbiased lens (did dozens of medical studies, many still ongoing) and so far there is no good evidence that it has any beneficial effect whatsoever. On the other hand now a bunch of people have overdosed from taking veterinary doses not intended for human consumption (there have been thousands of calls to poison control centers about Ivermectin in the past few months, and some have died). From what I have seen everyone pushing Ivermectin is a grossly misinformed and non-credible amateur. Some of these snake-oil salespeople may have direct financial interest, while others just want to promote their own questionable agendas, e.g. trying to undermine/disparage some extremely effective vaccines. This is a horrible example of something “worth looking into”. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
- loonster 5y ago
  > On the other hand now a bunch of people have overdosed from taking veterinary doses not intended for human consumption Maybe the solution to this is to allow OTC sales of human grade Ivermectin. The drug is one of the safest in the world. No reasonable reason to deny the drug if someone wants it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - duskwuff 5y ago
    > The drug is one of the safest in the world. This is not true at all. Ivermectin has some nasty neurological effects (vertigo, seizures, blindness) at high doses.
    - naasking 5y ago
      Water can also cause death at high doses (hyponatremia). Literally everything can. The difference between medicine and poison is in the dosage, so saying ivermectin is not safe because it causes health issues at high doses isn't really saying anything.
stefan_ 5y ago
Ivermectin has long fallen out of patent protection and generics can be manufactured. Anyone is free to make it and apply to the FDA for authorization to use it as Covid treatment - just bring the data. Obviously, that hasn't happened. No one has made an attempt. But you are here to disparage a company that has developed a novel antiviral treatment and has applied for the authorization.

by S_A_P 5y ago

akudha 5y ago

Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky describes in detail how the media lies, manipulates, twists the facts/truth to fit a particular narrative. He gives example after example after example. They also selectively ignore certain stories while simultaneously amplifying certain other stories. This has been going on for decades, this is nothing new. What is new is the medium and the cost. TV is still expensive even today, while internet is cheap, its reach is much larger and it has permanent memory. This is why we should support smaller independent outlets like TYT. We may or may not like their style, but they don't rely on corporate sponsors and that deserves respect. I am also happy about independent newsletter publishers (on substack, for example) - these are a drop in the ocean, but still a start. I can't name a single large publication (left, right, center, liberal, conservative... whatever) that I trust or respect :(

ThunderSizzle 5y ago
TYT may be smaller than Comcast, but it's not small. They received millions in VC funding, much of it partisan and political. That's about as far from independent as possible. An independent news source should be primarily funded by either non-patisans for good will or by viewers. I'll take Stephen Crowder over TYT any day. But either way, Stephen Crowder has much of an agenda to gain viewers as TYT - if your viewers support you, then more viewers is more support. If your viewers don't support you money-wise, then those interests are more indirect, such as a desire for implicit campaigning by donars, like TYT, or for corporate funding, like NBC/Fox.
- nemothekid 5y ago
  There is a clear level of influence and responsibility that separates CNN from TYT, despite TYT being VC funded. That said I wouldn't trust anyone who gets their news from solely TYT (which has a progressive stance) and Stephen Crowder (who has a a right slant). Despite having more funding, I wouldn't be surprised if Crowder was competitive in revenue to TYT. If your goal is news then getting as close to the primary source is as important as possible, and unfortunately YouTube is making this even more difficult today. If your goal is interpretation you need to listen to a wide variety of experts to form an informed opinion that you can actually defend. Ultimately, every news outlet is beholden to someone and most have made editorial choices to more palatable to the demographic they have acquired over the years.

belltaco 5y ago

It all depends on the scientific evidence in the highest quality large clinical trials. Ivermectin has failed to show benefit, the Pfizer drug has. >I don’t care if it is effective or not so much as I don’t think news and corporate interest should drive the national opinion. Even more frightening is that a lot of people who think that don't have the same opinion on things like these that are way worse than anything NBC News does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAh4uS4f78o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAh4uS4f78o They always focus and nitpick on media that's mostly following the science, and ignore the other side pushing drugs with unsound studies as some kind of magic drugs. >From what I have heard it seems like looking into it with an unbiased lens may be worth it And do you really think every country where covid isn't as politicized, like India, Brazil (both of who have extensive experience using ivermectin and HCQ for other users), China, UK, European countries, Canada etc. haven't looked at it with an unbiased lens? Maybe listen to actual scientists with decades of drug development research experience instead of 'both siding' the conversation? E.g https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/ivermectin-covid-19-therapy https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/ivermectin-covid-1...

ipaddr 5y ago
What makes you think European and Canadian are less politicized over Covid? Canada usually waits for fda approval and data before it approves most things.
- belltaco 5y ago
  They might be politicized internally, but they don't give a crap about Trump vs Biden, or red vs. blue. UK, Brazil and India have right wing govts, do you really think they would suppress real cures and destroy their economy and popularity of their leaders and parties due to lockdowns, hospitalizations, and the dead filling up burial grounds. If HCQ or IVR actually worked, a leader would have mandated it and would have become hugely popular for saving their country from a pandemic that other countries are getting roiled by. Imagine how much more popular Boris or Modi would become, it would literally seal their next election win. Or maybe IVR or HCQ aren't good drugs against covid and are hyped up for political reasons by some and then pushed by others who aren't capable of properly reading or understanding scientific studies. This conspiracy only makes sense to people who cannot think broadly, skeptically and logically.

jacobolus 5y ago

> I don’t know if Ivermectin is effective for Covid or not. From what I have heard it seems like looking into it with an unbiased lens may be worth it. People did look into this with an unbiased lens (did dozens of medical studies, many still ongoing) and so far there is no good evidence that it has any beneficial effect whatsoever. On the other hand now a bunch of people have overdosed from taking veterinary doses not intended for human consumption (there have been thousands of calls to poison control centers about Ivermectin in the past few months, and some have died). From what I have seen everyone pushing Ivermectin is a grossly misinformed and non-credible amateur. Some of these snake-oil salespeople may have direct financial interest, while others just want to promote their own questionable agendas, e.g. trying to undermine/disparage some extremely effective vaccines. This is a horrible example of something “worth looking into”. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...

loonster 5y ago
> On the other hand now a bunch of people have overdosed from taking veterinary doses not intended for human consumption Maybe the solution to this is to allow OTC sales of human grade Ivermectin. The drug is one of the safest in the world. No reasonable reason to deny the drug if someone wants it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- duskwuff 5y ago
  > The drug is one of the safest in the world. This is not true at all. Ivermectin has some nasty neurological effects (vertigo, seizures, blindness) at high doses.
  - naasking 5y ago
    Water can also cause death at high doses (hyponatremia). Literally everything can. The difference between medicine and poison is in the dosage, so saying ivermectin is not safe because it causes health issues at high doses isn't really saying anything.

stefan_ 5y ago

Ivermectin has long fallen out of patent protection and generics can be manufactured. Anyone is free to make it and apply to the FDA for authorization to use it as Covid treatment - just bring the data. Obviously, that hasn't happened. No one has made an attempt. But you are here to disparage a company that has developed a novel antiviral treatment and has applied for the authorization.