4 ms·

> The "Joe Rogan takes horse dewormer" was ridiculous and really made me distrust the institutions. What institutions? CNN or the CDC? I don't remember the CDC

> The "Joe Rogan takes horse dewormer" was ridiculous and really made me distrust the institutions. What institutions? CNN or the CDC? I don't remember the CDC ever coming out and saying something about Joe Rogan, but the CDC and FDA came out and rightfully said taking Ivermectin is a bad idea. If some private citizen wants to find some quack doctor that prescribes them drano, what can they do? What this is really about, is two competing medical communities... Joe Rogan's quack doctor and CNN's Sanjay Gupta, but don't make this about some higher level issue about "Institutions" the CDC and FDA are doing its job just fine.

gamblor956 5y ago
The issue wasn't Rogan taking dewormer. The issue was that he was telling tens of millions of people that he "researched" COVID and decided that taking a toxic animal dewormer was a safer option than taking a vaccine and suggested that millions of people do the same. It's understandable that people have issues with Moderna and Pfizer, since they are a new type of vaccine (mRNA-based) and we're not sure what the long-term affects of mRNA vaccines may be, but the J&J vaccine is made the same way that most other vaccines are made and those risks have been known for decades.
- supercanuck 5y ago
  He said he listened to his doctor who prescribed it if you watch the exchange with Sanjay Gupta. "His Doctor" is the person who should really be interviewed and scrutinized.
- dudeman13 5y ago
  >It's understandable that people have issues with Moderna and Pfizer, since they are a new type of vaccine (mRNA-based) and we're not sure what the long-term affects of mRNA vaccines may be It's not understandable why they use that as an argument for not taking them. There might be long term effects to taking the vaccine that will only make themselves known in 20 years. There might also be long term effects to taking the coronavirus raw that will only make themselves known in 20 years. This is the only valid argument against the vaccines that I have seen so far, and it is just as valid for the opposite side.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Viral vector vaccines have not been widely used either. Several Chinese and Indian vaccines are traditional vaccines that have been widely used. Tens of thousands of people received a viral vector Ebola vaccine.
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  >decided that taking a toxic animal dewormer Please don't repeat known lies. it just muddies the conversation and adds to misinformation, which is already a huge problem. Ivermectin is a drug designed for humans and prescribed to a hundred million people a year.
  - supercanuck 5y ago
    Follow your own advice, it was designed for treating parasites, not viruses.
    - s1artibartfast 5y ago
      Everything I said was factually correct. I never said anything about testing or approval for viruses. Compare that with "toxic animal dewormer". If we want to have any productive public discourse about any topic, we need to resist the urge to knowingly repeat lies and misinformation.
      - gamblor956 5y ago
        No, most of what you said is wrong. The history of ivermectin: Merck began marketing ivermectin as a veterinary antiparasitic in 1981.[7] By 1986, ivermectin was registered for use in 46 countries and was administered massively to cattle, sheep and other animals.[82] By the late 1980s, ivermectin was the bestselling veterinary medicine in the world.[7] Following its blockbuster success as a veterinary antiparasitic, another Merck scientist, Mohamed Aziz, collaborated with the World Health Organization to test the safety and efficacy of ivermectin against onchocerciasis in humans. Ivermectin is an animal drug that was then used in humans for severe cases of parasitic infestation (i.e., lice, scabies, etc.). It is absolutely not a drug intended for normal human use.

gamblor956 5y ago

The issue wasn't Rogan taking dewormer. The issue was that he was telling tens of millions of people that he "researched" COVID and decided that taking a toxic animal dewormer was a safer option than taking a vaccine and suggested that millions of people do the same. It's understandable that people have issues with Moderna and Pfizer, since they are a new type of vaccine (mRNA-based) and we're not sure what the long-term affects of mRNA vaccines may be, but the J&J vaccine is made the same way that most other vaccines are made and those risks have been known for decades.

supercanuck 5y ago
He said he listened to his doctor who prescribed it if you watch the exchange with Sanjay Gupta. "His Doctor" is the person who should really be interviewed and scrutinized.
dudeman13 5y ago
>It's understandable that people have issues with Moderna and Pfizer, since they are a new type of vaccine (mRNA-based) and we're not sure what the long-term affects of mRNA vaccines may be It's not understandable why they use that as an argument for not taking them. There might be long term effects to taking the vaccine that will only make themselves known in 20 years. There might also be long term effects to taking the coronavirus raw that will only make themselves known in 20 years. This is the only valid argument against the vaccines that I have seen so far, and it is just as valid for the opposite side.
maxerickson 5y ago
Viral vector vaccines have not been widely used either. Several Chinese and Indian vaccines are traditional vaccines that have been widely used. Tens of thousands of people received a viral vector Ebola vaccine.
s1artibartfast 5y ago
>decided that taking a toxic animal dewormer Please don't repeat known lies. it just muddies the conversation and adds to misinformation, which is already a huge problem. Ivermectin is a drug designed for humans and prescribed to a hundred million people a year.
- supercanuck 5y ago
  Follow your own advice, it was designed for treating parasites, not viruses.
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    Everything I said was factually correct. I never said anything about testing or approval for viruses. Compare that with "toxic animal dewormer". If we want to have any productive public discourse about any topic, we need to resist the urge to knowingly repeat lies and misinformation.
    - gamblor956 5y ago
      No, most of what you said is wrong. The history of ivermectin: Merck began marketing ivermectin as a veterinary antiparasitic in 1981.[7] By 1986, ivermectin was registered for use in 46 countries and was administered massively to cattle, sheep and other animals.[82] By the late 1980s, ivermectin was the bestselling veterinary medicine in the world.[7] Following its blockbuster success as a veterinary antiparasitic, another Merck scientist, Mohamed Aziz, collaborated with the World Health Organization to test the safety and efficacy of ivermectin against onchocerciasis in humans. Ivermectin is an animal drug that was then used in humans for severe cases of parasitic infestation (i.e., lice, scabies, etc.). It is absolutely not a drug intended for normal human use.