3 ms·

> I suppose it's human nature ... It's pretty simple, the different realities like you said. People consume and trust different streams of information (for a w

> I suppose it's human nature ... It's pretty simple, the different realities like you said. People consume and trust different streams of information (for a whole bunch of reasons). Your info stream probably told you that people were gobbling horse goo and aquarium cleaner and dying by the droves, while threatening your grandmother, and you believed it because the sum total of your experience told you that was the most believable of the options. Other peoples experiences led them to believe sources saying that there was a thing called ivermectin that sees use in agriculture but also in billions of human doses as an antiparasitic that seems to be helping against covid (and that big corporations are not to be trusted). There are life stories behind each of these perspectives. Many people with either of these perspectives had never heard of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine before their media of choice started praising or condemning them. Then suddenly they were experts. I never took any of it. Was that the right decision? It seems to have worked out at least. I do try to avoid the trap of thinking any of the stuff blasted out by the media corporations, at no cost to you, has any other purpose than to get you to 1) vote a certain way or 2) buy a certain product, or 3) support some forever war. The news corps aren't just generously informing you - there has to be an ROI.

scott_w 2y ago
> It's pretty simple, the different realities like you said. Agreed. > Your info stream probably told you that people were gobbling horse goo and aquarium cleaner and dying by the droves, while threatening your grandmother That's not even close to the truth. There were reliable reports of people admitted to hospital with this but nobody in their right mind thought "droves" of people were taking dangerous quantities of ivermectin or drinking bleach.
- ifyoubuildit 2y ago
  Seems reasonable to believe that some people read reports of gunshot victims dying because of ivermectin overdoses and believed it. https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/politics/fact-check-oklahoma-ivermectin-story/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/politics/fact-check-oklahoma-...
silverquiet 2y ago
Interestingly I knew an engineer who took fish medication long before covid, and I came to respect that sort of DIY ethos for medicine and have taken it on myself where possible. Veterinary medications are just medications, so that sort of characterization tended to fly over my head a bit. But if there was a drug that easily cured covid, it would be obvious because it would easily cure covid.
- ifyoubuildit 2y ago
  > But if there was a drug that easily cured covid, it would be obvious because it would easily cure covid. And that could explain why a lot of people believed ivermectin works: they had covid, they took ivermectin, they got better. They don't see the alternate universe where they didn't take it and they also got better, because that's what happens most of the time. I'm convinced this is why so many other people think the vaccine was a miracle. We were being blasted with the idea that covid was a death sentence, so if you had a plain old mild case (like most cases were), it had to be because of some intervention (ivermectin or the shots or the phase of the moon). I think this is true for most of the shit the medical industry tries to push on you, but I'm a kook and I know it.
  - silverquiet 2y ago
    Yes, the dynamic you identified is why sham treatments have sold for millennia. Teasing out what works is tricky. For some (to include people I knew) covid was a death sentence, but the fatality rate was around one percent, wasn't it? You'd never fly on a plane that crashed in one out of one hundred flights, but still they aren't too bad as odds go. Even so, once the vaccine came out, the only people I knew who died of covid were those who did not take it. Merely the observation of one individual, but it seems to match the wider data that was found. So given that information, what is one to do? I took the vaccine and take the newer versions now too along with a flu shot.
    - ifyoubuildit 2y ago
      > to include people I knew Sorry for your loss. > the fatality rate was around one percent, wasn't it? According to one report at least, it was 1% for folks in their 60s. For younger demographics it was quite a bit less than that. > We report IFR estimates for April 15, 2020, to January 1, 2021, the period before the introduction of vaccines and widespread evolution of variants. We found substantial heterogeneity in the IFR by age, location, and time. Age-specific IFR estimates form a J shape, with the lowest IFR occurring at age 7 years (0·0023%, 95% uncertainty interval [UI] 0·0015–0·0039) and increasing exponentially through ages 30 years (0·0573%, 0·0418–0·0870), 60 years (1·0035%, 0·7002–1·5727), and 90 years (20·3292%, 14·6888–28·9754). https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02867-1/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > So given that information, what is one to do? You make the best decision you can for yourself, and sounds like you did that. The frustrating part is when other people felt entitled to make that decision for you.
Rapzid 2y ago
> Your info stream probably told you that people were gobbling horse goo and aquarium cleaner and dying by the droves Which news stream was this?

scott_w 2y ago

> It's pretty simple, the different realities like you said. Agreed. > Your info stream probably told you that people were gobbling horse goo and aquarium cleaner and dying by the droves, while threatening your grandmother That's not even close to the truth. There were reliable reports of people admitted to hospital with this but nobody in their right mind thought "droves" of people were taking dangerous quantities of ivermectin or drinking bleach.

ifyoubuildit 2y ago
Seems reasonable to believe that some people read reports of gunshot victims dying because of ivermectin overdoses and believed it. https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/politics/fact-check-oklahoma-ivermectin-story/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/politics/fact-check-oklahoma-...

silverquiet 2y ago

Interestingly I knew an engineer who took fish medication long before covid, and I came to respect that sort of DIY ethos for medicine and have taken it on myself where possible. Veterinary medications are just medications, so that sort of characterization tended to fly over my head a bit. But if there was a drug that easily cured covid, it would be obvious because it would easily cure covid.

ifyoubuildit 2y ago
> But if there was a drug that easily cured covid, it would be obvious because it would easily cure covid. And that could explain why a lot of people believed ivermectin works: they had covid, they took ivermectin, they got better. They don't see the alternate universe where they didn't take it and they also got better, because that's what happens most of the time. I'm convinced this is why so many other people think the vaccine was a miracle. We were being blasted with the idea that covid was a death sentence, so if you had a plain old mild case (like most cases were), it had to be because of some intervention (ivermectin or the shots or the phase of the moon). I think this is true for most of the shit the medical industry tries to push on you, but I'm a kook and I know it.
- silverquiet 2y ago
  Yes, the dynamic you identified is why sham treatments have sold for millennia. Teasing out what works is tricky. For some (to include people I knew) covid was a death sentence, but the fatality rate was around one percent, wasn't it? You'd never fly on a plane that crashed in one out of one hundred flights, but still they aren't too bad as odds go. Even so, once the vaccine came out, the only people I knew who died of covid were those who did not take it. Merely the observation of one individual, but it seems to match the wider data that was found. So given that information, what is one to do? I took the vaccine and take the newer versions now too along with a flu shot.
  - ifyoubuildit 2y ago
    > to include people I knew Sorry for your loss. > the fatality rate was around one percent, wasn't it? According to one report at least, it was 1% for folks in their 60s. For younger demographics it was quite a bit less than that. > We report IFR estimates for April 15, 2020, to January 1, 2021, the period before the introduction of vaccines and widespread evolution of variants. We found substantial heterogeneity in the IFR by age, location, and time. Age-specific IFR estimates form a J shape, with the lowest IFR occurring at age 7 years (0·0023%, 95% uncertainty interval [UI] 0·0015–0·0039) and increasing exponentially through ages 30 years (0·0573%, 0·0418–0·0870), 60 years (1·0035%, 0·7002–1·5727), and 90 years (20·3292%, 14·6888–28·9754). https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02867-1/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > So given that information, what is one to do? You make the best decision you can for yourself, and sounds like you did that. The frustrating part is when other people felt entitled to make that decision for you.

Rapzid 2y ago

> Your info stream probably told you that people were gobbling horse goo and aquarium cleaner and dying by the droves Which news stream was this?