vibrato2

Citation needed for “more side effects” this is a Nobel prize winning drug which has a markedly safe profile. Not like the vaccines which fda admits have no long term data available.

On the other hand, this meta study found 20 mechanisms of action by ivermectin against covid and general efficacy as treatment.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8203399/

Since that’s impossible for you to back up, I question why you would say it. Rationally speaking

We have no encouraging long term data from any mRNA therapy. this is brand new. The animal tests were concerning to put it mildly.

Your chances of serious illness are lower for now. ADE shows dose dependent acceleration, so by the 4th or 5th booster it may be a different story.

I’m very confident I’ve been exposed to covid, yet never had any test or conclusive symptoms.

I’m also confident that people like me do not experience problems from covid. At least not any more problems than a flu. A 1/3000 risk of myocarditis is not something I will risk. That’s a long term scarring of heart tissue, similar to how my father died in his 30s from teenage medical treatment.

The difference in your statement is that covid is an acute condition rather than a chronic slow growing tumor. If covid took years to show symptoms it’d be a reasonable comparison, but it’s very silly to make otherwise.

Did you miss the part of the fda statement this week where they said they have no long term data available?

Consider the realistic uncertainty and probability from previous study of antibody dependent enhancement. It’s not proven that the mRNA therapy won’t worsen covid reaction in the long run.

Working very viably for myself.

Good point to follow the money. There have been a lot of unsubstantiated claims about lack of side effects from the mRNA therapies, while at the same time they became the most profitable drugs of all time even before approval.

Cannabidiol, which also shows about an order of magnitude decrease in covid infections from this study. Another promising therapeutic.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987002/

No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying your number is bad for a specific reason. I also never said no one’s died of covid.

If you wanted to see that data I’m sure you’d find it. Actuaries do this kind of work.

Simply put, there's an extraordinary number of people becoming old at this exact time. The baby boomers.

Any "excess" death calculation which doesn't account for this natural spike in death is not comprehensive whatsoever.

It's a naive calculation because it doesn't include projections we can accurately make from understanding the current state of the population. It treats the population characteristics as a black box and only uses an extrapolation of past death events as a projection. We can also accurately predict death from birth.

His number is based on a naive death count year over year. When the death rate is normalized for population age distribution his "excess" shrinks to near 0.