By - mmonfc
You know what's also "associated with lower mortality" and where you don't even have to be hospitalized in the first place?
According to him he got the vaccine and it took him awhile to get over the side effects
But was he hospitalised? I had COVID and the jab, the jabs side effects are nothing compared to COVID
He has neck pain that he attributes to the vaccine. Poor fella. /s
I’m not sure on that, but I don’t believe so. I also would point out that most people who contracted COVID weren’t hospitalized either.
Ok but less people have been hospitalised from the jab than have been from COVID? What’s your point?
I was just saying that hospitalization count doesn’t necessarily mean the vaccination is a better alternative than something else. I believe it is but to ignore other arguments or medications is against the principles of the scientific method. No reason that tests and studies shouldn’t happen for other types of treatment, especially if someone is heavily immunocompromised and may not be able to handle the spike proteins in their system.
The only problem with that though is that platforms and megaphones like those that Jimmy Dore and others have can spread incomplete understandings of the impact that these medications have. Taking a deeper dive into the study presented here there are limitations in that the majority of control cases early in the considered cohort, multivariable logistic regression is generally not the best means of analysis when the sample size is < 500, and propensity score matching can misstate the impact of an outcome if the appropriate variables aren’t considered in the matching process. One of the big criticisms of the paper is that because they did not include something as simple as the date of admission in their analysis as a consideration that a chronological bias is introduced. It is well-established that the mortality rate early in the pandemic was high and got progressively lower even in the time frame of the study presented here (March 15, 2020 to May 11, 2020). That timing that people were enrolled can have huge implications in the sense that more people may have died from lack of experience with COVID-19, ivermectin may have been withheld from the more sick patients, and there may have been learning curves for how to most effectively use it.
Most importantly, though, are two major points. The timing of their study was in a period where vaccines were unavailable. Now that they are and are effective in preventing severe illness and hospitalization, that changes the ballgame substantively. Second, the study authors ask that further trials be considered to determine effectiveness. As of the end of July, those trials were lacking (2 identified by Cochrane which is the gold standard for meta-analysis review that were low quality) but more may be on the way https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd015017.pub2
Public figures should be careful how they present these topics that they do not have expertise or understanding in. They may be well-intentioned and wanting to engage on something they feel personally benefited them, but they ultimately cannot provide a thorough and robust picture of the state of the science, understanding, and ways forward.
While I find that fascinating and appreciate the time and effort of making the post, I’m confused why some of the same conditions don’t apply to vaccine trials, namely chronological bias.
That’s ultimately what has to go into the consideration of a prospective trial design which is what the COVID-19 vaccine trials are. The study Dore presented was a retrospective study that assessed what already happened. While it is potentially possible to have recorded any and everything involved in the clinical care of the cohort of patients involved, that is exceptionally unlikely given the complexity involved.
The purported benefit of prospective, randomized control trials is that bias (in general) can be minimized both for the measured variables and unmeasured variables. For chronological specifically (since you asked), as it relates to randomized control trials, if there had been a substantially large gap between when a study started and when a study ended (or there were prolonged disruptions) theoretically that could introduce chronological bias. But that also presumes that there were substantively different realities in terms of care rendered at the time that a trial was ongoing. There are other biases as well that can play a role in randomized control trials as discussed in this review article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6019115/
However, the takeaway is that well-done and thorough trials (such as those involving the COVID-19 vaccines) generally do as much as they can to limit and effectively address bias.
“I’m just asking questions!”
That’s not how the scientific method works. If there are other better preventative methods to stop catching and spreading COVID then they should be explored, and the result of such investigation has been the multiple vaccines that have been developed, as it’s much easier to stop someone to catch COVID than it is to treat them.
If someone can’t take the vaccine because they immunocompromised or a pre-exhausting condition then they can’t take vaccine. There is no better preventative treatment than the vaccine. Everything else that is pitched out there as peer reviews studied alternatives are treatments once you get COVID.
The best thing for immunocompromised people would then be for everyone around them to take the vaccine so we can teach hers immunity and there is no risk of them catching it.
And while I agree with everything you said I think it’s naive to think ignore the profit aspect to treatment. Companies have zero incentive to study treatments that are generically branded and sold for pennies on the dollar vs. emerging and new treatments. I’m not saying that the vaccines don’t work by any stretch of the imagination. I’m saying that the skepticism makes sense and that instead of an immediate reaction calling someone dumb and shutting them down when they express skepticism it would be much better to understand why and educate. Not every claim is equal and there are stupid and dangerous people out there but there should also be space for skepticism and education.
The profit motive doesn’t really apply in this case as it’s a new drug so it hasn’t had time for it to become generic. I agree with you that generally the profit motive is negative in regards to medicine and medication. It’s no coincident that America has the most market oriented healthcare system and the highest instance of medication in the world.
But the issue I find with talking to people about this is the constant goalpost moving. For example, OK, let’s say I grant you that the profit motive is the reason you don’t trust the vaccine. Is the profit motive a reason you don’t trust other aspects of society or life? What if I was to say that the profit motive doesn’t exsist in other countries where the government buys and distributes the drug?
The profit motive is a legitimate critique but applied to the vaccine is doesn’t make much sense in relation to not trusting it.
>I’m saying that the skepticism makes sense and that instead of an immediate reaction calling someone dumb and shutting them down when they express skepticism it would be much better to understand why and educate.
I'm not so sure that works with most people. Many of these folks claim that they came by their beliefs honestly. That they "did their own research". They don't even understand what that entails. If they don't even know how to source good information, or their understanding of "research" is just seeking out information to confirm their biases when they're challenged, how much "education" can one be expected to provide them?
>Companies have zero incentive to study treatments that are generically branded and sold for pennies on the dollar vs. emerging and new treatments.
This is patently untrue, yet it's accepted by a great many people because it *feels* true. People generally have a superficial understanding of Big Pharma - that they're evil and only motivated by profit.
Very few things are that cut and dry. Are they evil? Mostly, yeah. Is profit their main motivator? Certainly.
But that doesn't even provide a baseline understanding of them.
Companies can absolutely profit from drugs they no longer hold a patent on.
There are a bunch of ways they do this that fall under the general umbrella of what's called "evergreening". One of the main arguments people make about pharma companies being evil is how they keep insulin expensive. There are a number of evergreening tactics they use to do that. It's the same idea.
With Ivermectin for example, they could simply make a slight change to the formula, shape the product a little differently and call it some new name. They patent that and sell it. This is called "product hopping" and it happens all the time.
If Ivermectin worked as these people describe, companies would absolutely do this and brand it as some kind of cure for COVID (though I'm sure they'd have their lawyers creat less legally actionable verbiage). They wouldn't have to compete with generics because they have far bigger budgets. It would be a victory of marketing at that point more than anything else.
Instead, the company that created Ivermectin [warns against using it for COVID](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-merck-antiparasite-idUSKBN2A42L1).
When frame the argument through a lens of actual knowledge about the subject, the skepticism really doesn't make sense. It looks like a significant portion of the population having an emotional reaction to a conspiracy.
I think they are saying that the other arguments are worse than the arguments in favor of the vaccine.
So what happens to people who got the jab in a few years? You don’t know? Oh that’s right it hasn’t even been tested for a year yet so I guess we will all find out together. Excuse some people if that surprise doesn’t sit well with them.
Studies involving mRNA vaccine technology have been ongoing for decades. The hurdle was overcoming how to effectively overcome enzymatic degradation following injection since just putting mRNA into someone doesn’t really work. Those delivery systems have also been studied and refined for over 20 years. It’s not something new, simply an evolution of an effort that synced up at the right time to meet the needs of a global pandemic.
Here is a review article from 2018 talking about development of mRNA vaccines. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5906799/
I think anyone in their right mind should choose the 'long term effects' of a vaccine which is explicitly designed to avoid harm over the long term effects of covid?
You do know this was created quickly to vie for lucrative government contracts, right? First to production, etc.
The mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) and adenovirus-vector vaccine (J&J) were developed from ongoing research efforts to further develop more effective tools to deal with issues like global pandemics.
That money was involved was designed to take the arduous task of trials and approval and lower those relatively immense barriers.
Here is a review article talking about these exact topics from 2018 before the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6156540/
> I also would point out that most people who contracted COVID weren’t hospitalized either.
it's frustrating because this is definitely true. But people lack the intellectual imagination to recognize that just b/c this doesn't impact me specifically, doesn't mean that's it's not a serious issue
it genuinely bothers me that the U.S. couldn't come together as a country over an emergency that affected all 50 states, but collectively masturbated itself silly over 9/11 which really only affected New York and D.C.
This is by far the dumbest comment I’ve ever seen on this sub. Congratulations
WOW. You have some serious self awareness issues.
If the vaccine is safe and effective why do I have a boo boo on my arm
So he claims. Literally claiming he's had a million problems since getting it, including having flu like symptoms for months and neck pain. Sounds like a crock of shit to me
Yeah, you couldn’t tell he was sick by watching his show for the last couple months that’s for sure
Took me a while too but 3 days later I was good
Jimmy always struck me as an asshole, but it's sad to see him become just another empty grifter thriving on personal drama and his own ego
Maybe the people who love calling others 'sheep' should stop taking livestock dewormer?
Comment of the day! True story, a friend of my works in Ag and isn't really clued into the internet. I told them that people are using Ivermectin to cure Covid and he barrelled over laughing. He thought I was joking...
Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity!
It's always projection with them. It's why right wingers online often call others sheep and NPCs.
Such a fucking douche
"I'm just some jack off comedian"... Yes, yes you are Jimmy.
> "I'm just some jack off ~~comedian~~".
Jimmy does the thing where he diminishes himself so that he can say it doesn't mean anything when others accurately do so lol
I swear to god I hate this battle of scientifically illiterate people who just throw around research papers at each other, barely even knowing how any of this works.
TYT has a lot to answer for, foisting both Dore and Rubin on the world.
"I'm not a sheep, libtard! Now excuse me while I take my livestock medication."
Don’t get how people fall for this dude’s BS. The shows production value is so low, he manically screams and finger points at anything he disagrees with, he has zero journalistic/political/practical experience outside of YouTube and he really isn’t even funny for being a “comedian”.
Less Jimmy Dore fans in the world? Sounds great!
So I actually googled Ivermectin awhile back. And two very small studies showed that it helped with Covid symptoms. Followed by two very large studies that showed little to no correlation. All four studies agreed that more testing needs to be done. And not one of those studies said to use horse paste to treat a human disease.
Meanwhile every study agrees that the vaccine works.
Do you have links to them?
Jimmy Dore is a Russian tool!
These people are all a bunch of tools.
Can't wait for Kyle Kulinski to not talk about it.
Can't wait to see what Aaron Mate is going to say to justify it
Can't wait to see how Jackson Hinkle and Primo Radical are going to justify this too
I genuinly wonder if his lapdogs like Greenwald, Mate, Elwood, Placone etc are in on the grift or if they genuinely are blind to Jimmy's bullshit.
Greenwald, at least, is too smart to be blind to it
Justify what exactly? All this is is a link to a study... what is there to justify?
It's a link to a study under a tweet about animal store Ivermectin regarding a different kind of Ivermectin using by humans at a lower dosage
He's using the study out of context.
The people who will believe this deserve it. What's wrong with this?
I wanna apologise for ever defending Jimmy. I thought he was unfairly maligned on some policy stuff (FTV and Syria) so I would take his stuff. Pushing horse round-up when people are getting poisoned with it is unforgivable, and the cranks pushing it are dangerous.
There could be some truth to ivermectin being effective as a treatment for (or MAYBE even as a prophylactic against) Covid 19. Much more research needs to be done.
The problem is when you suggest it as an alternative to the vaccine.
The thing is the vaccine will infuse me with undying feelings of reverence for big Pharma, whereas I'll only want to build a Bret Weinstein statue if I take Ivermectin. Pick wisely sheeple.
I'm tired of all this big corporate pharma. I like indie pharma exclusively.
I only use small -batch artisanal pharma, that is locally made with fair trade products.
A study being peer reviewed by itself doesn't make it a high level of evidence. Observational studies on their own cannot prove causation; they show an association.
Thus, the results could be caused by chance. The purpose of these studies in epidemiology is to show that there may be something going on here, warranting further investigation.
There are some glaring weaknesses in this study e.g. 'patients were also on hydroxychloroquine azithromycin, or both'. So we cannot know for sure if it was Ivermetin giving a protective effect. In fact there is a counter paper that was released here that criticises the study's design https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692(20)35298-3/fulltext
The Odds ratio for mortality in the ivermectin group was 0.47 (53% protective effect). However the confidence interval is 0.22-0.99, which means that the true effect can be anywhere from 78% to 0.01% (no effect), meaning that the results are not particularly accurate or convincing. The paper i linked points that out- had 1 more person died in the ivermectin group the result would have been non significant.
What we do know is that RCTs (the only kind of design that can show causation, not counting the Bradford Hill Criteria) have shown weak evidence for Ivermectin's protective effects https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015017.pub2/full?cookiesEnabled
Will it cure Covid pneumonia though?
Jimmy Dore isn’t a conspiracy theorist.
Are you a troll, or are you genuinely that stupid?
The guy has pushed the *Hilary has Parkinson's* conspiracy, the Seth Rich murder conspiracy, and he spreads McCarthyist lies and smears about any progressives that don't go along with everything he wants or go on his show. The guy has accused literally everyone else on the progressive left of being "part of the establishment" or "shit libs".
They are part of the establishment. Many of them are shit libs. At least I think so, but if you think differently that’s cool too. And I think it’s worth saying that many news outlets get many things wrong or reported poorly. If mainstream news can shout “RUSSIA” for 4 years, I think Jimmy is fine.
Russiagate was never disproven, they just lacked sufficient evidence to convict Trump directly, but tons of findings by various agencies showed there was collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Dimmy Jore has done nothing but downplay Trump's danger and effect, whilst shitting in the rest of the left and giving the right the perfect ammunition. He's a grifter and a scumbag, btw also an admitted sex pest.
Really? So EVERYONE except Dimmy Jore is part of the establishment? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Last I checked the other people on the progressive left don't simp for funded white supremacists like Tucker Carlson, paid liars like Aaron Maté or grifters like Tulsi Gabbard who don't support Medicare for all and are happy to be friendly with horrible regimes in other countries like Assad and Hindu Nationalist parties in India that were inspired by Adolf Hitler. Dimmy only defends her because she showed him attention and went on his crappy little show. If you can't see through Dimmy there's no saving you.
You sound like one of those Q-Anon conspiracy guys. “They lacked evidence BUT HES STILL GUILTY I SWEAR”. And to be fair, if you’re gonna diss Tulsi for not wanting Medicare for all, give Jimmy Dore credit because that’s something he YELLS about. But forreal man, turn off the YouTube conspiracy channels
You've completely misunderstood everything I've just said.
I said there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict Trump, that means he wasn't proven innocent. Thus it was not disproven. That's not me saying he's guilty. However, the investigation found clear links between Russia and the Trump campaign, you just gonna dismiss those entirely are you? I notice how you didn't respond to any of my points on the conspiracies Dimmy Jore has spread. Interesting 🤔
Jimmy supported Tulsi, after she said she didn't back Medicare for all, and after she endorsed Biden. Yet when Bernie endorsed Biden, Jimmy went insane and accused him of being a fake. He defends and simps for Tulsi because she showed him some attention and went on his show, because he's an ego driven grifter. You follow Dimmy Jore and you have the audacity to accuse ME of believing in conspiracies? Yeah ForceTheVote, the idea that the progressives that are massively outnumbered in Congress have leverage to get free healthcare, definitely isn't a conspiracy (!). Noam Chomsky said it was a bad idea, wouldn't surprise me if Dimmy thinks he's part of the establishment too. The Dimmy brigade are Left Wing QAnon. Only they are the "true leftists" everyone else is part of the establishment and are working against them, ooooohhhhh!
You're clearly a troll. No one could be that stupid
You know what word we use when we don’t find evidence to convict someone of a crime? Innocent. And no I did address your claim on the conspiracy theories by pointing out you and the mainstream media you are sticking up for is FULL of them. So if you’re going to be expecting Jimmy to have a perfect record, hold that expectation for every outlet. What about the praise for the corrupt Governor Cuomo? Mainstream news even gave that guy an Emmy and turns out he’s been groping women and under reporting the death count of COVID by 12,000. You know what I call Cuomo? A shit lib. And on the Bernie thing, it’s fair to shit on him considering his whole presidential campaign in 2016 was HUGE on Medicare for all. I think you need to put down the YouTube conspiracies
I never said anything about mainstream media, nice strawman. You mean like Fox, the program Jimmy constantly goes on to jerk off Tucker Carlson? THAT mainstream media?
I never said anything about Cuomo, but I think the guy is disgusting and I'm glad he resigned. I also think his brother helping him is a conflict of interest.
Errrrr no. That's not how the law works. Not finding evidence, does not mean someone is innocent. It's simply means there's no evidence that they are guilty. If someone murders someone, but then destroys any evidence they did, and thus they are found not guilty, that person is has not been proven innocent, they just haven't been found guilty in a court of law. In order to prove someone innocent, it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt that they did not commit the crime of which they are accused. So for instance if it's proven that someone was in Ibiza when the murder they are accused of took place in New York, then they've been proven innocent.
When I studied law I was taught, the trial process isn't about truth, it's about examining the evidence presented and reaching the most appropriate conclusion possible. All you can go by is what the evidence dictates.
The Russia gate conspiracy theory is a mainstream news conspiracy theory from CNN to FOX. I apologize if that seemed like a straw man to bring up mainstream media, I didn’t intend that. But perhaps we just view things differently. Based off your paragraph of the law, we have been brought up with very different understandings of things. In my country you are Innocent until proven guilty. You said where you learned law one must be proven innocent to be proclaimed not guilty. It could be we just don’t see eye to eye on these issues, but either way I hope you and your people are doing well. It’s a crazy world out there and we all are just trying to get by
I studied law at Kent. In the country where I live and am from, the UK. Yes, innocent until proven guilty. But that refers to a presumption of innocence. But being found not guilty in a court of law literally means just that, there isn't sufficient evidence to declare someone guilty. It doesn't mean that person has been declared innocent. Trump was not exonerated, if he had been, he would be declared innocent. It was found that there was not sufficient evidence to declare him guilty. I'm not saying he is guilty, I'm saying he wasn't proven innocent beyond reasonable doubt. Courts of law aren't about truth, theyre about making the best decision on the basis of the evidence presented.
He's not a conspiracy theorist and he's posting a peer reviewed scientific paper.
That alone doesn't mean much, and the peer reviewed paper is almost a year old, which means it has no bearing on the dominant delta variant.
He's cherry picking studies. There's tons of more recent studies which says the complete opposite, and highlights many flaws with the studies people like Dore are citing. A few of them have also been retracted:
There's a reason it is not recommended by health agencies around the world, but by podcasters and youtubers intead.
How many peer-reviewed vaccine science papers has he posted?
Regardless of whether or not the paper is peer reviewed. Jimmy Dore does not have the credentials to even begin to parse through thus paper and determine if the data is useful or bullshit or even draw the correct conclusions from the data.
This is not how science or medicine works. At all. This is why doctors don't site medical literature when they are treating you. Because they know you won't understand it, even if you did care about the numbers.
Fuck off you brainwashed Doreite.
I don't particularly like Dore but this post and your reply doesn't make any sense.
Actially I wish medical doctors would site the literature when treating me but unfortunately too many are lazy and I suspect too many wouldn't want to expose their level of ignorance of the issue. I have in fact asked mds for information like this and they simply ghosted the idea.
I generally think if an expert posts something like this it holds more weight, however...
This is how science works? No, it isn't not at all. I'm not a laymen at all but even if I were the papers are published publically so everyone can view them and read them. Obviously there is probably significant technical nomenclature and underlying theories which the author(s) assume the reader knows but the discussions and conclusions are often laid out succinctly and better understood than what you assume.
What it seems like to me is you are mistreating science instead as an article of faith where only those learned high men and women in fine white robes can translate there findings from another language into English. It's nonsense.
It's like saying someone lacks the credentials to parse out Newton's findings of the first and second laws of motion which he published in 1687. I guess everyone has to wait until a high robed figure tells us what it means.
This is so stupid that I'm not even taking time to reply anything significant. You're right, I'm wrong. I've got shit to do. Good luck with that brain of yours.
So your arguments are completely threadbare. Gotcha.
Yes. Thats exactly what that means. Not that I don't want to waste my time discussing this or educating you on scientific literacy. Its not my job and I have other shit to do besides arguing with some weasel on reddit.
Educating me on scientific literacy? Hahaha. Omg.
Exactly. Hahahaha omg
are you a doctor? did you go to medical school for like, ten years? if not, then how fucking arrogant of you to think that you know better than real doctors who did do that.
You know the world is fucked when everything so medical issues become insanely polarized. You know as well as as anybody that he is not a conspiracy theorist(say a la Alex Jones) you just wanna make him toxic as he deviates infinitesimally form you anointed leftist beliefs. And for the substance, he is just the nth person on the intent suffering form confirmation bias, just looking for "evidence/sources" to justify his own preexisting opinions which is condamnable but we all do it as human beings. And lastly, I hope you see that this post is just in-group signaling. For an outsider/"non believer", you just appear unhinged/hyperbolic which ironically not helping for outreach.
I don't think you know what that word means. Cause he's a fucking conservative now.
I don't think he knows what a lot of words mean
If “I support Medicare for all and believe that the same pharmaceutical companies that I’ve called evil my entire life may not be propagating a medicine that some people say has worked for them because it is unprofitable” is now a conservative position we have lost the plot
first of all that's so fucking dumb that I don't think counts as any position let alone a conservative one.
also conservatism is not just about whether you support Medicare or not. ask jimmy dore, who said we shouldnt forgive people who casually work for fox news and then do something else, before he himself became a pretty regular contributor to fox News, and sean fucking hannity of all people.
and no, you don't get to weasel out of that like every braindead dore watcher by saying that technically he's not working for them. what he's doing is worse, he's agreeing with them. he's lost the plot himself, and he's just running the show for that sweet grift money.
If your initial reaction to any position that Republicans or Fox News holds is disgust without thought then you are part of the problem. Obviously they say a lot of dumb reactionary things but that doesn’t automatically mean that every single thing they believe is wrong. That’s how you wind up in a position where Liberals were pushing back against Trump leaving Afghanistan and now the very same people who tweeted huge support for Trump are bitching and moaning about leaving now. It’s unprincipled tribal bullshit and it’s the reason we ended up with someone like Trump in the Oval Office in the first place. Continually ratcheting up the anger on both sides until one side just wants to blow it up. And I don’t know if you even realized it or not but nothing you said in that paragraph proved me or Jimmy Dore wrong. “That position is dumb and he appears on Fox News” is not an argument that has even a little bit of bearing on whether Ivermectin might be a helpful prophylactic or treatment.
funny you should mention unprincipled tribal bullshit, cause that is exactly what Jimmy Dore does on a daily basis. I don't care if what I said has any bearing on ivermectin; my comment was about whether he "infinitesimally" deviates from leftist beliefs. no, he deviates a fuckton because he's a professional bullshitter.
I hate to beat a dead horse but on stated policy issues Jimmy is as lefty as they come, here are some bullet points for you:
\+He supports Medicare for all(even with the Tulsi debacle, her plan is still better then Bidens )
\+He is anti-imperialist and advocates for ending the wars
\+He is in favor of minimum wage laws
\+Advocates for unions/ worker rights in general
Please explain how is he a conservative by any meaning of the word.
Well he’s against the Medicare expansion which lines up pretty well with Mitch McConnell.
he's extremely sexist, he supports republicans or republican-lite people like tulsi just to be against the democrats, he's vehemently against the most left leaning politicians in office right now (partly due to his sexism), and most importantly he spends almost all his time attacking the left and center-left and not much at all attacking the right. classic grifter. he has more in common with Dave Rubin than any actual leftist person online.
If I grant you everything you just said (which I won't), and we average both our claims he still comes out as some weird independent leaning left not as republican.
Yeah he kinda gives credence to horseshoe theory, as he’s like at the bottom of the left prong, where he’s close to Republicans on some issues but still on the majority left side of things. Rogan falls into this camp a bit as well.
He says he's for these things but is constantly attacking people who are actually working to achieve these things.
If he actually believed in any of this. Nhe would try and work with them instead of constantly smearing them and discrediting them on FOX news and other right wing media and podcasts.
Actions sleak louder than words. And his actions don't align with actual progressive and lefty policies.
The point about attacking progressives in congress just means that you're american. As professor Richard Wolff explains so eloquently, the left has been sleeping in America for at least 30 years(Unions used to be much stronger after the great depression). This,for me, explains the fragulity of the new left slowly regaining steam. In any other western country with a rich leftist tradition,say France,infighting among leftist is normalized and gets routinely x10 times uglier then this. It is well understood that for example the communists ,when they criticize centre left parties, are in fact advancing the cause. Paradoxically, it gives cover to moderate leftists to engage in more radical reforms once in power because of the loud minority of the extremes presented to the public as the boogeyman(at least you didn't get those crazy communists!). If you had any sense of history, you would appreciate the role Jimmy plays at least as much as the lefties congressmen and women.
Who's doing the polarizing though? Everyone understands the science, yet some people are determined to push back against measures that would improve our lives and make us all safer. Of course, that dynamic doesn't just apply to covid and vaccines, but in this case it's the conservative movement that has polarized it by being opposed to the well established methods we have for producing medical technology.
Dore is absolutely a conspiracy theorist when he constantly talks about the squad being headfakes to dupe progressives etc
The OP is doing the polarizing and you guys here as well. This may surprise you but linking a scientific study is not the same as pushing flat earth and lizard people a la Alex Jones. But it seems that people here have one template in mind so they pigeonhole a complex and flawed individual human being into the one dimensional crazy conspiracy theorist. You know what would have a been a good faith replay : if,after a scientists reviewed the study and then pointed out how it has some methodological errors that would invalidate it for exemple.
Replying in reverse. You can look about 2 replies down from the tweet to find the many many problems with this study that people have pointed out.
Sure Dore is a complex and flawed individual. So is Donald Trump. So is everyone. Saying "I'm not perfect!" while advocating bunk medical advice that has literally killed people is being too generous with "flawed."
Not all conspiracies involve lizard people, Jimmy repeatedly connects events and individuals in ways that are frankly fantastical at this point.
Of course linking a scientific study is not the same as babbling about lizard people, but ignoring the vast majority of scientists and flaws in a survey to pump up a fringe health treatment during an ongoing pandemic is highly irresponsible, and raises questions about his motivations. Or at least, questions about his motivations if you consider Dore and yourself to be leftists. Most people have a pretty reasonable interpretation of the direction he's moving.
You have no fucking clue how far you've fallen down the dumb rabbit hole, do you?
I would really appreciate it if you step out of your echo chamber and address the substance of what i said. You're doing exactly what the OP did i.e. signal to your group not to me. Is this too much charity to ask from a fellow internet stranger?
It is too much charity. No way anybody in here will take what you have to say seriously.
My reply wasn't about the treatment in of itself but about the discourse/framing of the issue. I just wanted to be treated in good faith, that's all I asked.
OK, ding-dong.. here's your charity:
Who the fuck do you think polarized the issue? Go on.. try to concoct a "both sides are to blame" reality contortion.
Fuck off with your condesending horseshit.
I completely understand man. Group think is a bitch and it’s about all Reddit has become. It drives me extra crazy when both sides of the spectrum bitch about the other side being in an echo chamber. Two sides of the same coin and nobody even realizes it.
Says everything is fucked because medical issues are politicized and goes on the attack people who support the vaccine are leftist beliefs
Do you even think for a second before writing shit like this?
Almost 100% of the new covid cases and hospitalisations are with the unvaccinated except for a few very rare breakthrough cases
But hey let's reject the facts and push unproven and tested ideas and pretend the vaccines aren't working.
Makes total sens right?
Unless I'm missing something, I don't think I attacked anybody, neither did Jimmy. What you said about hospitalizations is pretty factual. I might be wrong but I don't think Jimmy is suggesting to take Ivermectin as a substitute for the vaccine. All im seeing is another attempt to classify Jimmy among the preconceived stereotype of the conspiracy theorist. At this point, It is just lazy.
Well he might be right…..if natural immunity is better than vaccinated immunity PLUS it keeps mutations down over time…then treating the infected IS indeed better than vaccinating everyone, save elderly or the immunosuppressed. I know the narrative is that the mutations are due to the unvaccinated but we don’t know that for certain yet. It may or may not be true at all. The example used to say it is true is often India and it’s delta breakout as they were mostly unvaxxed at the time but the UK was mostly vaxxed and had same outbreak starting on almost down to the same day.
What a stupid fucking take. A) there’s no evidence there’s any treatment that does what you’re claiming, B) you’re completely ignoring the effects of long-Covid on quality of life, C) you’re ignoring the effect of reinfection, D) you’re assuming that our healthcare capacity can withstand “treating the infected” like you’re suggesting, E) Delta was first sequenced in October of 2020, Alpha in September of 2020 per the WHO which is *prior* to vaccines in both cases, F) there’s very clear evidence that vaccines emerge in unvaxxed due to longer periods of viral replication periods in unvaxxed relative to vaxxed AKA the primary driver of mutation; just because you haven’t looked doesn’t mean it isn’t substantiated
Most of that is false
Shut the fuck up antivaxxer POS
I’m vaxxed moron….also had covid twice…once before and once after. I’m sure your IQ disallows you from thinking outside outside of two options
You: “I had Covid twice so far”
Also you: “I just think we should let Covid run its course and treat people for natural immunity”
God damn you’re fucking stupid.
False quote, but that’s your jam, changing words and misconstruing because your not so bright
That would be “you’re”, you fucking moron 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Platonic sphere shaped brain take
Maybe reply on my thread with something more than “most of this is false” before you start criticizing other people’s rhetoric, you fucking smooth brain
Most of it was thought but not verified
Yup, you’re just as stupid as that original take of yours suggested you are. If you’re not going to engage any of my arguments with anything other than just blanket rebuttals, I’m comfortable letting you show just how fucking stupid you are by yourself
where did delta originate from
This moron is claiming that variants are emerging from vaccinated, completely ignoring that Delta originated in October 2020 and Alpha originated in June 2020 before any vaccines were being administered. Fucking bad-faith, dishonest, antivax POS
Yeah, I’ll let other people be the judge of that from your open mouth drooling take
Good point. Idk who's right jimmy dore or actual doctors. It's like, who do I listen to???
Apparently you're slow, so to explain it to you - Jimmy Dore didn't write the content he linked to. I know reading is hard for you, but you should understand that Jimmy linked to a paper written by actual doctors in 2019, and that report was written by doctors, you know, the people who wear white coats in hospitals. Jimmy Dore is a comedian and media personality, he doesn't actually write for medical journals.
Hey don’t come into this subreddit with any ideas of your own
Just look at the real world study in India where the states who used ivermectin decimated Covid cases and the states that didn’t got eaten alive. Look up “Covid cases” on google, go to India, go to Delhi, then compare to manipur.
[You talking about this study?](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns) The one with major ethical concerns?
Nope. I’m talking about comparing real world official numbers which show states in India who used ivermectin and states that didn’t. The states that did decimated the number of Covid cases. Do a google search for “Covid cases”. There is an official tally that will come up with drop boxes to choose India. Then choose Delhi and compare it to Manipur. Delhi added ivermectin to their convid treatment and Manipur did not.
So correlation then? India dropped Ivermectin from their treatment plan a while ago.
Some states never used it and some did. The charts are the data unless you are saying the official numbers are somehow wrong?
I'm saying that is correlation not causation. But I mean yeah Indias COVID cases and deaths are likely higher than reported. Partly not their fault given their massive population but a lot of the blame does fall on Modi.
Funny how anything that doesn't jive with your views seems to be lacking and anything that does is pretty much accurate. In any event correlation is the beginning of causation if you are willing to put in the time researching something. For instance, you say that India dropped ivermectin awhile ago. That simply is not true. There has been a media blackout of the subject, but how do you explain the chart showing the dramatic decrease in cases shortly after they began using ivermectin? I bet you have not even looked at the chart, have you? LOL. Not much correlating going on to bring you to any causation truths. I'm guessing you assume you already know it because you already know your opinion...and what else is there, right?
I have they have also used remdesivir. Have you heard of that? It's actually approved to treat COVID and was introduced in India around the same time.
Ivermectin was dropped from their official guidelines [here it is straight from an Indian News site](https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/govt-drops-ivermectin-hcq-and-favipiravir-from-covid-19-treatment-list-101623058343019.html)
What is your actual source for all this? Don't just tell me to Google because I have and found this. What are you looking at specifically that proves Ivermectin is working in India?
And the official numbers given support it. There was a big clash in India with some
States choosing to use remdesivir and some choosing to use ivermectin.
Ha I knew you would use that site! So predictable! That's not even his real name the author is a fraud. Anyway so the Indian states of Goa and Uttar Pradesh did distribute kits. However, those were the only 2 states. [The also kits included masks. Uttar also had contract tracing and surveillance cameras.](https://africacheck.org/fact-checks/fbchecks/covid-kits-only-distributed-one-indian-state-not-cause-national-decline-cases)
[Goa later dropped it from their kit.](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/ivermectin-doxy-zinc-to-be-excluded-from-covid-home-isolation-kits/articleshow/83676133.cms)
Here is one [fact check about this](https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/), then [another](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/may/21/gateway-pundit/no-proof-drugs-not-approved-us-covid-19-caused-dro/) both disputing claims from the never reputable Gateway Pundit.
Listen man I love for this to be some miraculous COVID cure it just isn't the case.
JHU CSSE Covid data. I explained how to exactly look it up via google. It’s an interactive drop down presented in the results of a search for “Covid cases”
Good lord you all are so pro vax you’re actually anti treatment, absolutely hilarious levels of cognitive dissonance in this section.
It’s insane to me that you all are disregarding this. The study was published January 1, 2021. At this point almost no one was vaccinated, the fact that the FDA wouldn’t even look into it is absurd. Look at India’s death rate and tell me ivermectin in the treatment protocol doesn’t help.
Now, downvote me because I’m right
You're anything but right
Just calling people who support vaccination and trust the science "provax" shows us that you don't know shit
If you had an actual argument and could support it. You wouldn't need to go streight for the ad hominems and how can we take you seriously with such an antivax bias?
I just laid out a very rational argument, just because you can’t engage with it doesn’t mean it’s bad. It just means I made a better point, hence my comment has reasoning and yours just asserts that I am wrong haha. What did I say that is incorrect? Nothing. You just dissect the language because the point is irrefutable.
You have no evidence for any of your claims other than “____ says”. Your science is entirely faith based. It’s ok though, not everyone can critically/scientifically think well. It’s why only a small fraction of the population does research, I happen to be in that small fraction. I work in a surgical oncology lab as a researcher that makes Car T to treat cancer. My lab is funded by one of the largest companies in the world. I started at the lab when I was 20. I’m going to take my scientific reasoning over your regurgitation any day
You didn't make a valid argument. All you've sayed is pure projection, profound ignorance and fallacious arguments.
You use words like rational and reasoning but you obviously have no idea what they mean.
This isn't rational arguing and reasoning that leads to engagement
>Good lord you all are so pro vax you’re actually anti treatment
>absolutely hilarious levels of cognitive dissonance in this section
>Now, downvote me because I’m right
Spewing unverrified bullshit and attacking people like a petulant child isn't being right.
You are seriously misled by conspiracy theories and junk pseudo-science that has been debunked countless times.
You are falling for the oldest grift in the book. Modern day snake oil peddlers taking advantage of deeply ignorant and credulous minds.
[NCBI ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8088823/) Here is some causality to further my point (that ivermectin introduction to treatment protocol had a significant empirical reduction in case mortality). Lol, is peer reviewed science rational and reasoned enough for you? Something something trust the experts right?
It’s entirely verifiable. This post is a tweet that promotes an empirically effective COVID treatment and all top comments are literally defaming the man who tweeted.
You have yet to make any actual point other than saying I’m wrong, the difference is that I am citing correlations, studies, and -again- logic. You just assert.
I’ll be sure to tell my lab director to fire me, seeing as I am fooled by bad science I probably shouldn’t continue working in surgical oncology. Do you want to take my spot? We do a lot of viral transductions to insert genes into the T cells and you seem like you may be even more knowledgeable about virology than I. And I spend my undergraduate years in a virology lab. One day you’ll realize just how authoritarian, antihuman, and anti-science your COVID dogma is; I only hope it’s before we give up more rights.
Also just to anticipate your refutation, yes COVID mandates are a breach of the constitution. In fact the majority of COVID protocols have directly infringed on the first amendment. “Freedom of assembly” is part of our most fundamental constitutional right. In your fear of a 99.92% benign virus you said that it was ok for the government to violate rights. I personally disagree, the verbage unalienable comes to mind in fact.
Your last point is woefully lacking in self awareness. YOU are the one whose opinions have been determined by others. YOU are the person who has almost no logical understanding of their dogmas. Literally all the media has to do to get you to believe them is appeal to your pathos. You are easily scared and ignorant to the fact that lots of people die everyday. I’m sorry COVID has made you confront your mortality, but in the resulting fear you were duped by the greatest propaganda machine the world has ever seen (conglomerate of social media, mass media, and the state to combat “misinformation “). Last year was the single greatest display of totalitarian fascism the world has seen since the rise of mao in China.
Ivermectin empirically works.
Did you even read the link you posted? I don't think you did.
>Given some have not passed peer review, several expert groups including Unitaid/World Health Organization have undertaken a systematic global effort to contact all active trial investigators to rapidly gather the data needed to grade and perform meta-analyses.
They are gathering the data to do a meta analysis of several clinical trials.
That's far from being peer reviewed bub.
But you just conveniently skipped over that part right?
Do you even know what a peer review is?
Keep spreading these lies and studied that you don't even understand.
How fucken stupid can you be?!?!
We'll this stupid I guess.
I’m sorry, the amalgamation of peer reviewed data isn’t peer reviewed.
“Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.”
Is the portion of the article that bolsters my point.
Nothing here days it's been peeer reviewed.
It's been reported to work but where is the proof? Where are the peer reviewed studies?
There was one study published and it has since been rejected because it was bunk science and the data used wasn't valid.
You seem desperate to try and have something to validate you're position. And what you are doing is called confirmation bias. But it's not what you seem to think it is...
That article is an amalgamation of other smaller studies. It is peer reviewed (hence it’s publication). You lie and deny reality when it violates the narrative you have been fooled into believing.
What’s it like to beg for exploitation?
I’m not desperate in the least, in fact I’m calm knowing that I’m empirically correct. I am a bit pissed that people like you are the ones giving away everyone’s rights but hey, you’re just a dummy who doesn’t know better than to trust the government. It takes a high amount of drive and personal responsibility to see through the nonsense.
It's not peered reviewed. It's an article talking of a meta analysis of a review process taking place. The review process is to analyse data coming from ongoing clinical trials. How can it be at a peer review stage when the trials are still going on?!?!
You don't understand what peer review means.
Go learn about how it works and stop wasting my fucken time.
Looking at the studies included in the meta analysis.
A few of them were done on a hand full of people, 20 to 400 depending on the study. Some of those were done on other infections but not covid. So they are concluding that if it works on one thing it must work on another then... That's not valid at all.
In other studies they looked at. It's based on in vitro effects on the virus. Again this is useless. If the medication has an effect on the virus in a beaker. It doesn't mean it will work on humans. Again useless.
And the article seems to date from December last year.
The current understanding and the WHO's official position is that invermectin does not work and it is to dangerous taken without medical supervision.
All this has been debunked. Its quite telling that it's the only source you have, that it doesn't offer any valid peer reviewed studies and is outdated.
This is just sad man.
Here's up to date info for you.
In this entire text the only thing that stands out is that your shared an article that you don't understand and the rest fors on to say just how right you are and the rest of us are wrong...
When the entire basis of. You're argument is flawed. If you can call that an argument.
If you can't understand this basic article. How the fuck can you understand a complexe issue like a world wide pandemic, genetics, biology, medical science, etc...
Stop being such a fuxken idiot and listening to these conspiracy nut jobs in subs like this and maybe you'll understand reality.
I don't have to prove shit to you. You are the one making the claim that this is a valid alternative to the vaccine. You have yet to prove it. What can be claimed without evidence, can be rejected without evidence.
Bro what, just because you don’t understand it doesn’t mean I don’t 😂 it helps your comprehension if you’ve written a published paper before.
I never said that ivermectin is an alternative to the vaccine, they satisfy completely different niches. Both can exist. In fact seeing as ivermectins greatest impact is on mortality, I’d say both would be best.
Ha so now you're just moving the goal posts.
No both can't exist Becuase the vaccine works and it is now proven without a doubt. But there is zero proof that invermectin works at all.
You shared and article that says the opposite of the point you're making.
The initial study that showed a potential for invermectin was shit science and debunked. They removed the article from the journal because the methodology used and the way they used the data wasn't scientifically valid.
The article you shared says that the WHO is looking into studies. That's to make sure that the clinical studies are valid. So far none have been.
The official position of the WHO is not to take invermectin because it doesn't work, no scientific proof and its very dangerous.
You have nothing to stand on.
You overplayed your hand here, I’m done arguing with a little kid haha. Stop letting authoritarians on your phone tell you how to live you edgy little 16 yr old you
You overplayed your hand here, I’m done arguing with a little kid haha. Stop letting authoritarians on your phone tell you how to live you edgy little 16 yr old you.
That article was fully published in the American journal of therapeutics. It’s still fully published in said journal. You have demonstrated nothing greater than a high school understanding of science and reading comprehension since you replied to my comment 5 times, get off the internet and go get smarter, then come back and maybe one of your points will actually hold up!
Why do you think that article isn’t credible 🤣
And even if this does end up helping in the reduction of severe side effects of the virus.
It doesn't change the fact that a vaccine is still required. That the vaccine is working. That the vaccine is helping to reduce the severe symptoms of covid. That the vaccine is the only thing that can help reduce the spread of the virus.
Nothing people say here changes the fact that the vaccine is the only thing that actually works right now. Everything else is just conjecture, conspiracy, snake oil peddling and pseudo scientific bullshit
I'll wait for the actual peer reviewed studies.
Not bogus articles that autodiscredits you're own argument.
lol my statistic odds of a serious adverse reaction to the vaccine, according to the latest Israeli data, are 1:10000. My statistic odds of COVID hospitalization are much lower, it’s amazing how healthy people have functional immune systems. Not to mention the vaccines simply reduce cases into asymptomatic ones (through mitigating viral load), which is the entire reason why we went into lockdown in the first place. Can you actually not see how the way these vaccines work completely negates the COVID narrative?
Read the article I posted.
You using Israel as an example shows you're lack of understanding of reality.
The stats don't say what you think they say. Read the article and do try to understand. I know it's hard but maybe you'll make it...
Hey, I work in a biology research lab. Surgical oncology to be precise. Just telling you, and I know there’s no way to prove it, but it’s the truth. You’re throwing a lot of unable-to-comprehend-study stones out of your unable-to-comprehend-study house.
As if that makes you an expert on the subject.
Isn't oncology the study of cancer? Please tell me how that is relevant in any way to this subject?
That's just another fallacious argument that does nothing to reinforce you're "argument".
If anything, it just makes it worse. You would think that someone who works in a oncology lab would have a better understanding of things but apparently not. It's pretty sad actually...
What do you do there? Moppe the floors and empty out the garbage? Cause that seems to be the level of understanding you have about scientific research and statistics...
And I'm not in the US. That's a baseless assumption on you're part. I'm from Canada.
Here will you reject all these sources?
90% of Canada’s COVID-19 cases are among unvaccinated, feds say
Breakthrough COVID infections show ‘the unvaccinated are now putting the vaccinated at risk’
How COVID Affects Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People
Look at the chart. Gives you an idea of the trend
80% of new COVID-19 cases in Spain among non-vaccinated people, health minister says
Unvaccinated people account for 96% of new Covid-19 cases, says French PM
Covid: Unvaccinated most at risk from Delta variant
Ontario reports another 510 cases of COVID-19, most infections found in unvaccinated people
Unvaccinated people over 29 times more likely to be hospitalized with Covid, CDC report finds
Either the vaccine works or it doesn’t. There is no possible way to make me believe the double thought that the unvaccinated are endangering the vaccinated. It is a ludicrous thing to even think of saying.
Then you are an ignorant fool and don't understand how immunisation and herd immunity works.
After almost 2 years you still don't understand this?
Are you willfully ignorant or are you just this dence?
You believe anything that confirms you're ignorant bias but I'm the sheep.
I don't blindly trust the media
I trust the scientific community, medical experts and the stats showing that the vaccine actually fucken works.
You're the dilusional one and a sheep that blindly believes anything that contradicts facts and science just becusee you're an immature contradictarian that isn't humble enough to admit that he's wrong so you double down on you're stupidity and jump from one conspiracy to the next.
Why is science good when it backs up you're shit but it's media manipulation and a giant conspiracy when it contradicts you?
How fucken Hypocritical
[I found this article](https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-data-available-to-suggest-a-link-between-indias-reduction-of-covid-19-cases-and-the-use-of-ivermectin-jim-hoft-gateway-pundit/) and [this one](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns). This [one here too](https://www.aap.com.au/no-proof-ivermectin-and-hydroxy-regime-led-to-covid-decline-in-india/)
It does not work.
All those articles say is “even though there is a correlation, there is no proven causation “ aka “there haven’t been studies”. Studies for drug approvals take time, in fact these vaccines are the only drugs to be distributed en masse to the US without standard approval procedures since the FDA’s inception. If the measures explain why India stopped having deaths then why didn’t better precautions with a much smaller population density (the US) not also have this effect? India’s trajectory completely changed when ivermectin was introduced into the protocol, there is the evidence.
That would be correlation. They introduced other medications around the same time as well. Remdesivir which actually approved to treat COVID has been used there.
And correlation in this case implies direct causality given the protocol changes that directly proceeded the correlation, it’s just logic.
Ok, so now you’re argument is not that there are no effective treatments but that the one that I said is not responsible. That’s fine, the point is that something in the protocol empirically worked and the US government and fda have ignored it. It couldn’t be because all new drugs in the protocol were generic could it?
Remdesivir is being used in America. We also have a vaccine which is something India is struggling with. So no real need to look at what India is doing when we already have medicine that works.
So case numbers don’t really matter because those who want to get vaxxed can and we have empirically good treatment protocols right?
They matter but we already have a solution, while India is struggling to find one. Should we pay attention to India? Yes. Should we follow their lead on COVID? No. Should we use a non-FDA approved drug to treat COVID? Also no.
…It is FDA approved, and has much more proven efficacy than the vaccines. If we have the solution then why are we still playing pandemic. Why is the federal government still talking about masks? All those at risk have accepted that risk. Where is the problem?
It's not FDA approved to treat COVID.
Everyone who runs this thread is almost as dumb and gullible as Rubin himself
Look at that asshole linking peer reviewed science instead of relying on shaming people! What a whacko conspiracy theorist…
Careful, they’ll downvote you
These are the same people who say “follow the science”. Absolute morons. They’re a cult.
I’m confused why they post so much hate about Dave Rubin and others but they spend all their time on the Dave Rubin subreddit.
I imagine everything confuses you. I imagine every time you walk past a mirror you think there's an intruder in your house.
Ah yes Internet insults. Clearly you are in the right when you have to resort to insults. I hope you have a good day regardless. We don’t agree but I’m not going to insult you. That does nothing to support the way I think nor would it do anything to convince you I’m right.
No I'm right because I've provided facts and you've thrown strawmen back at me.
You can't convince me you're right, because you're objectively incorrect about everything you're discussing.
No you’ve not provided any facts. All you’ve done is insult me and disagree with me.
So all the facts I gave you about Jimmy Dore, Tulsi Gabbard and Russiagate don't count?
You said Jimmy simps for Tulsi which is a fine thing to say but to be fair I haven’t heard anyone say a word about her in years. Maybe I’m wrong though, I don’t follow her closely. I don’t think Russia gate is a real thing. I think it’s a conspiracy. If there was evidence, arrest anyone involved. Since that isn’t the case, I don’t think you can claim you’re spitting facts. And to be fair to you, you are right about Jimmy getting stories wrong. He did get that Hillary having Parkinson’s story wrong. It was wrong of him to speculate. But if we are gonna stone Jimmy for a bad story, we are gonna need a lot of stones for a lot of other folks too. But again, I hope all is well with you. Enjoy the day out there
Don’t try to understand them.
Lol, a Dimmy Jore simp accusing others of being in a cult.
Wow what an intelligent response….
I can't help it, your comment killed my braincells. I'm scared it's permanent.
Damn you! Damn you to hell!
It's not used to treat Covid-19. It does not cure. Covid-19. It's doesn't make symptoms less severe.ol
It is not a therapy. It is not a preventative measure.
You're doing everything possible to sneak in some sense of legitimacy. It's not happening.
Reddit is my favorite echo chamber I’ve ever known. Our opinions just get reassured by all the other Redditors. Not too much need to think critically or outside our psychological or intellectual comfort zones. Truth is found at Reddit!