Support NeoGAF

[DragoonKain]

You can help stupid by not giving them stupid ideas they’re too stupid to realize are stupid. Joe can say he’s not an expert all he wants, but if he’s gonna keep on pushing bad ideas that disagree with what the experts are saying then he’s kinda talking out both sides of his mouth

Well he referenced something that he apparently didn’t know was debunked. So how is he supposed to stop doing something he didn’t even know he was doing?

 

[Nobody_Important]

Well he referenced something that he apparently didn’t know was debunked. So how is he supposed to stop doing something he didn’t even know he was doing?

By not trying to backseat this issue in the first place. He said himself he isn't an expert. He needs to just shut up.

 

[Punished Miku]

You can help stupid by not giving them stupid ideas they’re too stupid to realize are stupid. Joe can say he’s not an expert all he wants, but if he’s gonna keep on pushing bad ideas that disagree with what the experts are saying then he’s kinda talking out both sides of his mouth

Rogan literally gets experts on his podcast all the time, and relentlessly researches fitness and health info. He already had his treatment plans prepped and has multiple personal doctors that will prescribe him anything he wants. He 100% believes this is the right method, and not a vaccine. He just doesn't want to say it publicly, which is obviously understandable. Easier to just say "I'm just a comic."

Like I said, it's 100% his right to talk about it but the criticism is earned. I also feel he's clearly masking his true beliefs on the issue.

 

[DragoonKain]

By not trying to backseat this issue in the first place. He said himself he isn't an expert. He needs to just shut up.

He’s a podcaster who talks for a living. He’s not going to shut up. Nor should he. The second he starts censoring himself is the second he changes who he is and what makes him successful.

 

[Rentahamster]

Because the alternative would be for him to just never talk about COVID or anything related to it at all ever again.

That's not the only alternative. My personal preferred alternative is that he get more informed on the issue and facilitate the discussion by having Kory and Weinstein on the podcast again along with two other qualified people who can debunk their claims or provide a different point of view.

It's like that time when he had on Graham Hancock, Russel Carlson, and Michael Shermer on to debate their theories on history.

 

[Rentahamster]

New study on Invermectin impact on sperm counts… significantly drops sperm count on vast majority after one treatment.



lmfao

given this new evidence I have changed my stance and strongly recommend a daily dose for all anti vaxxers.

It would be pretty funny if a renewed increase in study surrounding ivermectin results in the development of the world's first safe and reliable male birth control pill.

 

[Punished Miku]

It would be pretty funny if a renewed increase in study surrounding ivermectin results in the development of the world's first safe and reliable male birth control pill.

It would never truly be reliable though. Far easier to design something that reliably works on 1 egg than on millions of sperm. All it takes is 1 of them to not be inhibited for the birth control to fail.

 

[DragoonKain]

That's not the only alternative. My personal preferred alternative is that he get more informed on the issue and facilitate the discussion by having Kory and Weinstein on the podcast again along with two other qualified people who can debunk their claims or provide a different point of view.

It's like that time when he had on Graham Hancock, Russel Carlson, and Michael Shermer on to debate their theories on history.

But you have to understand he thinks he's getting informed. He's not getting his knowledge from Alex Jones. He's getting this stuff from doctors. Where do you think he got the obsession with vitamin D from? He got it from doctors and health experts who he knows.

You have to realize that there is a sizeable contingent of people out there in the health fields that disagree with the consensus on many COVID-related things. It's all about who you trust. Joe has chosen who he trusts. Now he may have chosen the wrong people to trust, but it's not like he's not listening to anyone and is just making it up as he goes along.

 

[Nobody_Important]

He’s a podcaster who talks for a living. He’s not going to shut up. Nor should he. The second he starts censoring himself is the second he changes who he is and what makes him successful.

Then I have no sympathy for him. If he is going to be willfully irresponsible with his platform in order to get clicks then I don't care if he catches crap for it.

 

[Jaysen]

Except right after pointing out CNN was wrong about what he was taking, he brings up the bullshit conspiracy theory about there needing to be no alternatives for the EUA again, which has been debunked.

Yeah he’s an idiot.

 

[Jaysen]

He can talk about it. I think the people calling him out though are part of that open conversation. He's the one that talked about suing CNN.

Bingo

 

[Rentahamster]

But you have to understand he thinks he's getting informed. He's not getting his knowledge from Alex Jones. He's getting this stuff from doctors. Where do you think he got the obsession with vitamin D from? He got it from doctors and health experts who he knows.

You have to realize that there is a sizeable contingent of people out there in the health fields that disagree with the consensus on many COVID-related things. It's all about who you trust. Joe has chosen who he trusts. Now he may have chosen the wrong people to trust, but it's not like he's not listening to anyone and is just making it up as he goes along.

Yeah I know that he *thinks* he's getting informed, just like we all want to think that we are getting informed. I already do understand that point very well. That's why I bring up the debate format because there's always going to be another side, so facilitating that back and forth, even if you think you're on the right side is usually going to result in positive outcomes.

One of the main reasons that Weinstein fell into this bubble, as far as I can see, is because he insulated himself from differing opinions and isn't bothering to engage with them openly.

 

[DragoonKain]

Then I have no sympathy for him. If he is going to be willfully irresponsible with his platform in order to get clicks then I don't care if he catches crap for it.

I don't think it's about "clicks" per se. He's doing what he enjoys doing. He's always said his podcast is him sitting down and just talking to people organically like if it was just two people hanging out having a conversation.

The second he starts going I can't talk about X, Y, and Z anymore, I need to start doing X, Y, and Z, it becomes scripted. He's eluded to this before the COVID stuff, he's said he will never do a show that doesn't allow him to talk about whatever he wants, it's why he's turned down many deals from people who wanted to buy his podcast and control his content.

I actually kind of respect that he sticks to his method and won't change for anyone. Takes balls, especially in these times.

 

[Rentahamster]

It would never truly be reliable though. Far easier to design something that reliably works on 1 egg than on millions of sperm. All it takes is 1 of them to not be inhibited for the birth control to fail.

Not necessarily. Infertility in men is defined as less than 13.5 million sperm per mL of semen. It won't be 100% successful, but no birth control is.

 

[DragoonKain]

Yeah I know that he *thinks* he's getting informed, just like we all want to think that we are getting informed. I already do understand that point very well. That's why I bring up the debate format because there's always going to be another side, so facilitating that back and forth, even if you think you're on the right side is usually going to result in positive outcomes.

One of the main reasons that Weinstein fell into this bubble, as far as I can see, is because he insulated himself from differing opinions and isn't bothering to engage with them openly.

I'd be cool with a debate podcast episode. It's something I actually have wanted to see happen with a lot of the anti-vaxxers and COVID "it's just a flu" bros. Because the people they are arguing with are dumb and they aren't equipped with the logic ot data to refute their points.

The parties would have to agree to it though obviously.

 

[ManaByte]

 

[Rentahamster]

The parties would have to agree to it though obviously.

Yes, and that's one of the factors I use when I try to determine who's probably more right than wrong - which side is more receptive to an open debate and which side looks more like it's circling the wagons.

 

[Nobody_Important]

I don't think it's about "clicks" per se. He's doing what he enjoys doing. He's always said his podcast is him sitting down and just talking to people organically like if it was just two people hanging out having a conversation.

The second he starts going I can't talk about X, Y, and Z anymore, I need to start doing X, Y, and Z, it becomes scripted. He's eluded to this before the COVID stuff, he's said he will never do a show that doesn't allow him to talk about whatever he wants, it's why he's turned down many deals from people who wanted to buy his podcast and control his content.

I actually kind of respect that he sticks to his method and won't change for anyone. Takes balls, especially in these times.

It makes him look like a selfishly irresponsible idiot. But that kind of thing is pretty popular these days on social media. So I guess it's par for the course.

 

[DragoonKain]

Yes, and that's one of the factors I use when I try to determine who's probably more right than wrong - which side is more receptive to an open debate and which side looks more like it's circling the wagons.

I think Bret would do it. I don't consider Bret a conspiracy theorist, but I think he's gone too far down the anti-woke rabbit hole to see what qualifies as wokeness any longer and what doesn't. Vaccines have nothing to do with wokeness, but Bret is always in defense mode because of what happened to him at Evergreen, that I think his natural inclination is to push back in the other direction of anything the far left mobs of social media are promoting. And in many cases they're promoting trash, but this just happened to intersect with vaccines.

And Bret is extremely stubborn because like most people who are generally bright, they have a high opinion of themselves. Which I think isn't necessarily a bad quality, but I think it can rear its ugly had in certain circumstances. In this case, I have no idea how a bright guy could think the logic of being more afraid of the vaccine than you are concerned about Ivermectin's effectiveness could prevail. Even his brother Eric, who was skeptical of the vaccine took it because it was a simple decision of weighing the odds.

 

[DragoonKain]

It makes him look like a selfishly irresponsible idiot. But that kind of thing is pretty popular these days on social media. So I guess it's par for the course.

I think telling someone what they can and can't talk about on their own show is selfish, and that people should have agency, but that's me. We've disagreed on every aspect of this.

 

[Rentahamster]

I think Bret would do it.

I don't know about that, given his interactions with Fuller, who's been trying to have this debate in public with him.

 

[Nobody_Important]

I think telling someone what they can and can't talk about on their own show is selfish, and that people should have agency, but that's me. We've disagreed on every aspect of this.

I'm not saying anyone should tell him to stop talking about. I'm saying that he should have the good sense and common decency to say it to himself. To know that he is out of his depth and the his ignorance is literally a danger to some of his listeners.


The fact that he doesn't says all I need to know about his priorities.

 

[QSD]

I think Bret would do it. I don't consider Bret a conspiracy theorist, but I think he's gone too far down the anti-woke rabbit hole to see what qualifies as wokeness any longer and what doesn't. Vaccines have nothing to do with wokeness, but Bret is always in defense mode because of what happened to him at Evergreen, that I think his natural inclination is to push back in the other direction of anything the far left mobs of social media are promoting. And in many cases they're promoting trash, but this just happened to intersect with vaccines.

And Bret is extremely stubborn because like most people who are generally bright, they have a high opinion of themselves. Which I think isn't necessarily a bad quality, but I think it can rear its ugly had in certain circumstances. In this case, I have no idea how a bright guy could think the logic of being more afraid of the vaccine than you are concerned about Ivermectin's effectiveness could prevail. Even his brother Eric, who was skeptical of the vaccine took it because it was a simple decision of weighing the odds.

I think Bret was invited a number of times by David Fuller of Rebel Wisdom to discuss his views in a debate or dialectic format, but he's always declined. It's very disappointing and suspect behaviour if you ask me. I also expected Bret to be reasonable, but for some reason he's just hell-bent to keep digging this trench he's in.

 

[Thaedolus]

If I had an audience of millions listening to me and knew they’d be making literal life and death decisions based on my understanding of quantum mechanics I’d probably have the good sense to not opine on quantum mechanics at all. But that’s just me knowing what I do and don’t know

 

[DragoonKain]

I'm not saying anyone should tell him to stop talking about. I'm saying that he should have the good sense and common decency to say it to himself. To know that he is out of his depth and the his ignorance is literally a danger to some of his listeners.


The fact that he doesn't says all I need to know about his priorities.

I don't think he feels that he's a danger. Is there any evidence anyone has ever died or were harmed listening to a Joe Rogan podcast? People like to push this narrative, but it's just projection. And it's not like it's scripted, it just comes up in the middle of a conversation.

And even if there was someone dumb enough out there to take something from his show out of context and get harmed about it, why should he care? You can't live your life that way. People are going to do what they do, you aren't responsible for the actions of dumb people.

There are people out there who see shit on television and movies and try to mimic it and get injured or killed. People who see others doing things on social media like those stupid challenges that come up every year like milk crate and tide pod. Natural selection.

 

[Nobody_Important]

If I had an audience of millions listening to me and knew they’d be making literal life and death decisions based on my understanding of quantum mechanics I’d probably have the good sense to not opine on quantum mechanics at all. But that’s just me knowing what I do and don’t know

Exactly.

 

[poppabk]

I'd be cool with a debate podcast episode. It's something I actually have wanted to see happen with a lot of the anti-vaxxers and COVID "it's just a flu" bros. Because the people they are arguing with are dumb and they aren't equipped with the logic ot data to refute their points.

The parties would have to agree to it though obviously.

Debates like that are generally bad. Without being able to have all the data etc on hand and to reference it, you just end up with a mess. Think presidential debates but with smart people.

 

[FunkMiller]

This is objectively hilarious. Like… you couldn’t write this any better. They spend all their time worrying about vaccine side effects, only to be turned sterile by the thing they take instead.

Amazing.

To be fair it’s only one small study though.

 

[Rentahamster]

Debates like that are generally bad. Without being able to have all the data etc on hand and to reference it, you just end up with a mess. Think presidential debates but with smart people.

The ones Rogan has hosted in the past did have prepared data on hand and real time fact checking.

 

[DragoonKain]

No one's making life and death decisions based off the Joe Rogan show lol. People way overestimate his influence.

If he made a podcast where he implored people to take Ivermectin and not take the vaccine, while I'd still argue he should be allowed to do it, because I'm against censorship, that's not what he did.

The things he's said that he's caught flak for in the last week are literally:

"I caught COVID, doctors gave me monclonal antibodies, NAD and vitamin D drip, Ivermectin, and prednisone. I'm feeling better now, but have to cancel some shows FYI"

and

Tom Segura: "Why do you think everyone gets so crazy about bringing up Ivermectin?"
Joe: "I don't know, some people think it has to do with the fact that to get an emergency use authorization, there can't be an alternative treatment."

If you think this is the type of stuff that's endangering people, you're caught up in an insane conspiracy theory of your own. I mean, my god. No one on the planet earth will have died from anything Joe Rogan said over the past week, and I doubt anyone, ever, has died from anything that was ever said on one of his podcasts.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

"People must see the world as I do. If they don't, they're dangerous." - Society, 2021

 

[Punished Miku]

No one's making life and death decisions based off the Joe Rogan show lol. People way overestimate his influence.

If he made a podcast where he implored people to take Ivermectin and not take the vaccine, while I'd still argue he should be allowed to do it, because I'm against censorship, that's not what he did.

The things he's said that he's caught flak for in the last week are literally:

"I caught COVID, doctors gave me monclonal antibodies, NAD and vitamin D drip, Ivermectin, and prednisone. I'm feeling better now, but have to cancel some shows FYI"

and

Tom Segura: "Why do you think everyone gets so crazy about bringing up Ivermectin?"
Joe: "I don't know, some people think it has to do with the fact that to get an emergency use authorization, there can't be an alternative treatment."

If you think this is the type of stuff that's endangering people, you're caught up in an insane conspiracy theory of your own. I mean, my god. No one on the planet earth will have died from anything Joe Rogan said over the past week, and I doubt anyone, ever, has died from anything that was ever said on one of his podcasts.

I just think you're radically underestimating the influence that popular people have on others. Every politician in the country wants his endorsement. Oprah in her prime tanked beef prices with just a couple comments on her show (and now everyone thinks she's a presidential front-runner if she wants to run). If Rogan makes it known that COVID isn't anything to worry about if "you're healthy," and that vaccines aren't needed - it's obviously going to lead to some nasty outcomes for a non-zero portion of his audience.

Anyway, that's just how it goes.

 

[Rentahamster]

One in 5,000 (Published 2021)

The real chances of a breakthrough infection.

www.nytimes.com

How small are the chances of the average vaccinated American contracting Covid? Probably about one in 5,000 per day, and even lower for people who take precautions or live in a highly vaccinated community.

The estimates here are based on statistics from three places that have reported detailed data on Covid infections by vaccination status: Utah; Virginia; and King County, which includes Seattle, in Washington state. All three are consistent with the idea that about one in 5,000 vaccinated Americans have tested positive for Covid each day in recent weeks.

The chances are surely higher in the places with the worst Covid outbreaks, like the Southeast. And in places with many fewer cases — like the Northeast, as well as the Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco areas — the chances are lower, probably less than 1 in 10,000. That’s what the Seattle data shows, for example. (These numbers don’t include undiagnosed cases, which are often so mild that people do not notice them and do not pass the virus to anyone else.)

Here’s one way to think about a one-in-10,000 daily chance: It would take more than three months for the combined risk to reach just 1 percent.

Another way to understand the situation is to compare each state’s vaccination rate with its recent daily Covid infection rate. The infection rates in the least vaccinated states are about four times as high as in the most vaccinated states:

These numbers help show why the talking point about viral loads was problematic. It was one of those statements that managed to be both true and misleading. Even when the size of the viral loads are similar, the virus behaves differently in the noses and throats of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

In an unvaccinated person, a viral load is akin to an enemy army facing little resistance. In a vaccinated person, the human immune system launches a powerful response and tends to prevail quickly — often before the host body gets sick or infects others. That the viral loads were initially similar in size can end up being irrelevant.

I will confess to one bit of hesitation about walking you through the data on breakthrough infections: It’s not clear how much we should be worrying about them. For the vaccinated, Covid resembles the flu and usually a mild one. Society does not grind to a halt over the flu.

Our level of Covid anxiety is higher, especially in communities that lean to the left politically. And there is no “correct” response to Covid. Different people respond to risk differently.

But at least one part of the American anxiety does seem to have become disconnected from the facts in recent weeks: the effectiveness of the vaccines. In a new ABC News/Washington Post poll, nearly half of adults judged their “risk of getting sick from the coronavirus” as either moderate or high — even though 75 percent of adults have received at least one shot.

In reality, the risks of getting any version of the virus remain small for the vaccinated, and the risks of getting badly sick remain minuscule.

In Seattle on an average recent day, about one out of every one million vaccinated residents have been admitted to a hospital with Covid symptoms. That risk is so close to zero that the human mind can’t easily process it. My best attempt is to say that the Covid risks for most vaccinated people are of the same order of magnitude as risks that people unthinkingly accept every day, like riding in a vehicle.

 

[Airola]

This is objectively hilarious. Like… you couldn’t write this any better. They spend all their time worrying about vaccine side effects, only to be turned sterile by the thing they take instead.

Amazing.

To be fair it’s only one small study though.

I think it might be even more hilarious that people are quick to dismiss any claims of completely new vaccines causing sterilization, but are even quicker to accept one claim of men becoming sterile by a medicine that has been used for humans since 1988 or so.

That's how far politicizing covid has become. You (not necessarily meaning _you_ but a lot of people who are being cheerful with that tweet) literally are cheering for claims you just a while ago were laughing at when it came from people you don't like.

Like it or not, but ivermectin is already being used in drugs that are made to fight covid and there is a chance you will be using it in future too.


To be fair, you did say "to be fair it's only one small study though", but it still doesn't take away the point I'm trying to make here.

 

[DragoonKain]

I just think you're radically underestimating the influence that popular people have on others. Every politician in the country wants his endorsement. Oprah in her prime tanked beef prices with just a couple comments on her show (and now everyone thinks she's a presidential front-runner if she wants to run). If Rogan makes it known that COVID isn't anything to worry about if "you're healthy," and that vaccines aren't needed - it's obviously going to lead to some nasty outcomes for a non-zero portion of his audience.

Anyway, that's just how it goes.

I think they have influence, but I think it's limited in part because most people think for themselves. Just like most people don't see things on TV and think it's ok to do it, the same applies to podcasting.

Regardless, Joe hasn't really pushed anything though that is dangerous. He never told anyone to take Ivermectin or did an episode where he said the vaccine is bad and dangerous. He had the one episode on his show who had Bret and the doctor who advocated for Ivermectin, but it wasn't Joe. And he also had people on who advocated for the vaccine and how serious COVID was and that people should take it seriously. But anyone seeing the Weinstein appearance pod and going out and taking Ivermectin, whicheven suggesting that even happened is baseless, but even if it did, I think putting that on Joe is a major reach. If anything, it would be on the doctor who was advocating for it, being someone who took an oath to promote health and do right by the sick and needy.

If you go down the road of this logic, you can point to many people and/or companies who you could deem responsible for things people do. Like TV networks who show casino or beer ads contributing to addiction or alcoholism. They're responsible for people drinking. Or any network that ever showed a cigarette ad. Or any record label that ever published an album that had violent language in it. I'm just never going down that road.

 

[Loki]

New study on Invermectin impact on sperm counts… significantly drops sperm count on vast majority after one treatment.



lmfao

given this new evidence I have changed my stance and strongly recommend a daily dose for all anti vaxxers.

How is this POSSIBLY true and only coming out NOW abot a drug which has been adminstered to hundreds of millions of people over 40+ years and which is known to have one of the best safety profiles and tolerance of any mass-distributed drug? I'm not saying I don't believe it, but considering all that, and the fact that there are countries where this is given to a good percentage of the population prophylactically, I feel that if it was sterilizing 85% of people it would have been obvious decades ago. Just seems fishy to me.

 

[thefool]

How is this POSSIBLY true and only coming out NOW abot a drug which has been adminstered to hundreds of millions of people over 40+ years and which is known to have one of the best safety profiles and tolerance of any mass-distributed drug? I'm not saying I don't believe it, but considering all that, and the fact that there are countries where this is given to a good percentage of the population prophylactically, I feel that if it was sterilizing 85% of people it would have been obvious decades ago. Just seems fishy to me.

Do you guys even read the stuff that is linked? Is an irrelevant minuscule study, published 10 years ago on some godawful journal.

 

[Loki]

Do you guys even read the stuff that is linked? Is an irrelevant minuscule study, published 10 years ago on some godawful journal.

Admittedly I didn't. Makes sense now.

 

[Thaedolus]

Sorry, but Bro Rogan pushing back on the vaccine evidence when Rhonda Patrick was on while also promoting these bullshit alternatives almost certainly has an effect on whether or not his listeners get vaccinated, and whether or not you have the vaccine is a life or death factor once you’re infected, and infection with some variant is almost a certainty at this point.

Again I don’t dislike him in general but the COVID discussions on his show have been fucking terrible and people will die who might not have if they hadn’t listened to the bro science

 

[Thesuffering79]

How is this POSSIBLY true and only coming out NOW abot a drug which has been adminstered to hundreds of millions of people over 40+ years and which is known to have one of the best safety profiles and tolerance of any mass-distributed drug? I'm not saying I don't believe it, but considering all that, and the fact that there are countries where this is given to a good percentage of the population prophylactically, I feel that if it was sterilizing 85% of people it would have been obvious decades ago. Just seems fishy to me.

For this people are willing to take this one study and accept it as proven science. No placebos or double blind trials either.

 

[BarringGaffner]

I think it might be even more hilarious that people are quick to dismiss any claims of completely new vaccines causing sterilization, but are even quicker to accept one claim of men becoming sterile by a medicine that has been used for humans since 1988 or so.

That's how far politicizing covid has become. You (not necessarily meaning _you_ but a lot of people who are being cheerful with that tweet) literally are cheering for claims you just a while ago were laughing at when it came from people you don't like.

Like it or not, but ivermectin is already being used in drugs that are made to fight covid and there is a chance you will be using it in future too.


To be fair, you did say "to be fair it's only one small study though", but it still doesn't take away the point I'm trying to make here.

Your point is very stupid as the vaccines don’t cause men to be sterile. You can’t equate scientific studies to conspiracy theories.

I think they have influence, but I think it's limited in part because most people think for themselves. Just like most people don't see things on TV and think it's ok to do it, the same applies to podcasting.

Regardless, Joe hasn't really pushed anything though that is dangerous. He never told anyone to take Ivermectin or did an episode where he said the vaccine is bad and dangerous. He had the one episode on his show who had Bret and the doctor who advocated for Ivermectin, but it wasn't Joe. And he also had people on who advocated for the vaccine and how serious COVID was and that people should take it seriously. But anyone seeing the Weinstein appearance pod and going out and taking Ivermectin, whicheven suggesting that even happened is baseless, but even if it did, I think putting that on Joe is a major reach. If anything, it would be on the doctor who was advocating for it, being someone who took an oath to promote health and do right by the sick and needy.

If you go down the road of this logic, you can point to many people and/or companies who you could deem responsible for things people do. Like TV networks who show casino or beer ads contributing to addiction or alcoholism. They're responsible for people drinking. Or any network that ever showed a cigarette ad. Or any record label that ever published an album that had violent language in it. I'm just never going down that road.

This is like saying propaganda is fine because people still have a choice. People can be influenced.

No one is saying they are criminally responsible. Are Trump, gop leaders and media criminally responsible for causing hundreds of thousands additional deaths than were necessary with their handling of covid? No, but there is no doubt that downplaying the virus had that effect and it’s as clear as day in the data we have.

 

[Jaysen]

"People must see the world as I do. If they don't, they're dangerous." - Society, 2021

Perfectly sums up anti vaxxer, and anti masking dipshits.

 

[poppabk]

How is this POSSIBLY true and only coming out NOW abot a drug which has been adminstered to hundreds of millions of people over 40+ years and which is known to have one of the best safety profiles and tolerance of any mass-distributed drug? I'm not saying I don't believe it, but considering all that, and the fact that there are countries where this is given to a good percentage of the population prophylactically, I feel that if it was sterilizing 85% of people it would have been obvious decades ago. Just seems fishy to me.

It negatively effected sperm in 85% of men, motility, count, etc - 'sterilization' was hyperbole. The more worrying thing is it results in an increase in abnormal sperm (two heads, giant heads etc) and genetic abnormalities in sperm especially in conjunction with other drugs. This isn't just this study but also studies in rats and other populations.
The thing is it has been used relatively safely in parasitic infections not continued use of high doses over long periods of time. DTT was a great pesticide until the long term effects of build up in predators that never came into direct contact became apparent.

 

[Thesuffering79]

New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab

More than 900 pages of materials related to U.S.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept.

theintercept.com

 

[DragoonKain]

Your point is very stupid as the vaccines don’t cause men to be sterile. You can’t equate scientific studies to conspiracy theories.


This is like saying propaganda is fine because people still have a choice. People can be influenced.

No one is saying they are criminally responsible. Are Trump, gop leaders and media criminally responsible for causing hundreds of thousands additional deaths than were necessary with their handling of covid? No, but there is no doubt that downplaying the virus had that effect and it’s as clear as day in the data we have.

But Joe hasn't pushed propaganda.

If he's "responsible" at worst he's "responsible" for over-fixating on your weight and vitamin D, which isn't even propaganda. They're important.

If Joe Rogan had a podcast where he came out and said "Guys, I promise you. This vaccine is bad news. Do not take it. Nobody take it. It's dangerous." I'd agree with you. But he didn't. All his "irresponsible actions" are major projections. Like his video the other day. He mentions like 6 drugs he took, one being Ivermectin, and somehow the narrative was "he's pushing that people should be taking Ivermectin." It's so far beyond a reach it's ridiculous. Laughably asinine conclusion to draw. That's when you have an agenda and you're chomping at the bit to produce an "own" and one doesn't even take the time to rationalize if it even is logical or not.

And if Joe at any point starts promoting Ivermectin I'll call him out. I'll defend his right to do it, but I'll call him out. But if the worst he's guilty of is promoting vitamin D, having a doctor on his show who uses Ivermectin, but not even advocating for it himself, after already having pro vaccine doctors on his show on multiple occasions, then people need to find another angle. Because there's a whole lotta nothing where you're looking.

Let me know when he comes on his show and definitively declares a horribly dangerous position universally. Until that happens, I'm just not going to be on board with this side of the debate.

 

[Ichabod]

Except right after pointing out CNN was wrong about what he was taking, he brings up the bullshit conspiracy theory about there needing to be no alternatives for the EUA again, which has been debunked.

Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained

FDA explains the Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines

www.fda.gov

 

[Thaedolus]

Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained

FDA explains the Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines

www.fda.gov

Oh so we only had one EUA for the only vaccine available right? As soon as multiple vaccines became available all the EUAs were revoked because there can only be one under this rule? No alternatives?

Wait no, that didn’t happen because if you understand the rules beyond a cursory glance you’ll know it doesn’t work that way. This is why having actual experience with this stuff matters.

 

[BouncyFrag]

New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab

More than 900 pages of materials related to U.S.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept.

theintercept.com

Follow thread for a good account of this. Fauci is exposed again.

 

[Airola]

Your point is very stupid as the vaccines don’t cause men to be sterile. You can’t equate scientific studies to conspiracy theories.

My point is this:
1) These certain vaccines have been around for a very VERY short time so we don't simply yet know if they could have an effect like that (besides, the conspiracy theory is that women might become infertile, not men). And note that, NO, I'm not supporting that conspiracy theory and I don't believe in that theory.
2) Ivermectin has been used for humans for several decades now. The creators of ivermectin have been given a nobel prize for their work even after that one small study was made. We haven't really heard about any scandals of ivermectin making men sterile even though it has been around for a way longer time than the vaccines have been.

To me it's stupid to be vehemently against claims of a completely new thing causing infertility, while being willing to accept claims of a decades old common drug causing infertility after reading one tweet about one old small study. To me this reeks of wishing this currently (in)famous drug having adverse issues that would be of harm to people who might be rooting for that drug. You love the potential irony of that. Not even the actual irony, but the potential irony.

 

[Rentahamster]

(besides, the conspiracy theory is that women might become infertile, not men)

It was both.