collapse

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: Good Day for Horses and Livestock  (Read 14098 times)


MUDPT

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2022, 01:27:18 PM »
Just came here to post this.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10072
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2022, 01:33:18 PM »
But Joe Rogan ...

jesmu84

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6086
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2022, 01:39:55 PM »

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2066
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2022, 01:58:04 PM »
From the study:

"In this open-label randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with COVID-19 in Malaysia, a 5-day course of oral ivermectin administered during the first week of illness did not reduce the risk of developing severe disease compared with standard of care alone."


Duh..., you need to use it for more than 5 days

pacearrow02

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2022, 02:07:57 PM »
From the study:

"In this open-label randomized clinical trial of high-risk patients with COVID-19 in Malaysia, a 5-day course of oral ivermectin administered during the first week of illness did not reduce the risk of developing severe disease compared with standard of care alone."


Duh..., you need to use it for more than 5 days

Also from the study

Results  Among 490 patients included in the primary analysis (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.7] years; 267 women [54.5%]), 52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80; P = .25). For all prespecified secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 (1.7%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13-1.30; P = .17), intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.4%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27-2.20; P = .79), and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09). The most common adverse event reported was diarrhea (14 [5.8%] in the ivermectin group and 4 [1.6%] in the control group).


So 60% less mechanical ventilation in ivermectin group, 70% reduction in death, and 33% reduction in ICU admission. 

Or am I interpreting that wrong?

MUDPT

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2022, 02:24:21 PM »
Also from the study

Results  Among 490 patients included in the primary analysis (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.7] years; 267 women [54.5%]), 52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80; P = .25). For all prespecified secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 (1.7%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13-1.30; P = .17), intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.4%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27-2.20; P = .79), and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09). The most common adverse event reported was diarrhea (14 [5.8%] in the ivermectin group and 4 [1.6%] in the control group).


So 60% less mechanical ventilation in ivermectin group, 70% reduction in death, and 33% reduction in ICU admission. 

Or am I interpreting that wrong?

TSmith34, Inc.

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5188
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2022, 02:41:17 PM »
But rocket...
Won't deter him in the least. He lives in a post-fact world.
If you think for one second that I am comparing the USA to China you have bumped your hard.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10296
    • Mazos Hamburgers
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2022, 03:03:27 PM »
Also from the study

Results  Among 490 patients included in the primary analysis (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.7] years; 267 women [54.5%]), 52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease (relative risk [RR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80; P = .25). For all prespecified secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 4 (1.7%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.13-1.30; P = .17), intensive care unit admission in 6 (2.4%) vs 8 (3.2%) (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.27-2.20; P = .79), and 28-day in-hospital death in 3 (1.2%) vs 10 (4.0%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.09-1.11; P = .09). The most common adverse event reported was diarrhea (14 [5.8%] in the ivermectin group and 4 [1.6%] in the control group).


So 60% less mechanical ventilation in ivermectin group, 70% reduction in death, and 33% reduction in ICU admission. 

Or am I interpreting that wrong?

You’re wrong again.  Stick to Connect 4 with the elderly
Ramsey head thoroughly up his ass.

pacearrow02

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2022, 03:18:00 PM »


Sure, but the data below is also right there to read for yourself.  What is the definition of significant?  Was the data size too small or does it have to be a certain % or CI to be considered significant?

Sincere questions cause if someone told me there was a study published in JAMA with secondary findings that a medication could lessen your chances of being out on a vent by 70% i sure as hell would find that significant.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2022, 03:23:15 PM by pacearrow02 »

tower912

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 24018
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2022, 03:50:38 PM »
This must be some of the big news we were promised.

Snake.


Oil.
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

rocky_warrior

  • Global Moderator
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9158
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2022, 04:05:47 PM »
Sincere questions cause if someone told me there was a study published in JAMA with secondary findings that a medication could lessen your chances of being out on a vent by 70% i sure as hell would find that significant.

Well, by your logic, it appears by taking ivermectin makes you 20% more likely to progress to severe disease!  If you like that sales pitch, take all your want!

Quote
52 of 241 patients (21.6%) in the ivermectin group and 43 of 249 patients (17.3%) in the control group progressed to severe disease

tower912

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 24018
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2022, 04:07:46 PM »
Well, by your logic, it appears by taking ivermectin makes you 20% more likely to progress to severe disease!  If you like that sales pitch, take all your want!

Please.
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

TSmith34, Inc.

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5188
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2022, 05:05:09 PM »
Sure, but the data below is also right there to read for yourself.  What is the definition of significant?  Was the data size too small or does it have to be a certain % or CI to be considered significant?

Sincere questions cause if someone told me there was a study published in JAMA with secondary findings that a medication could lessen your chances of being out on a vent by 70% i sure as hell would find that significant.

If you think for one second that I am comparing the USA to China you have bumped your hard.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 23156
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2022, 06:04:30 PM »
Great. The Deep State has infiltrated Malaysian studies of the greatest Covid cure known to man (and horses)!

What they're not telling us is that Dominion rigged this study.
“It’s not how white men fight.” - Tucker Carlson

“Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.” - George Washington

pacearrow02

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2022, 07:05:47 PM »
All very serious answers.  You guys are doing great!

ATL MU Warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2816
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2022, 07:49:42 PM »
When I was a kid, I had a horse. His name was El Bandito. He was smarter than Pace and RoQQet combined.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10072
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2022, 08:20:53 PM »
All very serious answers.  You guys are doing great!

Troll big angry people no take troll seriously.

pacearrow02

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2022, 08:40:41 PM »
Troll big angry people no take troll seriously.

Remember when you said I was wrong in saying the FDA delayed their decision regarding the Pfizer vaccine for young kids because it wasnt working?  Shocking, you were spreading misinformation…..again.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/lower-omicron-efficacy-delayed-fda-review-on-pfizer-shot-in-kids-under-5-11645192800

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10072
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2022, 08:49:59 PM »
Remember when you said I was wrong in saying the FDA delayed their decision regarding the Pfizer vaccine for young kids because it wasnt working?  Shocking, you were spreading misinformation…..again.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/lower-omicron-efficacy-delayed-fda-review-on-pfizer-shot-in-kids-under-5-11645192800

You were wrong and remain wrong.
Maybe for once in your life you should read beyond the headline.

MUDPT

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2022, 09:52:22 PM »
Sure, but the data below is also right there to read for yourself.  What is the definition of significant?  Was the data size too small or does it have to be a certain % or CI to be considered significant?

Sincere questions cause if someone told me there was a study published in JAMA with secondary findings that a medication could lessen your chances of being out on a vent by 70% i sure as hell would find that significant.

Easy answer is that it's not 10 vs. 4, it's 14 in 490.  There isn't enough clinical difference in the groups to say it's better or worse.

rocky_warrior

  • Global Moderator
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9158
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2022, 12:59:31 AM »
Easy answer is that it's not 10 vs. 4, it's 14 in 490.  There isn't enough clinical difference in the groups to say it's better or worse.

490 too big for pace. 14 ok.

pacearrow02

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #22 on: February 19, 2022, 09:38:29 AM »
Easy answer is that it's not 10 vs. 4, it's 14 in 490.  There isn't enough clinical difference in the groups to say it's better or worse.

Ok that makes sense, thanks for the adult response.  Do you know what the difference needs to be in these types of studies to be found significant?  Again sincere questions as I have no idea.

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6738
Re: Good Day for Horses and Livestock
« Reply #23 on: February 19, 2022, 01:35:56 PM »
You were wrong and remain wrong.
Maybe for once in your life you should read beyond the headline.

He is the poster child for cognitive bias.