“But if I wait, every day that goes by is another day when lots and lots of people get very sick, go to ICU, many of them die and that could theoretically even be preventable and that’s why I thought it was so critically important to get this information out there,” Dr. Rajter said.
He credits his wife, Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz-Rajter, with the idea of using Ivermectin for this purpose. She came across Australian research which showed Ivermectin destroys the virus in the lab, in vitro, but it has not been studied for this purpose in people.
“More studies need to be conducted,” Dr. Cepelowicz-Rajter said. “We haven’t had any ill effects from it and it’s readily available, we have some patients who are pretty advanced, not yet intubated, and even those, in 12 hours, they showed a significant improvement.”
John Reed is one of those patients. He’s recovering at Broward Health Medical Center after being treated with the cocktail including Ivermectin.
“I’m blessed with God, I’m blessed surely with my doctor, I’m definitely blessed with my nurses because they are wonderful staff and I’m blessed with that medicine because I didn’t know it was gonna happen,” Reed said via FaceTime from his hospital bed.
“It saved my life, trust me it saved my life.”
Dr. Rajter said Reed fit the criteria he set for trying the new regimen. Reed was in bad shape, rapidly going downhill, but not yet ready to intubate. As Rajter explains it, once they’re intubated, the medication does not have as much impact.
He credits his wife, Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz-Rajter, with the idea of using Ivermectin for this purpose. She came across Australian research which showed Ivermectin destroys the virus in the lab, in vitro, but it has not been studied for this purpose in people.
“More studies need to be conducted,” Dr. Cepelowicz-Rajter said. “We haven’t had any ill effects from it and it’s readily available, we have some patients who are pretty advanced, not yet intubated, and even those, in 12 hours, they showed a significant improvement.”
Um, perhaps because this is a forum and after Oldiesman contributed the first post, people started jumping in with their 'justification' as to WHY THEY got vaxxed and why everyone else should as well...if we all kept our 'opinions' to ourselves, well, it wouldn't be much of a forum...would it ? The door of public discourse swings both ways dude.
FWIW, I have no problem with you refusing to protect your neighbors.
Thanks Allan.......you have every right to your position.
THIS is what an *open discussion forum* should be.......1) discourse about the subject, 2) each bringing their perspective, opinion and position into view, 3) no personal attacks, 4) no politics, 5) facts, statistics and one's discernment of that analysis, 6) new studies, new data, new treatments, 7) etc.
Around the world.....vaccines, mandates and passports are being discussed (and challenged) by nearly everyone, right? This topic affects everyone! We will see the topic headlined for the next decade or two. This is the stuff that fuels civil rights discussions and personal sovereignty. Doctors, nurses, first-responders, police officers, firefighters, employers, employees, schools and universities, parents, children, etc. etc........this discussion is a touchstone for everyone.
Thank you GSC for allowing this discussion in open forum while others places, here and around the world, censor the free-flow of information and personal opinion. Thanks to the moderators.
Yes, he has a right to his position. But he (as are the rest of us) is also NOT immune from criticism. Others have every right to 1) try to figure out what he's ultimately getting at, and 2) freely question (for clarification) and criticize his posts/comments.
Yes, he has a right to his position. But he (as are the rest of us) is also NOT immune from criticism. Others have every right to 1) try to figure out what he's ultimately getting at, and 2) freely question (for clarification) and criticize his posts/comments.
what do you have against making cogent arguments? What got the attention of editorial page editors when I started getting published (op-eds and letters to editors, nearly 30 years ago) was making arguments that were able to get people to look at issues/situations differently than they had previously. You're not succeeding with your endeavors if that's your intent.
what do you have against making cogent arguments? What got the attention of editorial page editors when I started getting published (op-eds and letters to editors, nearly 30 years ago) was making arguments that were able to get people to look at issues/situations differently than they had previously. You're not succeeding with your endeavors if that's your intent.
Good golly, what don't you get ? I'm not trying to 'win' any argument. Just stating my thoughts and opinion and what I base them on. If you're on this forum to win arguments you must be either a/ missing your old job or b/ lacking something major in your life or c/ both !!
Good golly, what don't you get ? I'm not trying to 'win' any argument. Just stating my thoughts and opinion and what I base them on. If you're on this forum to win arguments you must be either a/ missing your old job or b/ lacking something major in your life or c/ both !!
You've been doing it (arguing, albeit, not very successfully) all along. All of us who take a position are stating an argument.
That I try to encourage you to make cogent arguments means that I hope you can form your statements in a way that inspires your readers to see things the way you do. But if you don't make sense, it's increasingly unlikely anyone will get your point, other than that you are, as you said in a comment today, about what pi$$es you off.
You would have to reach into the imaginations of your readers and find something they can relate to. You being angry about something you have no possibility of influencing at all doesn't get the job done.
And if you think simply stating your position would make anyone care what you think... well... thank you for arguing.
InThank You for Arguing,Jay Heinrichsendeavors to show why the lost art of rhetoric—the study of argument and persuasion—can help people understand the world, help them succeed, and generally improve their lives.
In Part One, “Offense,” Heinrichs lays out the basics of arguing. Every argument has three basic steps: first, stimulating the audience’s emotions, second, changing the audience’s opinion, and third, getting the audience to do or choose something.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
186
104
71
132
Popular Days
Nov 13
62
Nov 15
49
Nov 8
44
Nov 12
44
Top Posters In This Topic
Allan 186 posts
Rocky 104 posts
waysider 71 posts
Bolshevik 132 posts
Popular Days
Nov 13 2021
62 posts
Nov 15 2021
49 posts
Nov 8 2021
44 posts
Nov 12 2021
44 posts
Popular Posts
Bolshevik
This mRNA technology sounds like it's going to open the door to many new solutions, so that's fascinating. However, joining a cult like The Way is like a type of addiction. There is no vaccine e
Bolshevik
Nearly 7 out of 10 Americans have at least one dose. Nearly 6 out of 10 are fully vaccinated. Boosters are available for certain groups but not everyone at this time. Children 5 - 11 can be
Twinky
Going for my booster jab tomorrow. Yes, I believe God to keep me safe - and to keep others safe. I believe I have a great natural immune system, to which loads of fresh fruit and veg, exercise,
Posted Images
Allan
Woman says controversial COVID-19 treatment Ivermectin saved her life – FOX13 News Memphis (fox13memphis.com)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Your link says it comes in apple flavored - tempting . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Judge Orders Hospital to Give COVID Patient Ivermectin | MedPage Today
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
I never thought of you as a 'shallow thinker'...perhaps it is true, the covid vax really is for lazy people that prefer to be told what to do :)
Local Doctor Tries New Coronavirus Drug Treatment – NBC 6 South Florida (nbcmiami.com)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Extract from the article- "
“But if I wait, every day that goes by is another day when lots and lots of people get very sick, go to ICU, many of them die and that could theoretically even be preventable and that’s why I thought it was so critically important to get this information out there,” Dr. Rajter said.
He credits his wife, Dr. Juliana Cepelowicz-Rajter, with the idea of using Ivermectin for this purpose. She came across Australian research which showed Ivermectin destroys the virus in the lab, in vitro, but it has not been studied for this purpose in people.
“More studies need to be conducted,” Dr. Cepelowicz-Rajter said. “We haven’t had any ill effects from it and it’s readily available, we have some patients who are pretty advanced, not yet intubated, and even those, in 12 hours, they showed a significant improvement.”
John Reed is one of those patients. He’s recovering at Broward Health Medical Center after being treated with the cocktail including Ivermectin.
“I’m blessed with God, I’m blessed surely with my doctor, I’m definitely blessed with my nurses because they are wonderful staff and I’m blessed with that medicine because I didn’t know it was gonna happen,” Reed said via FaceTime from his hospital bed.
“It saved my life, trust me it saved my life.”
Dr. Rajter said Reed fit the criteria he set for trying the new regimen. Reed was in bad shape, rapidly going downhill, but not yet ready to intubate. As Rajter explains it, once they’re intubated, the medication does not have as much impact.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Thankyou, you just confirmed the efficacy and simplicity of this article :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I don't think we're having an actual discussion . . . . I just think this is humorous.
Do people make their own Ivermectin or does big pharma make it for them?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
FWIW, I have no problem with you refusing to protect your neighbors.
Consider yourself justified.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Yes, he has a right to his position. But he (as are the rest of us) is also NOT immune from criticism. Others have every right to 1) try to figure out what he's ultimately getting at, and 2) freely question (for clarification) and criticize his posts/comments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
What right do you have to tell other posters what to do?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
That's a pretty hypocritical statement, isn't it ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Oh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Ditto
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I wish you'd at least TRY to make cogent arguments when you (allegedly try to) criticize my comments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Yup, the 'cancel culture' is 'cancerous'...that's what really ....es me off the most, not whether anyone gets 'the jab' or not. It's the fcuking 'woke mob' that insist you speak what they speak, think what they think and DO what they do....Ask yourself, are you part of the problem ?
Aaron Rodgers NFL news: Joe Rogan podcast Covid-19 vaccination secret | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
what do you have against making cogent arguments? What got the attention of editorial page editors when I started getting published (op-eds and letters to editors, nearly 30 years ago) was making arguments that were able to get people to look at issues/situations differently than they had previously. You're not succeeding with your endeavors if that's your intent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
sounds like the perfect argument for getting vaxxed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allan
Good golly, what don't you get ? I'm not trying to 'win' any argument. Just stating my thoughts and opinion and what I base them on. If you're on this forum to win arguments you must be either a/ missing your old job or b/ lacking something major in your life or c/ both !!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
You seem to be projecting.
Argument is a form of making a statement.
You've been doing it (arguing, albeit, not very successfully) all along. All of us who take a position are stating an argument.
That I try to encourage you to make cogent arguments means that I hope you can form your statements in a way that inspires your readers to see things the way you do. But if you don't make sense, it's increasingly unlikely anyone will get your point, other than that you are, as you said in a comment today, about what pi$$es you off.
You would have to reach into the imaginations of your readers and find something they can relate to. You being angry about something you have no possibility of influencing at all doesn't get the job done.
And if you think simply stating your position would make anyone care what you think... well... thank you for arguing.
In Thank You for Arguing, Jay Heinrichs endeavors to show why the lost art of rhetoric—the study of argument and persuasion—can help people understand the world, help them succeed, and generally improve their lives.
In Part One, “Offense,” Heinrichs lays out the basics of arguing. Every argument has three basic steps: first, stimulating the audience’s emotions, second, changing the audience’s opinion, and third, getting the audience to do or choose something.
Edited by RockyLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Anyone still talking about the vaccine? Just curious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites