Thanks for another great video and appreciate both your time and your guest. It’s really informative to have a better overview of studies when they seem fairly opaque to the average person.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 I wonder why some people immediately go for conspiracy ideation when something does not suit their desired narrative. The retraction is not strange at all, but shows the great ethical and moral compass of the authors: they knew there were issues, they saw how widely it was misrepresented, and thus considered it the most appropriate course of action to remove it from the literature, to stop its widespread abuse.

@MrImarcus

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr I see the main conspiracy with Ivermectin was the mysterious urgency for mainstream media to derail it at any cost. You mention 'abuse' as a consequence of this article being misread or misinterpreted. That's pretty emotive language?

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@MrImarcus At some point in time the consistent "misreading" and "misinterpretating" of research does no longer allow completely objective language. What Peterson, Kory, and Campbell have been doing for quite some time now makes a mockery of how science should be done...

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

David Szeto: You are the average person. We can see through you. Your campaign won't work. Tell your paymaster that.

Imagine that: the actual author of the study gets less attention criticizing his own study than those with an agenda do to run with it. Then those appropriating his study for their own gain don't want to talk to him. Much respect to both of you. Spread the truth!

@sukhmanicambridge

Жыл бұрын

He's not so much criticising his own study as condemning those who can't fathom why it was retracted. Zero substance!

@charlesmaguire6096

Жыл бұрын

whats the agenda are these people just evil

Since you deleted my last comment and question, I will rephrase it. IVM has been prescribed billions of times and has an excellent safety profile. It is on The WHO list of essential medicines, when prescribed in the proper dosage by a doctor there is literally no risk associated with it. Why are doctors and pharmacists being sanctioned for prescribing it off label when twenty percent of all scripts written in the U.S. are off label? What are the motivations of doctors like Kory ,Tess Lawrie and others who advocate it's usage? If there is zero evidence of it's effectiveness then why is Oxford University keeping it as part of it's Principle Trial? Finally, the reluctant release of the Pfizer documents show that the term "safe and effective" apparently means different things to different people but the documents themselves from Pfizer and the FDA show over 1200 deaths associated with the vaccine in a three month period. Why would anyone discourage alternative solutions?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

I didn't delete your comment or question. I don't have time for that. There is risk from ivermectin being taken at the higher doses and durations recommended by the FLCCC. The PRINCIPLE trial is not running the trial to *ask* if there is evidence for its efficacy.

@randystevens6302

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Could I respectfully ask what source you referenced which stated that .4-.6 mg. per kg. of bodyweight for five days is a high dose? What are the risks associated with this dose? Is your opinion that the reason it has been so heavily sanctioned is because of these risks? As a nurse, I would be very interested.

@bmint

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg no risks from cbd! And the profits, because it grows so easy.. could be a gold mine?

@goodoldtom

2 жыл бұрын

@@randystevens6302 In I-TECH (which, as said, used a relatively high dose, adherent to FLCCC recommendation), there was a significant increase of patients with any AE(s) and number of SAEs (CTCAE grade 3-4) in the ivm group. (p=.0004 and p=.03 respectively on Fisher’s). ~3-fold increase. Although it’s an open-label trial. Avi Bitterman on Twitter also did a mini MA of grade 3-4 SAEs. This seems slightly concerning to me.

@randystevens6302

2 жыл бұрын

@@goodoldtom while I would agree it's certainly possible to to have AE's we are now in the realm of risk/benefit. For those who can not for medical reasons be vaccinated or for those who choose not to be it would seem seem that something of slight concern would not be a sufficient reason for such an over reaction on the part of regulating bodies to essentially outlaw it's use (I don't believe that term is too strong in this context). Any one who has had the misfortune of watching television in the U.S. sits through a torrential flood of Pharma commercials every evening which come with warnings of side effects ranging from jock itch to death and eternal damnation. I don't believe that even the strongest critic of the medication in question here would suggest we're at the extreme. Thank you for the exchange.

Do you mind if I use a few clips from this for a video?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Go ahead. I've seen your work; you meander less than I do 😉 Please provide a link back.

@ordinal2361

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Thank you. :) Sure thing

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 jeez, man, no. It was a medical student research project, and it was flawed for a myriad of reasons, not least because it was comparing previously hospitalized patients prescribed remdesivir with outpatients taking ivermectin. A different question to ask would be "why didn't anyone else do this analysis, since the database was available?" And the answer is because it's not an appropriate and meaningful analysis.

@ordinal2361

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 I wouldn't wonder that because even with how....generous....the methodology was towards Ivermectin, the risk reduction was like 5%. Sounds kinda meh.

I am glad that among the noise around what different studies may or may not mean, there is still room for rational discussion to find out what it all really means and what you can and cannot infer from it. Thanks.

@wagoodwin3

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly! So much simpler than reading any data yourself and formulating your own opinion. If it's not worth it to you to research ANY topic, then there isn't anything you can or cannot infer from it. That you fail to grasp that, and this being the most liked comment, speaks to the quality of this content and its audience.

@rbronsing

2 жыл бұрын

@@wagoodwin3 it is usually informative to ask the first author about the limitations and strengths of a study, and that's what happened here.

@wagoodwin3

2 жыл бұрын

@@rbronsing The "limitations and strengths" were in the abstract and/or implied in its non-peer-reviewed status, which was disclosed by Kory, Campbell, Peterson, and any other party who was presenting data as it has been published. If, after the fact, the data is found to be flawed or stating so is delayed - which is what happened here - then the study should be immediately redacted, and attention drawn to this fact. That way all who may have shared the flawed research that some bozos published, can inform their audiences of the redaction. Normally, that's what happens, and all is once again right with the world. AP are shills, this is a shill channel, the plastic surgery student he's interviewing is one of the ass-hats who published a flawed study, which could have endangered millions. If you can't, or refuse to see that, you're a shill, a fool, or desperately needing the whole horse-paste fantasy to be real. Likely, because you made some decisions you can't go back on, but that you wouldn't have made, had you taken the time to do some research. Some lessons are hard-learned.

@wagoodwin3

2 жыл бұрын

It's astounding that you can rationalize arguing with someone for suggesting you draw your own conclusion. 🤯

@rbronsing

2 жыл бұрын

@@wagoodwin3 so, what makes you think that I did not do that? Just because I thank somebody for having a calm and rational discussion?

WE HAVE HEROS FROM THIS DISASTER OF COVID. RESEARCH, RESEARCH, DON'T BELIEVE IN EVERYTHING THAT SOME PEOPLE WANT TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE. GOD BLESS OUR HEROS P. MARIK, MOBEEN SYED, A. MALHOTRA, P. KORY, JOHN CAMPBELL, AND SOME BRAVE POLITICIANS.

Such a calming presentation. Thank you. I can’t bare to even watch Campbell anymore, he’s so rude and condescending toward anyone who dare criticise him.

@Lily-Bravo

2 жыл бұрын

I stay fully clothed too!! 🤣🤣

@clairelariviere3122

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed. It’s oddly like he’s in an ongoing Monty Python skit.

@jonathanport5002

2 жыл бұрын

So right

@Muddy283

2 жыл бұрын

@@Lily-Bravo 😂

@monkeykh4647

2 жыл бұрын

Couldn't agree more, I used to subscribe to John Campbell but had to stop watching his content as even i realised much of his information over the last 6 months wasn't correct before getting my usual second and third opinions from different doctors. So glad I found Prof Greg's channel.

I need to stop watching these because they honestly make me worry for the future of science. Before the pandemic, I caught a few articles on how social media commentary had undermined public confidence in experts (I can't remember refs; if you care to google words to that effect Im sure you'll find some). Just anecdotally, I dont think this situation has improved during the pandemic, but the content of this video imo may well cause some to question in addition the established process of going from data to wisdom (i.e. competent design of experiments, treatment of data, proposal of theses and peer review - repeat till there is concensus). Greg was very measured and professional, but his guest could not seem to decide whether his own study was garbage or not (around the 12 minute mark). When asked at 10'07" if the abstract was peer reviewed his initial answer was 'no', then two reviewers, then basically: I dont know I only submitted it. At 7'13" he says 'you would never draw conclusions from retrospective cohort studies' while the word 'Conclusion:' is displayed in bold on the right hand side of the screen. At 7'53" he accuses Prof Peterson of being 'irresponsible' for using inflammatory language in a tweet on the abstract; that he was irresponsible for putting poor quality information into the public domain in the first place is completely lost on him. I could go on and on and on and on... The outcome is that a supposed expert comes across as a moron, and when at 9'31' he drags politics into it by talking about the money Dr Campell may make from his KZread channel of 2.2m subscribers and Campbell pushing a narrative, his credibility is in tatters. For those of you in the science game reading this missive, you will see the nuances in the video's conversation of course, and you may even cut the young medic some slack, but just for a minute, imagine you were an average member of the public confronted with this: "Conclusion: Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in patients with covid-19 compared to remdesivir". Might I suggest most people reading that statement might think it means that Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in patients with covid-19 compared to remdesivir? With all the talk of misinterpretation in the video (used interchangeably with misinformation - either deliberately or lazily, you decide), would another commentator here care to suggest how "Conclusion: Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in patients with covid-19 compared to remdesivir" could be interpreted differently? So where does this leave us? Not only is it still not clear if there is an inexpensive and readily available drug that could have helped people who got sick from covid (surely that's what we need to know?), but we are now having bad presentation of bad science (or is it - its own author didnt seem to know?) discussed in a forum where people cannot seem to keep politics out of it. (For the record, Campbell is just as bad for this but his exaggerated sarcasm usually makes it obvious when hes dragging politics into it).

@DJdeepsoulelectric

2 жыл бұрын

I completely saw this the same way as you have explained this. Also they should of worded the conclusion differently then as it is stated quite clearly what the outcome of the study was. What do they expect people to believe based on that statement "Ivermectin use was associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 compared to remdesivir. To our knowledge, this is the largest association study of patients with COVID-19, mortality and ivermectin. "

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

" I could go on and on and on and on..." Why do you even comment when it is clear you've got no idea what you are babbling on about. And no idea how science works. Good grief! Do you understand the difference between an observational (retrospective cohort) study and a Random Controlled Clinical Trial? Do you even understand the difference between a research paper and a conference abstract? Do you understand why the authors did not proceed with publishing the paper of which this was a conference abstract? Did you even catch the significance of the fact that this study was performed in July last year and that its relevance had been superseded by better and more informative clinical trials? " his credibility is in tatters. " Hey, take a look in the mirror, fella. Here we have a 4th year medical student with an actual integrity coming out publicly to put his own conference abstract into perspective. That took courage and humility. Honestly why did you even bother to comment.Before you decide to babble on again in the future pleas make sure you at least understand the process of science, because it is clear you haven't got a clue. You say John Campbell is "bad", but here you are making the same mistake that he has. Speaking way out of your depth.

@laurencehogg6010

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamverhoef4349 Oh dear - the first resort of those that have no argument: insults. I would be interested to know however what I said in my comment that shows I dont understand how 'science works' or 'the process of science'? Anyhow, while I'm here - one last point on the content which I was going to put in my original comment. The point was made a few times about how 'old' this work is and you've commented on it here. Watch the video again and look at the abstract's publication date. Oh alright then - another point. My favourite part of the whole video was when the author reassured us that he didn't falsify any results, thereby restoring our confidence in experts and the process by which scientific information gets into the public domain via specialised journals. Thank goodness for that.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@laurencehogg6010 "Oh dear - the first resort of those that have no argument: insults." Oh dear - you thought THAT was an insult ;) "Watch the video again and look at the abstract's publication date." Look further. The study was done in July 2021 and delivered as a conference abstract in October 2021. "My favourite part of the whole video was when the author reassured us that he didn't falsify any results" All THAT tells me is that my initial assessment of you - which you read as an insult - was correct.

@laurencehogg6010

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamverhoef4349 Oh dear - the second resort of those that have no argument: insults.

It all circles back to money.... The things people will say and do to get money or power is disgusting.

@chadlee4281

Жыл бұрын

Unless ure sam haŕris

@charlesmaguire6096

Жыл бұрын

It had been approved only for treating rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and menstrual pain. As part of the settlement, Pfizer PFE will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the USA for any matter, according to the Justice Department.

Well done on an excellent video and the direct contact with the primary author of the abstract. Full credit to him, he is a credit to his medical school. I believe he has a good career ahead. Personal note, I was heavily involved in training of young doctors for many years.

@frogfrog56

2 жыл бұрын

Laughable. Oozing with fake sincerity

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

The Problem with Ivermectin is there is no money.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@drijackson

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 Good grief you keep coming back don't you. If you can't accept the truth when it is shown to you then you are way too far down the rabbit hole to be helped. These are not actors and there is no grifting here. Sadly the same cannot be said of others who are pushing Ivermectin. Oh and yes I am a qualified doctor and you can check my GMC registration is up to date. Have a nice day!

Ivermectin is like Prof Greg's personal Groundhog Day. He sounded so weary to be addressing this again. I feel bad for being jazzed he was going to demystify the latest; I didn't intend to attract controversy; I'm posting from genuine appreciation & bc Creators always say comments help boost visibility a lot & this work deserves a broader audience. I'll be more innocuous tho from now on! Apologies! & thank you!

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

I've been hoping Prof Greg would address the latest Campbell Ivermectin vid. Which I should not have even seen the thumbnail for, since I've now requested YT not show me his channel 3x already.

@minRef

2 жыл бұрын

I still watch TWiV (against my better judgement) so I’ll occasionally get the youtube ads that say “Vincent Raccaniello viewers also watch John🤢Campbell”. Or “…Vinay 🤢Prasad” or “….Dr 🤮Been” etc etc.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@minRef I like TWiV!

@MarcosElMalo2

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Lol, I have to be in the right mood and listen to it in the background.

@fransimms3803

2 жыл бұрын

Anyone who dislikes Campbells videos and misinformation should not watch, subscribe or comment to his videos, it only encourages him and encourages the YT algorithms to further spread his conspiratorial BS.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@fransimms3803 I think you have a point, but i personally feel an obligation at this point to check because I have an opportunity to help a small fraction of his viewers become less misguided. I hope.

Impressive young man, I'm sure he is now due a very successful career. Greg in your closing summary you infer the integrity of an abstract can be converted from fairly reliable into misinformation by the number of times its shared. Would you care to clarify with a more specific figure? I'm curious about the nature of the conversion from one to the other and if we might observe it?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

In the superb book "The Misinformation Age", the authors (philosophers of science who use mathematical models of how beliefs spread) describe the mechanism of selective sharing in spreading incorrect beliefs. Imagine a large number of weak studies with (as weak studies will have) conflicting results, with two possible interpretations, A and B. Even if the consensus of better studies favours belief A, a single study (even a weak or flawed one) can have strong influence towards belief B if it is widely shared and interpreted as favouring that belief.

@MrImarcus

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg a good point indeed Greg but I'm not sure how we've moved seamlessly from conclusions and interpretation to Belief, furthermore attribute 1 or 2 dichotomous beliefs to a potential group of 2.5 million, let alone 'know' their mindset or predisposition to be right or wrong in the eyes of an observer?

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 It wasn't retracted it was never published. Please see my reply to your other comment

I love all your vids you’ve uploaded!!! Thanks!

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 - Bot

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

Was the abstract and underlying data and prospective paper and analysis underlying all these at the time … misrepresented? … or incorrect/flawed in and of itself?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Probably both. As Iakov noted, there were a lot of unaccountable confounders, and such massive differences between the patient groups that the comparison may not have much meaning. So in that sense, I think the ultimate disposition not to publish is an outcome of the inherent flaws, but the decision to misrepresent it stands on its own.

@thekoalawasbrown

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg "probably" is not a term anyone based is science should ever use way to discredit yourself

Conclusion. Never trust one source alone.

Nobody was saying: "This study proves Ivermectin works." All Dr. Campbell was saying is according to this study Ivermectin seems to associated with better health outcomes. Nobody is saying this study proves the exact mechanics of why or how it works or that this study alone should change policy. They are saying this study suggests we should undertake a "real" study to take a closer look at Ivermectin to figure out why this association exists, or doesn't. Dr. Campbell's complaint is that nobody is going to undertake that closer look and do a real study because there is no money to be made promoting Ivermectin as a treatment.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Yet his complaint is unfounded

@JTHeidrick

2 жыл бұрын

You must not work in clinical medicine if you cannot appreciate the bias created throughout the pandemic by those who stand financially. Shockingly ignorant.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@JTHeidrick Pro-ivermectin groups are recruiting doctors to their networks with promises of tens of thousands of dollars a month in consulation/prescription fees (cash, not via insurance) for remote, asynchronous consultations.

@annasusanti7621

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg , How much does it cost to treat a patient with Ivermectin? How much does ONE Pfizer jab cost? Which would make you a lot more money? C'mon do you think people are idiots??

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@annasusanti7621 Treating a patient with an ineffective drug, which is what is happening when treating Covid patients with Ivermectin, has a cost that can't be measured in dollars and cents. Have a nice day.

If it's retrospective, why does it say prospective on the title of the study?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

I think you are referring to the Brazil study, not the Miami study. The Brazil study is really really terrible, and you are correct they should not have referred to it as prospective.

@acworthian7340

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg What makes it terrible?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@acworthian7340 I'm working on another video specifically about it

You've earned this John Campbell fan's sub. I've been more and more disappointed with the quality of his sources and language about ivermectin and vaccine safety recently.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@alexdevcamp

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 cope

@richardp6461

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 try to cope. You won't be able to, and it will be humorous. Thanks in advance.

I attempted to explain the difference between a withdrawal and a retraction on John Campbell’s video. I did not know the exact background of your withdrawal but it appears I was quite accurate - initial data with confounders. I also explained that abstracts are not reviewed in the same way as papers. No response. He has ‘removed’ the video though

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

I go into more specifics about conference abstracts using this example in kzread.info/dash/bejne/lJ2qmLBrZcafitI.html

@MarkJones-si2bb

2 жыл бұрын

A 70% reduction in mortality and infection are still substantial, and he kept harping here about "Its a retrospective study". I didn't find this very enlightening.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@EsseL He removed his video titled "Ivermectin, more evidence", because of the conference abstract. He then reposted the remaining half as "Ivermectin in Africa and Brazil"

@kevin15776

2 жыл бұрын

So he didn't remove it. Disinformation.

Here is yet another instance where the paper, this one an abstract--a retrospective analysis, gets attention at the end of the pandemic. The real tragedy is that nobody conducted ivermectin (a proven safe drug) studies vs. any other expensive (and questionably safe) EUA drug. We've had 2 years to study repurposed drugs, and this discussion is still ongoing (nearly 1 million lives later). The lack of studies looking at available treatments is perhaps the biggest dropped ball of the world's medical systems throughout this entire pandemic.

@wagoodwin3

2 жыл бұрын

Total accident. Damn shame. At least we were able to pay for all the new biotech and research that pharma has already made billions off of. Now, if we could only find that kind of windfall for things like the national debt.

@toeachitsown2050

2 жыл бұрын

In a perfect world, we would have. However, it was a fast moving state of emergency and VACCINE is the #1 solution, therefore recieved the most resources. I am curious if you personally were on the frontlines of this Pandemic, but coming from those of us who were the literal boots on the ground, there was no time to think.

@theoremus

2 жыл бұрын

@@toeachitsown2050 Hold on with the phrase, "no time to think". If you want to see a thinking doctor in regards to treating Covid, look at Dr Shankara Chetty.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

"The lack of studies looking at available treatments is perhaps the biggest dropped ball of the world's medical systems throughout this entire pandemic." A whole sh!tload of studies has been done. Literally hundreds of drugs have been investigated. This is also where the problem is: we could not just take three and test those, as we had no idea where to start. We have well over half a century of research into drugs against viruses, and so far the results have been very underwhelming: only some chronic viral infections can be treated with simple drug treatments (primarily HIV and HCV).

When the video from John Campbell pinged up on my screen (I haven't subscribed to him by the way) and I started to read it, I remembered your video on Abstracts and recognised the article for what it is. So, thank you so much for this education. Even better, when the notification of this video came up. To have the actual author showing concern just has to make an impact. I know a couple of people who admit to hanging on John Campbell's every word, and I am trying to gently steer them away. It's very difficult though. It's as though they have joined a cult.

@clairelariviere3122

2 жыл бұрын

Well said! I as well have people in my circle who believe every word Campbell says and they mirror his disdain for people who disagree, contempt for fact checkers and distrust of « mainstream » media. Lol My response to the last one is « Do you mean the media with actual editors, trained journalists, reputations to uphold and potential liability issues if they get it wrong? ». Not much they can say to that. What’s sad is they are kind, smart gentle people.

@pat2562

2 жыл бұрын

@@clairelariviere3122 I agree with your main point but the media are absolutely not to be trusted and routinely misrepresent medical studies.

@clairelariviere3122

2 жыл бұрын

@@pat2562 myself I’m quite sélective about the media I consume. Public radio broadcasting and long standing newspapers mostly. I agree that many media, especially Fox, are entertainment and like reality tv shows.

@lynch4815

2 жыл бұрын

@@pat2562 I think the point is the John Campbell has become media and has a financial stake in covering certain topics in a certain way. It’s sad to see, but he clearly got taken in by the fame and money and is just as untrustworthy and biased as other news sources.

@pat2562

2 жыл бұрын

@@lynch4815 I'm aware but I couldn't help but laugh at "...trained journalists.." as though that means something in a world where lies go on the first page and retractions on the 10th. They're all garbage and that's why people turn to the John Campbells' of the world. The Atlantic is a joke when it comes to some of their medical articles, but most are bad.

Thank you for an informative analysis. Chris Butler, co-lead PRINCIPLE Trial some 9 months ago: "By including ivermectin in a large-scale trial like PRINCIPLE, we hope to generate robust evidence to determine how effective the treatment is against COVID-19, and whether there are benefits or harms associated with its use". Unfortunately there seems to be a lack of robust evidence from Chris Butler and PRINCIPLE thus far on the benefits or harms associated with ivermectin's use.

Concerning both ways but good to know

Even with the limitations of the study, does it still not point to the fact that Ivermectin has a positive effect in treating covid?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Nope. it really doesn't. It was comparing two treatments: one (ivermectin) people take at home, and one (remdeisivir) for hospitalised patients. Which do you think will fare better?

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

"Even with the limitations of the study, does it still not point to the fact that Ivermectin has a positive effect in treating covid?" No. That is why the study was only ever published as a conference abstract and never as a research paper. There were too many limitations and confounders to make this study in any way a reliable source of information about ivermectin. In addition it was written way back in September last year and has been well and truly superseded by more reliable studies. I mean you have it straight from the mouths of two of the authors! What more do you want?

@scottocallaghan4377

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Yes, I understand this as a false comparible in the Florida study and I understand the focus on this. But what about the large Brazil study John Campbell puts forward? And what about the accumulation of studies from around the world that show a 60 to 80% positive effect? Is the data wrong on ivmmetadotcom?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottocallaghan4377 Hi Scott, I'm glad you asked. The Brazil study is terrible and misleading. I'm making a video about it, but it's really a remarkable piece of terrible science. It's misleading in somewhat complicated ways, so that video of mine is going to be a bit of a slow burn. The Brazil study is also full of unacknowledged conflicts, since most of the authors have a direct financial interest in ivermectin being used for Covid-19, though they deny any conflict. But I digress; I'll have a video about it. And yes, the ivmmetadotcom site is also misleading (intentionally). It's an anonymous site clearly run by FLCCC affiliates. I mention how bad it is in my video today. Consider this: they have already *included* the Efimenko abstract in their meta-analysis as favouring ivermectin, and have chosen to *exclude* a separate, peer-reviewed study from Peru that came out against ivermectin. That site is the worst. No meta-analysis expert I know takes it seriously. The gold standard meta-analysis (Cochrane) has not found evidence of a benefit from Ivermectin for Covid-19. Cheers.

@scottocallaghan4377

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg I look forward to your videos. It will interesting to hear about the conflicts of interests. I thought Ivermectin was off patent. Can you point me to the Cochrane meta analysis please?

What a refreshing interview. It really does restore your hope in humanity. This level of modesty and integrity is what is missing in so many of these influencers who, like he said, are pushing a certain narrative for their own personal gain. I really admire this young man.

@WBKimmons

2 жыл бұрын

Influencers like Dr. Fauci?

@terjeoseberg990

2 жыл бұрын

@@WBKimmons, Like Dr. John Campbell and several others.

@frogfrog56

2 жыл бұрын

Laughable. Oozing with fake sincerity

@kandredfpv

2 жыл бұрын

@@frogfrog56 you sound like the typical troll. You can't attack the message so you attack the messenger. 😂

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

Thanks! 🙂

Thank you so much for the invaluable work you're providing to the public sphere (and doing so with grace and professionalism. There was no snarkiness, which was refreshing (from a layperson such as myself). I'm afraid that we as the public need our scientific community to rid itself of it (the snark) in social media, because it's hurting the overall perception (and I know that's not fair, given the way fraudsters have been interacting with scientists on social media). Again, bravo.

It's a lost cause. I forwarded this to someone who's a big John Campbell fan, they said they rate John's opinion of the paper higher than that of the guy who actually wrote the paper...

@dellhell8842

2 жыл бұрын

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” Mark Twain

@nonflyingdutchman9573

2 жыл бұрын

@@dellhell8842 also "it's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person" Bill Murray

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

Pernicious sharing is not the exclusive domain of industry or government or the right or the left (well, politics shouldn't really be part of science at all). Opportunities to make a name for oneself, or opportunities to make millions or billions or dollars could also steer "scientists" and the media towards the practice, unfortunately.

@Shelmerdine745

2 жыл бұрын

They are dealing in death.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@Shelmerdine745

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 It;s called science, look it up, idiot.

~ At this point in time, there is no room for rumors.

A pharma in Japan is doing a clinical trial. Will wait and will hold judgement.

@richvid9814

2 жыл бұрын

Nope apnews.com/article/fact-checking-439365261885

@donovannamibia7883

Жыл бұрын

@@richvid9814 Yup

Thank you for this. Information is a great thing, only if its TRUE. I keep reporting those misinformation video's but nothing gets taken down. I put a link to this video on John Campbells personal FB wall.

@lystic9392

2 жыл бұрын

I think it's good they don't take them down. Discussions are always better than silencing people. It would just make it worse. Can you imagine? Anyone who likes Campbell would think: Why would they take things down instead of coming with facts? This is outrageous, they must be wrong to do something so underhanded. Such methods will always be counterproductive, and open to abuse. I think it's better to correct the mistakes and bad information, and then let public discourse sort things out.

@pat2562

2 жыл бұрын

@@lystic9392 I agree, but it is very odd considering how many have been demonitized.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@lystic9392 The problem is that it is not an even playing field. Trash like John Campbell's videos have hundreds of thousands of views and tens of thousands of comments and generate over 2 million subscribers giving him a enormous cash stream that enables him to churn out that trash every day of the week while ensuring that he will never admit he was wrong. On the other side we have the informed, nuanced, and sience-based discussion by people like Dr Greg Tucker-Kellogg, Dr. Susan Oliver, Dr. Yan Yu, and Dan Wilson and others who are lucky if they can generate a thousand views and a few hundred comments. With social media the trash, loaded with manufacture controversy, spreads around the world within daya and it can take weeks, months, and sometimes even years to clean up the mess. That is why we need "Quality Control", and I for one am glad that some of that quality control is slowly emerging, even if fairly ineffectually at present.

@lystic9392

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamverhoef4349 I know it's never even but I do have two arguments: It still would make it worse. Whether it's even or not. Even if it's a thousand times easier to spread misinformation, removing it without arguing will only strengthen the misinformation. And I think it's more important it's uneven in terms of factuality. The truth is much more powerful. If Campbell got something wrong you don't need as many people who get it right. They will be better equipped to head into the public square.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@lystic9392 "removing it without arguing" I was only advocating for removing it. " The truth is much more powerful." Then why are only 65% of Americans vaccinated after 12 months of oversupply of freely available vaccines.

I’m glad you posted this video and that Iakov agreed to do the interview. My science background is weak to say the least but I have let’s say an educated imagination and know as a general rule historical data is not the same as experimental data but for much of the public you talk around the issues with using a retrospective student paper submitted to a conference to pump up a treatment regimen but don’t get to the actual limitations or what factors you think could confound the most until the end. It’s likely the majority of people in that data set taking remdesivir were severe cases isn’t it? Since if I remember it was prescribed in that sort of emergency “sign a waiver”, throw the kitchen sink at them, way. The people your dealing with are effective communicators speaking to people hungry for the content they provide. They are either straight up malicious actors or so motivated at this point as to be indistinguishable from a malicious actor. What it takes is your A game. You need to explain why you don’t use a single student paper on historical data sets (no matter how large )and be specific about limitations to this study. Next people will say “but this is why you do more research”. You need to explain that the follow up research has been done that this is like using a screwdriver when you already have a drill driver (or some better metaphor), explain what the findings are of the follow up data and briefly why it means ivermectin is not a therapeutic medication. A shrewd actor would jump on your lack of specificity and attack you for your vagueness “oh it sounds like someone got to them, their denying the results in the vaguest terms”. You need to make your content impeccable if your going to approach the misinformation/disinformation space. The people your dealing with are like information serial killers you need to approach their crimes like a criminal investigation that will need to hold up in a court with 12 idiots.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 "Is there money in it?" I'm sorry, I think you made a wrong turn. This is not John Campbell's KZread channel.

@patricesilva8004

2 жыл бұрын

Wow I don't trust

@enjoythestruggle

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 You think they're getting paid *and* that they're bots? So which one is it?

@henrybentsen6204

Жыл бұрын

We know your science is non-existent. You watch the antivaxxers.

but what about the brasil study for example, was it a coincidence?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

The Brazil study was pretty terrible, and I'm working on a video about it.

@cobobonzobobby

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg lol of course its "terrible" as long as its against your bias eh?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@cobobonzobobby No, it's pretty terrible on its own right. There's a reason they published it in a journal that doesn't do serious peer review.

G’day Greg. I’ve tried to find where Trump supported IVM as your colleague stated. Googled it. No luck. Am I looking in the wrong place?

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

I think he was mistaken. Trump himself does not seem to have openly supported IVM - but many of his closest allies in the Republican party have, so I guess that's where the error came from.

@jeffcoyle3177

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr a pity. We want scientific people to be thus. Not political. I wonder now about his overal truthfulness.

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@jeffcoyle3177 Sorry, but it is a minor thing. It's easy to get this wrong, with how much this has been linked to Trump by close allies of Trump.

@jeffcoyle3177

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr A minor thing? Makes me wonder about his credibility on a very important issue re COVID-19.

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@jeffcoyle3177 Yes, a minor thing. Look, I know you are looking for things - anything - to dismiss what he is saying, so you can keep believing ivermectin is a useful drug to combat COVID19. After all, I just checked the transcript, and Iakov does NOT state Trump supported ivm. He said "decided to ask the question that was kind of circulating at the time regarding ivermectin because it was like everywhere you know I think president trump was talking about it you know like you heard it on joe rogan experience you heard it kind of like everywhere". He even says *I think*, clearly expressing some level of uncertainty.

From the horses mouth....Thank you for your humility in talking about your paper.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 - wrong- kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y5Z6ydd8lK3MfKQ.html

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

The Problem with Ivermectin is there is no money.

@BasedMexx

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 The research was from 8 months ago, two variants ago, and was never a peer reviewed study. Why the hell would you latch onto it so much? It's because it fits YOUR narrative and you so desperately want to it to be right. To the point that you're saying the literal people that made the study are lying. When the simpler answer is that Peterson and others promoting it simply left out key details and that it was never a bombshell

@zdenkobiuk3517

2 жыл бұрын

It was from human mouth first as you probably know. Ivermectin was introduced in human medicine first, then to horses mouth.

Dr. Campbell deleted the video since the abstract was removed due to the controversy surrounding it. I only got connected to this interview (uploaded march 9) based on dr. Campbell making an update on this paper today (march 14th). Seems there is more upright character on both sides surrounding this than many would say in the comment section.

@matthewa6052

2 жыл бұрын

Yep, stealthily deletes his video, little accountability and then back to more other disinformation videos. Classic.

@cobobonzobobby

2 жыл бұрын

@@matthewa6052 bruh, the abstract was removed FIRST

@matthewa6052

2 жыл бұрын

@@cobobonzobobby It was a conference to discuss further research into the study. and Abstract is a summary of the overall study findings. There cannot be an abstract of findings if the researchers do not proceed with submitting those findings in the first place. You guys really need to slow down on this IVM stuff. It's getting you all in knots and it's idiotic. Borders are opening, countries are moving on from lockdowns now, largely. Let it go.

@bobjohnson8447

2 жыл бұрын

@@matthewa6052 How does any of that refute his statement regarding the timing of things?

@matthewa6052

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobjohnson8447 the actions of dr Campbell himself refutes his integrity. He posts video about this abstract, this video shows clearly his interpretations were wrong, Campbell withdraws the video after and then deflects . He reacted to the revelation. Do you understand?

I feel kinda weird that I amplified a conference abstract last year, although the topic was a followup of subjects were part of one of Gaebler et al 2021’s two longitudinal cohorts. The findings were consistent with previous results found by Saurabh Mehandru, but extending the data points to 7 months instead of the previous 3 months. I felt this was important(and still feel this is important) because the fresher datapoints reinforce the surprising findings in Gaebler, using the same longitudinal prospective cohort. Gaebler et al has enough going against it…although it was published in Nature in Jan 2021, the mundane title “Evolution of Antibody Immunity in SARS-CoV-2” is not germane to the breathtaking data in the supplementary figures (especially for people familiar with viral persistence). A better title would have been “Ongoing Affinity Maturation Suggests Long Term Sites of Replication in Mild SARS-CoV-2 Infections” or something along those lines. The one year followup of the original plasma donors seems to show the same SHM phenomenon continuing at 12 months, and appears to have a different trajectory to vaccinated and uninfected. I feel that this Nature paper has gotten very little appreciation outside of HHMI, and was completely misinterpreted by Eric Topol (although Crotty, Iwasaki, and Van Elzakker noticed what the data itself said, rather than the abstract). For this particularly valuable pair of cohorts (the healthy march 2020 NYC plasma donors and the healthy biopsy subjects), I feel that any conference abstract with tidbits on the followup data of these cohorts are worth amplifying. Or maybe the next Nussenzweig lab / Bieniasz lab paper on this can actually use the words “apparent viral replication” in the title, so that none of this explaining cool research results to my friends and family via youtube would be necessary.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@henrybentsen6204

Жыл бұрын

It was not published in NATURE. It was published by a small journal published by Nature's group.

Dr Campbell did backtrack

Dr. Peterson knows better; he's a published researcher! He knows the difference in quality between a poster abstract & a peer-reviewed article. Dr. Campbell's KZread channel started off well enough explaining research findings and country data related to COVID, but once he went down the Ivermectin rabbit-hole, he lost me. So hard to understand why this happens to science-minded people. Thanks so much for your channel.

@goldenboy140

2 жыл бұрын

" So hard to understand why this happens to science-minded people. " It's not hard to understand. The reason is money

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@goldenboy140 No, the reason is often not money at all. Never underestimate the impact of ideology - beliefs that the world works in a certain way, and that you are one of the few who understands how it works. Add a cult following that continuously praises you, and it is hard to back down from a wrong position.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@SLJShortt

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr The reason for Dr. Malone is definitely money. He's the guy that helped create the mRNA tech that made the vaccine and is now telling people not to take it. He tried to start up his own Big Pharma company and it fell flat, so he's looking for cash. And right-wingers are willing to pay him to come on their shows be anti-vax.

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@SLJShortt Not sure if this really is money, rather than a hurt ego. What 'better' way to get back at those you think did not acknowledge your input sufficiently than to sabotage their work?

Thanks for the video!

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

An association study is not a basis for concluding cause and effect. Period. Anyone who doesn't know that has NO business commenting. Once again, we see Peterson making a fool of himself without knowing it. As they say, ignorance is bliss.

I’ve never bothered to subscribe to any channel on KZread over the years, but I’ve subscribed to yours today. Keep up the good work.

It's fascinating how Prof Greg guides the medical student's responses, in a way to make sure he stays on-script. I of course don't know if that is the case, but it looks like that. I wonder what the consequences would have been for Iakov if he hadn't agreed to do this. His professor seemed pretty annoyed that some people picked up this study as evidence that IVM was effective. Yes, it is a retrospective study and therefore shows association, not causation, but the numbers were pretty big. I'd like to know what the alternative explanations were.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

One clear possibility is that the patients given remdesivir were sicker. They were inpatients, given an intravenous drug. The ivermectin group was mostly outpatients

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Actually, I was trying to keep _myself_ on topic, 😀 If you've seen any of my other videos, you may have noticed my tendency to wander. Because Iakov has done research in urology, I was very tempted to discuss the recent study in monkeys that shows that SARS-Cov-2 infects the genital tract

@jamesnite2157

2 жыл бұрын

Iakov and his senior collaborator Zamora were immediately on Twitter countering Campbell, Kory et al. over their misrepresentation of what is simply a retrospective associative study. They're literally pointing out the glaring limitations of the work. A 40k remdesivir group that is 10 years older than a 1k IVM group. 2x as many on ventilation in the former. Mortality rate in the rem group is likely to be 2x right off the gate (mech. ventilation CFR is 45% - PMID: 33119402). Rem is also administered via IV when the patient is going to already be far sicker. Comparing outpatients with in patients. The groups are in no way comparable. Why look for a conspiracy over such pedestrian preliminary database scrubbing? (No offense Iakov.)

@Schokland2007

2 жыл бұрын

It did not look like that to me at all.

@porscheoscar

2 жыл бұрын

I ask this question often and have yet to receive a response from any physician or biologist supporting Ivermectin. The antiparasitic is an ion channel inhibitor. The covid virus is wholly unaffected by ion channel inhibition in human cells... it continues to grow. Can you please provide an explanation on how ivermectin stops viral replication in human cells? Please be specific

Do you have an opinion on remdisivir in the U.S.? Some are saying it is not effective and was pushed when it should not have been.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

I think it has a lot of limitations, but i haven't studied it as much as I have some other drugs. I think, for example, that molnupiravir should not have been approved based on the clinical trial data currently available.

@robertethanbowman

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Thanks for the reply

Im sure no one tried to set these people up .. But why was this paper never retracted?! Whose in charge of that?! I appreciate the writers's willingness to come on your show- they should offer to talk with those who mis/presented the paper if asked, because that would help all involved - thankyou

@Cabiriad

2 жыл бұрын

Because no paper/study was ever published. There is nothing to retract. This was a conference abstract. The purpose of a conference abstract is a brief summary of the main points of your work that you will present at an academic conference. This abstract was peer-reviewed and accepted as a topic for discussion at a conference, and published in the record of the conference. It's not possible that Campbell and Mobeen do not know what a conference abstract is. That they both pretend to "not understand where the rest of the study is" is absurd. It's clearly not a study, and the Journal has not presented it as such.

@grainofsand4176

2 жыл бұрын

@@Cabiriad thanks. Idk the difference- which is why I rely on expertise of others and then figure the truth lies somewhere else anyway.

And this is why I unsubscribed from John Campbell some time ago…& I’ve subscribed here instead.

@thekoalawasbrown

2 жыл бұрын

thats called living in an echo chamber

@WhatTheFrogDoing

2 жыл бұрын

@@thekoalawasbrown thats called *leaving* an echo chamber

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@jamiejones8508

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 hang on, Wow…I’m a paid bot? I want my paycheque! Where do I apply? I hope you appreciate how sophisticated AI is these days; we can even do humour.

I find it disturbing and worrying that malice is ascribed to people who mis-interpret something.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

"I find it disturbing and worrying that malice is ascribed to people who mis-interpret something." I find it disturbing that you would see fit to say something positive about someone who has been egregiously "misinterpreting" something for 8 months while improving his bank balance considerably, instead of the praising the ethical young medical student who has nothing to gain except potentially some bullying by antivaxxers, political hacks, and John Campbell's acolytes.

@richvid9814

2 жыл бұрын

When it happens over and over again by the same person, it is what it is

@cal1686

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamverhoef4349 I don't know who in particular you're talking about but the link to science direct it shows that it was published on the website Feb 28 2022 if I'm reading it right. So, just a week ago. I can see how people would think this is some new discovery. These people aren't spreading misinformation. They're linking to the source article. If anyone is spreading misinformation it's sciencedirect and this guy for not getting it pulled from sciencedirect if it's so wrong. But now it's a useful honeypot to find and shame people for spreading "mis-information"

@Dragonslairminis

2 жыл бұрын

He misinterprets everything and presents the misinformation as indisputable fact. A mistake is one thing, however he consistently does it for profit. That's where the malice is and it's 100% warranted. People have died because of him.

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

As pointed out, when misinterpretation becomes a pattern, one should reconsider whether this is not malicious. Notably, Campbell even scolded one of the co-authors on Twitter, claiming he didn't know what he was talking about. Seriously, one of the co-authors. Reminds me of several tweets some time ago in which women explained "mansplaining" with examples of a man 'explaining' the woman in question what a certain paper showed, contradicting the woman's interpretation...and blissfully unaware that this woman was the frikkin' first author of that paper.

Excellent video. Thanks so much for doing what you do

association ain't causation

If at least people who are exposed to the distortions somehow had to see such clarifications. I wish the inner workings of the video platform itself would try to push the audience in such direction, but unfortunately it's more likely a spiral diving in worse content.

IMO, One of the more difficult Issues is that people who already have a bias on this issue will listen to the influencers and conclude that such presentations confirm their worst fears…. Even beyond what ever the influencers will claim.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@MrArdytube

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 I am curious… have you actually read the paper?

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 - Rubbish

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

Keep on those fools, thank you sir!

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I certainly have to give credit to all the actors in this series. Nice try. Good mis-information though a little bit too transparent and too obvious. When are we having episode 2? You guys ever thought of doing a comedy show? You’re hilarious Considering changing and becoming a paid bot just like you guys. Is there money in it? How much do you make per mis-information session without overtime? Honest answers only.

@mgriff0309

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 keep sniffing those farts fella!

What's your opinion on the latest Pfizer court ordered information just released?

@drummingjack7055

2 жыл бұрын

There‘s a good video about that on the „back to the science“ channel from 6 days ago.

@bmint

2 жыл бұрын

He will never answer this one straight if he does at all!

@richvid9814

2 жыл бұрын

@@bmint (Some posted this recently) I just watched John Campbell's latest, 'Pfizer Documents' video (while chasing down the Ivermectin one). Once again butchers it. It's beyond my comprehension. How can a person with a medical background misinterpret "Appendix 1" of the quoted Pfizer document, to be a list of documented BNT162b2 vaccine adverse events (as Campbell does), when listed are various viruses, list ending with "Zika virus associated Guillain Barre syndrome". His analysis is a shocker. It's just a list of medical conditions (found with viruses, other vaccines, co-morbidities, etc) ie surveillance criteria with the rollout of BNT162b2 vaccine. And never once does Campbell mention that the majority of recorded and established vaccine adverse events were mild symptoms (eg localised injection site swelling, pain, fever, headaches, etc). There's no major revelations in the document

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

"just released" being November 2021, and not court-ordered. This was one of the first documents released by the FDA *before* any court case was started. So, what's your opinion on you spreading misinformation?

@bmint

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr hahah yes but no we are talking about “March 1 2022” release.. there is much more coming as well! Four days after the Pfizer vaccine was approved for ages 16+, we submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request to the FDA for all of the data within Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine biological product file. We have now sued the FDA for not releasing the data. Click below for court documents and for productions of Pfizer’s documents from the FDA.

Thanks once again Prof Greg, this was amazing. I wish there was more we could do to stop Campbell, he has really become a loose canon.

Can we all agree that a serious ivermectin study should be done even if nobody will make money from it? Can we all agree that ivermectin is safer than remdeisivir so even if they have the same results ivermectin should be used? What about the war that IVM received from media and big pharma? (horse pictures and what about this 'A Letter to Dr Andrew Hill | Dr Tess Lawrie')

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

What about Tess Lawrie interpreting several studies that turned out to be obviously flawed or even fraudulent as "strong evidence" in her meta-analysis? And what about Tess Lawrie hiding her obvious CoI in the meta-analysis she got published? She had started the BIRD group, that explicitly promotes ivermectin use, well before that.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

Perdonomai: These are paid bots out to charcter assasinate. Tells you something. Stinks like yesterday's diapers.

Good video. Well done for getting the author. Props to Dr G that I was not at all suprised by this, thanks to his earlier video where the limitations of conference abstracts was clarified.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 - please delete this BOT.

Does anyone have links to the mentioned much better studies that have been published since this conference that have shown that it does not work?

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

Check a prior video on this channel on the I-TECH results.

@cmoullasnet

2 жыл бұрын

@@Marco-it2mr I’ll check it out, thanks!

I have had COVID symptoms since December’20. I listen to JC, hence I have now been taking liquid form Ivermectin for a week and my myalgia pain has gone from acute to tolerable. I don’t know what to believe and what to discard but it’s no coincidence that Ivermectin has helped 🤷🏻‍♀️

@drummingjack7055

2 жыл бұрын

How do you know it‘s no coincidence?

@caroshmarow

2 жыл бұрын

@@drummingjack7055 I have no measurable proof. Only the fact that, after trying all sorts of medical protocols combined with supplements, I remained disabled from pain until taking the Ivermectin three times a day for four days and found it mitigated painful symptoms. I am double vaccinated and have Fibromyalgia, so I was hit ver6 hard and admitted to hospital twice. I feel that the Ivermectin got into the cells and killed off the worst of the virus that had bunkered in for the long term. Of course, I could be wrong, it could be a coincidence but I have reordered Ivermectin. Each to their own.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@caroshmarow - No = kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y5Z6ydd8lK3MfKQ.html

@Account.for.Comment

2 жыл бұрын

Covid symptoms don' t last this long.

Well, the least I can say is that I did not find this interview very convincing...I'm a researcher, and a full paper has always more weight than an abstract (usually nobody reads or cites abstracts), so I'm having a hard time believing this student saying he does not think publishing the full paper is important now. Again, a full paper is part of your credentials as a scientist, so it should be important! Weird reaction, either the results are not good enough (he said it was rejected by one journal) and you fix it, or he has been "convinced" that it was not important anymore...I do not see this as 'integrity" or "modesty" as I can read in the comment. As a PhD student, you usually do as your supervisor tell you...

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

"Weird reaction, either the results are not good enough (he said it was rejected by one journal) and you fix it" Some things ultimately cannot be fixed. In this case, you'd run into a massive problem in finding out how to "fix" the big difference in the characteristics of the two treated groups - index matching sounds nice, but has its own challenges, as you still have questions left on *why* people got drug A or B, and whether you need to add a time factor in as well, etc. etc. etc. This is a retrospective study, so you cannot just go back and do it all over.

1:40 TriNetX is an awesome database. 5 years ago, if somebody had said this would be possible outside the UK NHS I’d think they were crazy.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 - Where in Russia do you live, paid troll?

IVERMECTIN THANKS.

But give people the choice of what they want stop making mandating drugs for their gain

@matthewa6052

2 жыл бұрын

There's a difference between advocating 'choice' and spreading 'misinformation' The two are mutually exclusive.

‪Still appears there is some ignorance or dishonesty here. “John Campbell makes money off his KZread channel, so for him to backtrack wouldn’t fit his narrative”‬ ‪John Campbell DID BACKTRACK TWO DAYS AGO AND APOLOGIZED. Neither one mentions it.‬

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

Our video was recorded before his

@richvid9814

2 жыл бұрын

Did he really back track, he got caught red handed misleading and he blew it off by saying well I did not know it was not a real study- He and the other ivermectin grifters knew exactly what it was and still presented it as proof that ivermectin works? I had presented the study to Dr.Wilson PhD (Dr. Wilson's Debunk the Funk Videos) as soon as Doc Campbell posted his video and Dr.Wilson knew right away it was not an actual study and it was just a hot mess of a working paper- This is what he said to me " I looked at the study he linked and it’s a retrospective study with a very small ivermectin group and a much larger remdesivir group. Not sure why he is reporting on these retrospective studies instead of the randomized controlled trials that shown no benefit." As of today, the original video is still up and the backtracking he does is another video with a different topic heading so unless you watch that particular video you would still be misled by the original video if you came across it or it was shared by someone--Why has it not been deleted, c'mon you know the answer to that $$$?

@charliezxi

2 жыл бұрын

@@richvid9814 Fact that ivermectin works Doesn’t hinge on that one fucking abstract there’s plenty of other studies. Just because you’re being dishonest doesn’t mean he was

@charliezxi

2 жыл бұрын

@@richvid9814 How about this clown, who gives a presentation with an abstract From a failed study? That doesn’t sound right does it?

@drummingjack7055

2 жыл бұрын

@@charliezxi The latest video on this channel explains it very good. No clown to see here.

More wierd stuff from Campbell. Thanks for coming in fast and sensible

@jonathanport5002

2 жыл бұрын

Look at campbells latest effort today on Pfizer paper. He claims 1200 deaths in the first 3 months of Pfizer vacation . Its a difficult video to follow

@MrImarcus

2 жыл бұрын

Well spotted. Definitely weird, someone should speak to him about referencing published articles. I always smelled a rat.

Have you got anything to say on the study of ivermectin as prophylactic that Dr Campbell also mentioned in that same video, Prof?

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

Campbell has backed away from his debunked ivermectin claims.

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

Greg is preparing a video. It's a horrendous study, and one disconcerting aspect is several authors not admitting to obvious conflicts of interest.

@warren7389

2 жыл бұрын

Campbell still stands by his comments on the prophylactic study in another ivermectin video on the 14th of March. kzread.info/dash/bejne/ea5ow8aDiK-ul6Q.html

People are dealing with datas not abstract.

Campbell's video has around 500 times the number of views as this one. That's where the problem is. If he can't win on the merit of his case, he can win on the ratio. This needs to be shared as much as possible.

@Dragonslairminis

2 жыл бұрын

Campbell needs to be banned for continuing to spread misinformation.

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

That IS the problem. These grifters have learnt that they must take a position contrary to the reasonable, nuanced science-based position and manufacture as much controversy as they can while appealing with dog-whistles to influential social media groups such as antivaxxers and those with certain political views. Their armies of acolytes will do the rest while the grifters collect the cash that rolls in. The whole system then makes it impossible for them to back track.

@MrImarcus

2 жыл бұрын

I too want everyone to agree with me, using scientific talk of course. Down with this free speech business, it surely is the road to nowhere.

@WBKimmons

2 жыл бұрын

Y’all are so damn butthurt that ivermectin works you want to silence those who promote it

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@MrImarcus "Down with this free speech business" It's not about "free speech", it's about Quality Control. A break on the avalanche of fools speaking rubbish about stuff they are clueless about and suffering no consequences and, in fact, being paid handsomely to spread misinformation that maims and kills. "it surely is the road to nowhere." With the perverse incentives provided by social media and without any Quality Control whatsoever we are, in fact, on the road to perdition.

What about the peer reviewed study from brazil? Also in JC video. That seems to confirm positive effect of ivermecton. Also flawed?

@frogsong100

2 жыл бұрын

Peer reviewed by quacks.

@jamesnite2157

2 жыл бұрын

I haven't finished reading it (although there are a lot of methodological criticisms in the comments on the Cureus link), but there are some major red flags up front regarding the authors. Its lead authors Kerr and Cadegiani received funding during Covid by a manufacturer of IVM in Brazil. Cadegiani is the co-founder of the FLCCC with Pierre Kory, who prescribe IVM on their I-MASK+ and MATH+ protocols. Cadegiani designed and performed the statistical analysis of this study, while Pierre Kory was also responsible for reviewing the data and the manuscript, yet there is no conflict of interest declared on the study. Cadegiani is also under investigation for 'crimes against humanity' (according to Brazil's attorney general) for conducting a clinical trial during Covid using various treatments on people in Brazil without them even knowing they were in a clinical trial (among other issues), causing up to 200 deaths.

@terjeoseberg990

2 жыл бұрын

If Ivermectin worked in Brazil, they would bother with vaccines. Ivermectin is cheaper. Also, Brazil would have significantly fewer Covid deaths than they have had.

How much blood is on your hands?

What are all the RCTs showing that I ivermectin doesn’t work?

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

I-TECH for one. TOGETHER, for another (although the study isn't yet published).

@ukulayme2

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg how do you know the results or not published? Can you link? I want to show my loony ivermectin friends. Thanks for responding!

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

@@ukulayme2 If you go to the TOGETHER trial website, they say the Ivermectin arm was stopped for futility, but they have the results listed as "manuscript in preparation:

@ukulayme2

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg I have problems with this. This totally feeds the theories that Ivermectin is being shut down prematurely by “big pharma” in order to prevent a cheap alternative (ivermectin) from being discovered. Every time someone says “we’re not looking into it because other studies show it doesn’t work” but when I try to find the studies that show this, it just leads to another study that says “we stopped early bc we didn’t think it worked, we’re not sharing the data”. So is there no dang large scale RCT that just finished the dang study and published so we can put this to bed?

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

@@ukulayme2 Again: I-TECH. But of course the grifters have already found a way to claim that one DOES show it works, by torturing the data.

What am I missing? He said he did not misrepresent the data AT ALL... But from the study... "After using propensity score matching and adjusting for potential confounders, ivermectin was associated with reduced mortality vs remdesivir (OR 0.308, 95% CI (0.198,0.479)),Risk Difference -5.224%, CI (-7.079%,-3.369%), p

@tirregius

2 жыл бұрын

The criticism of the study comes down to the uses of each on patients with different attributes - but isn't that why you start with a very large group, and then look only at individuals with very closely matched variables?

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

Why should anyone spend time explaining this to you when all you need to do is watch the video?

@tirregius

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamverhoef4349 of course I watched the video. The explanation was left vague, and the author actually defended the work. It was super confusing and honestly weird. It was the kind of interview where there's a reluctance to be straightforward for whatever reason. The quote from the study above explains the lengths they went to to make sure the two cohorts produced experimentally valid results should a decently strong signal present itself. It just seems really strange that we go from careful work and p

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

@@tirregius If you understood how science works you would not be in the least confused. Here are the particular quotes from just your last comment that tells me you don't know: - "the author actually defended the work" - "It was super confusing and honestly weird" - "there's a reluctance to be straightforward " - "the study above explains the lengths they went to to make sure the two cohorts produced valid results" But it would take a chapter in a book to explain this. In the mean time, that young medical student is already way ahead of you even before he has finished his medical degree and will be the better for this experience.

@honorburza9110

2 жыл бұрын

@@tirregius he’s saying that his full manuscript (which none of us can see since it’s been withdrawn) states what all the limitations were such as they couldn’t say who was vaxxed who wasn’t or what dose anyone received of the antivirals. And the fact that Remdesivir was only given by IV to hospitalised patients versus IVM that’s an oral pill which can be taken at home is a big confounder. He then muddies the waters by saying how we are two variants away. And on top of that how there are now studies that don’t show in favour of ivermectin (likewise there are those who do show benefit but choosing that stance he doesn’t come across as neutral!). It feels like Iakow has been told off for daring to accidentally let his paper show Remdesivir in bad light (not forgetting that Remdesivir is advised against use in Covid by WHO plus it’s safety profile is poor). I agree, he doesn’t come across straight forward. It’s rather odd.

Hmmm med student going into plastics…he’s trying to buff his resume by pumping out abstracts/papers. I can sympathize with the pressure being a med student myself, but come on man. Given the limitations, this should never have gone anywhere.

@drummingjack7055

2 жыл бұрын

And it indeed didn‘t go anywhere. We‘re talking about an abstract for a conference, not a published study.

@RaistlinFF

2 жыл бұрын

@@drummingjack7055 I know, but I meant that I wish someone on the team didn’t even let it get that far. Analyze something else. Anyway, if I’m being perfectly frank…I’m frustrated with my own stalled research when this kind of crap gets to be put into the list of pubs on a resume.

@donovannamibia7883

Жыл бұрын

@@RaistlinFF Yes, but I'm sure someone said "Oh, it's just a bloody abstract", forgetting the universe of opportunists out there. People like John Campbell and others with no ethics and big financial interests in their KZread channels. And Pierre Kory, the "scientist" director of "The Leading Edge Clinic" (for COVID-19 and Alternative Care) who IMHO should be ashamed of himself. Among many others.

Vaccination status was unaccounted for? 14.40 ish? That's quite a confounder? Was this research worth a fag end? Does the result tell us something about jab efficacy?

@donovannamibia7883

Жыл бұрын

No

where is the covid-19 bar leading me to the government site and info?

@dawnlara422

2 жыл бұрын

Hello 👏👀👀👀

John would be more than happy to speak to either of these men: his heart is definitely in the right place; and he is humble enough to listen to respectful intelligent challenges

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

And yet he's never answered my emails or Iakov's attempts to reach him. Go figure.

@thefbat5847

2 жыл бұрын

He's always ignored messages from people such as these.

@TeraByteify

2 жыл бұрын

@@ProfGregTuckerKellogg Unfortunately you likely have too small an audience for him to even notice your e-mails. I'm certain he'd be happy to talk with the author though, if the author has sent him correspondence please post evidence of that.

@kcboy303

2 жыл бұрын

@@TeraByteify The author contacted him on Twitter. Campbell does not have a huge audiene on Twitter. The tweet the author sent is hard to miss.

@TeraByteify

2 жыл бұрын

@@kcboy303 Thank you for the update I'll look it up :)

Great video👍🏻

Working for big pharma.

Figures are rubbery, increasingly so it would seem, in this era of COVID. In almost every case, I go with the results, few though they may be in COVID times, of clinical doctor-patient trials over the large RCTs . Problem is, with the SARS-CoV2 infection, most clinicians have been prevented form using their clinical judgement in regard to using medications formerly approved, and in some cases, even vitamins. This state of affairs, to me, as someone who has been in the clinical field for 40+ years, is completely inexplicable.

@PifflePrattle

2 жыл бұрын

Three most dangerous words in medicine "In my experience". Mark Crislip MD infectious disease specialist with a similar time working in the clinical field as yourself.

Sounds like he was lent on by the establishment Quote ‘Hey, kid, remove your abstract, before we end your career before it has even started.’ Happens all the time in climate science. Professors David Bellamy, Judith Curry Peter Rill, Tim Ball and many more, were all dismissed from their positions, because they opposed the climate lobby. R

Beginning of COVID Campbell provided very helpful and unbiased fact based info that led me to genuinely trust him. I am so disheartened to see him choose ad revenue profits over public health. Keep speaking out against him ! we need to get him removed from this platform for dangerous misinfo.

@vlera8447

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, I have the same impression! Almost Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde!

@mikedavison3400

2 жыл бұрын

Ah a couple of censors. The type of people who when they can’t win an argument with their intellect resort to totalitarian methods. Stalin and Mao would be proud of you two.

@masterq2.033

2 жыл бұрын

@@vlera8447 That happens when one wakes up.

@thekoalawasbrown

2 жыл бұрын

so when he does not agree with what you think he is a dangerous?? what a sad little man you are

@WhatTheFrogDoing

2 жыл бұрын

@@thekoalawasbrown if he is encouraging people to take ineffective medicine which may lead to their death then he is objectively dangerous

See how many beers you’ll last through every time you read these common bot messages: “IVM has been prescribed to millions!” “My anecdotal experience says otherwise!” “Nobody is perfect”

Lakov efmenko.......google him and fond out who he is ?

John Campbell has posted another video on ivermectin today. Grifters have to grift and ivermectin is the grift that keeps on giving.

@johngregor6743

2 жыл бұрын

While he's clearly wrong, I'm not convinced Campbell is a grifter. I think he's just a man of a certain age, social status, and perhaps emotional brittleness that prevents him from recognizing or admitting that he screwed up and then acted in bad faith to double and triple down on his original narrative. I think you can see a similar mechanism at work in his battle for aspiration-before-injection - his proposed mechanism is not ridiculous and his argument is not without merit, but he cannot bring himself to present dissenting arguments as being competent or in good faith and he's reduced to sarcasm, mocking, and half-truths about them. I've also noticed that with the rise of BA.2, he's scaled back his tracking of cases and I think it might be because he seemed pretty invested in the "Omicron is going to save us all" narrative, which is looking less likely. But he's a guy who has worked for decades doing what looks like competent meat-and-potatoes medical informational videos that don't seem to have a lot of 'woo' or ulterior agenda to them - hardly a path for world (or KZread) domination. I think he just got out over his skis and we're just watching him cope badly and unfortunately giving a lot of oxygen to a lot of bad actors in the process.

Wow so impressed with nice young man . Only if Cambell had half the courage and morals this young man has .

@williamverhoef4349

2 жыл бұрын

"Only if Cambell had half the courage and morals this young man has ." Exactly my thoughts as I was listening to this young man speak.

@MsBuggeroff

2 жыл бұрын

Only if you could spell his name correctly, it is Campbell? Are you an American perchance?

@MsBuggeroff

2 жыл бұрын

It is Dr John Campbell not Cambell Duh!

@Sceince01

2 жыл бұрын

@@MsBuggeroff I noticed it rt after I wrote it but as he has lost all his respect by his actions ( harming others via misinformation ) I did not bother to fix it . He does not deserve it . My being American or not has no bearing on anything .

@Sceince01

2 жыл бұрын

@@MsBuggeroff yeah if you notice my other posts I don’t call Malone , Peter Mc Callough doctors as well . They in my opinion are purposefully harming others with their obvious half truths . Half truths are more dangerous than full on lies. It makes it harder for his victims to find facts when they are not medically trained . Also it tells you that they are purposefully taking people for a ride as they omit what they they know will lead one to facts . Do you think people like Campbell ( the nurse practitioner ) , Malone , Mobeen and Peter McCallough be given any respect after all the incredibly unethical things they are doing without a care who they harm ?

I think that the study was garbage and you might want to read the Twitter thread by Nick Mark MD on it.

Thanks

With all the misinformation out there. Why should we BELIEVE you?

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

These paid bots character-assasinating. Taking us for nincompoops, we can't see through them. Tells you something. Stinks like yesterday's diapers.

Gotta say I trust Kory more than I trust this guy.

@LewdConnoisseur

Жыл бұрын

Why

@NonFlyiingDutchman

Жыл бұрын

@@LewdConnoisseur you trust Kory's analysis of the study more than the first author of the study?!

misinformation or disinformation ?

Almost everybody makes misinterpretation this day, isn't it? That includes you. The fact is, like dr Campbel would let his audiences to do their own fact finding and never claim to produce his own content.

Young man acts like someone got to him. The data is the data.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

These paid bots character-assasinating. Taking us for nincompoops, we can't see through them. Tells you something. Stinks like yesterday's diapers.

I think Campbell mentioned these studies more as to show his disappointment that we didn't pursue ivermectin's potential in saving lives. He might have been wrong, but he wasn't saying that its use was "relevant" to today's pandemic. He didn't say or suggest that it proved ivermectin is some miracle drug for covid, but that he is skeptical of profit motives throughout the pandemic, which is a valid concern in my opinion.

@nonflyingdutchman9573

2 жыл бұрын

definitely is, particularly when you consider that the cost for a week of the unproven Ivermectin is more than the cost of 3 doses of the proven vaccines.

@justinmyres3487

2 жыл бұрын

@@nonflyingdutchman9573 You're saying ivermectin is more expensive than the vaccines? The cost of a single dose of pfizer is $19.50. ivermectin is less than a dollar per dose. I'm not sure what the weekly cost is, but it's hard to imagine that you would take 60 pills in one week. Sure it's not proven, but the efficacy of the vaccine had hardly any evidence when it was being pursued. I think that's a shame that even though ivermectin had proven to be safe decades ago, had evidence suggesting efficacy for inhibiting the replication of RNA viruses, that we pursued something that had never been used on humans instead. I think that it's very likely that there was profit motive in that decision.

@justinmyres3487

2 жыл бұрын

​I guess we'll see if it was the right decision once the oxford study is complete. Even if it's somewhat effective, which i'm suspecting it is, it would've saved lives. If that is indeed the case, that would mark a tremendous failure of the scientific community.

I trust not this site.

oof this didnt age well.

I can't believe Dr Campbell has millions of followers. His video on "the pfizer papers" only a few days old already has over a million views. And today's video? "oops, I read it wrong!" 😂

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the researchers were Incentivized to retract the research so as to scuttle and disparage the bombshell and the backlash that ivermectin works and could have saved very many lives if big pharma and pollies did not push their own agenda. Its very strange, the retraction..

@msmendes214

2 жыл бұрын

@@lionprinceashanti7912 I think it's more strange that you pasted this same reply on every single Comment on this video. Almost like, bot behavior 🤔

@Marco-it2mr

2 жыл бұрын

...followed by doubling down by referencing a nutcase doctor...

@salmonnella4930

2 жыл бұрын

@@msmendes214 While you appeared in so many threads.

@lionprinceashanti7912

2 жыл бұрын

The Problem with Ivermectin is there is no money.

John Campbell didn't do the research, he's just reporting on the published papers. He posted an update video to explain the retraction of the paper. Don't shoot the messenger.

@ProfGregTuckerKellogg

2 жыл бұрын

There was no published paper.

Awesome

Learn from your elders