Few_Tumbleweed7151 | 6 points
Is it safe to take I-MASK+ protocol after the first Astra Zeneca vaccine injection?I cant speak specifically for AstraZeneca, but I can speak with 1st hand experience that the vaccine I was given whilst taking ivermectin, worked fine.
I've been taking weekly ivermectin as a prophylactic and had the Pfizer vaccine, and I developed antibodies as expected - ie before the 21 day when we're told the protection kicks in. (antibodies were visible with a home lateral flow antibody test)
[-] Admirable-Raise9185 | 1 points
Given the risk of the vaccine, why did you take it? Long term safety and animal studies are not available on the vaccines.
im not a conspiracy theorist. and I'm definitely not anti-vax. I get my flu shot every year, whether I need it or not. my kids get all their shots. yes, even mmr.
the vaccines are far safer than the disease theyre protecting against and I'm in a moderate risk group (over 50, and with some conditions that make it worse than average). I have had friends & family who have had covid, and its not something I would ever like to have. Its not harmless. its not 'like flu'.
Some of those close to me have got long term symptoms (almost a year after they recovered) and its unknown whether they will ever be fully cured.
I dont want covid and I want to avoid all risk of getting it. its the reason I took weekly ivermectin, and its the reason I got the vaccine as soon as I could. and when the modified vaccines come out that are better efficacy for the variants, I will get that too.
ivermectin too isnt free of side effects. sure, its a very safe drug. but there are known side effects, and for chronic users, there may be more. we sure dont know what the long term effects of taking weekly ivermectin, literally forever, will be, and I would much prefer to have a reliable vaccine than be taking a drug every week that I dont know what its long term effects are.
ironic, really, as when covid first appeared, I wanted to get infected with it to get it over with and get natural immunity. but that was before all the 'long covid' symptoms were known. now, I dont want to play Russian roulette to see whether I get it and recover fully, or be, like some of my friends and family, with a long term reminder that I got an awful disease and there's no treatment for the long term effects. sure, theyre in the minority. but I now know too many people personally who cant smell or taste properly, or who are breathless all the time, many months after they recovered from mild covid. this is not a disease you want to risk getting, if you have a choice.
But I realise that maybe ivermectin, or maybe some other treatment will come along that completely wipes covid off the face of the earth. but there's a lot that has to happen before that. the governments of the world need to (a) agree that it works, and (b) production and distribution needs to ramp up to offer it to 7B people! thats a tall order.
[-] RemainingLifespanJoy | 1 points
ivermectin too isnt free of side effects. sure, its a very safe drug. but there are known side effects
can you summarize these, or provide a link?
check out Merck's cynical statement where theyre trying to dissuade people from using the drug they originally marketed (perhaps because they want to market an in-patent expensive drug instead)
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/
[-] Admirable-Raise9185 | 0 points
Simply wait and take it at the first sign of symptoms is a viable alternative! I took my flu shot this year as well. These are not flu shots. They lack safety data and long term studies. Those taking the first two vaccines are participating in a study.
the strategy of simply waiting til you get first symptoms, then take the ivermectin... won't protect some from the long covid symptoms. pretty much everyone I know who lost their sense of smell and taste, that was their first symptom. and for some, it never came back. if there was a vaccine that significantly eliminated the chance of getting infected in the first place, and also, cuts down the community spread so that the entire population will benefit, then thats the best long term solution.
to know there are effective treatments like ivermectin are a fantastic safety net, but the long term route out of this pandemic are the vaccines.
not to mention the social and commercial benefits for having the vaccine (as well as protecting you and others from the disease)
for instance, do you think people will be allowed on a plane, after the majority of people have been vaccinated and you Havent? might even spread to hotels, or restaurants, or businesses and workplaces.
it wouldn't be a surprise to me if before this year is out, when everyone else is vaccinated, and you're not, you could be a social leper. missing out from some of the freedoms that everyone who's vaccinated will eventually be able to enjoy (how life was, a year or so ago), like holidays, travel, meetings, conferences, sporting events, etc.
countries are already negotiating an international vaccine passport. once that standard exists, and airlines, hotels, amusement parks and football stadiums want you to show your evidence of vaccination to be able to participate, the anti vaxxers might be missing out...
if, as you say, by having the vaccine youre participating in an experiment (albeit the largest one ever, covering billions of people). but, equally, by choosing not to have the vaccine, you are still participating in the experiment, but as 'the control', but you're also participating in a social experiment to see what freedoms you miss out on, and how other people react to you, as a voluntarily unvaccinated person. will be an interesting situation, and new normals might apply that previously would be considered tyrannical.
[-] paredes916 | 2 points
This is assuming the vaccines prevent transmission of the virus
I also think that simply at this point no one knows the long term effects of the vaccine (mRNA)
Sure, for some it might be worth it, but for others I would say No, considering the availability of treatment options.
No animal studies, no manufacturer liabilities, No clear conclusion on potential fertility impact, no word on potential antibody dependent enhancement.
I don't think this is about anti-vaxx. And I also think the term anti-vaxx is kind of dumb. People have suffered from vaccine injuries that is a fact. Context matters
And I don't think this has anything to do with conspiracies either. I think these are very reasonable questions.
But to each their own. And I also understand how horrible covid can be.
I totally get your position, the only thing I stumbled over is your casual acceptance of potential social and commercial benefits of being vaccinated. I would consider getting the vaccine myself for the other reasons you mentioned, but if something like institutional benefits are on the horizon, I definitively would not get vaccinated. It's scary to me that people don't intuitively grasp this as an abhorrent attack on liberty (why stop at benefits for the vaccine, why not grant benefits for sporty people, people without aids, people who don't participate in demonstrations, people who vote red/blue etc). Institutions have to respect the personal decisions of citizens and those decisions should be allowed to be kept private anyway.
its just a personal prediction. it might not happen. but I'm pretty confident it will.
businesses like airlines are already starting to say that they will not allow people to travel that are unvaccinated (starting with Australian airlines). its likely to extend to other airlines over time.
I think we'll definitely see travel & hospitality sectors insist on vaccination to be able to use their services.
if we're lucky, the 'vaccine passport' will also be available for those that have antibodies naturally (from recovered infection).
I totally get that what I'm predicting is tyrannical and scary. but, when it comes to public health your own personal choice deeply affects the risk of others catching a virus that you might be carrying/spreading that are near you, so it seems unlikely to be left to 'personal choice'. ie: if you choose to be unvaccinated, then the airlines and hotels, and sports arenas, etc.. can choose to not allow you on their premises, for the safety of other customers. this is likely to happen! (at least for this year). when we've eradicated covid from the world, then of course, it'll hopefully stop.
[-] RemainingLifespanJoy | 1 points
antibodies were visible with a home lateral flow antibody test
where do you live, that enabled your acquiring a home antibody test? if you're in the US or know of a source that ships to the US -- link?
theyre pretty easy to get almost everywhere (except, it seems, the US).
try googling. I found this one straight away but im sure there are others
https://wilburnmedicalusa.com/healgen-antibody-tests-rapid-detection-kit-gccov-402a/
[-] Haitchpeasauce | 5 points | Feb 21 2021 09:22:11
Yes, Ivermectin does not interfere with the training of the immune system from a vaccine. Ivermectin's mechanisms of action act against viral mechanisms that promote its replication, as well as downregulate inflammation caused by the virus. None of these are in the vaccine.
Most vaccines contain the spike protein RNA. Ivermectin won't act against transcription of the protein, nor against MHC1 presentation and the T helper 1 and 2 pathways.
permalink
[-] RemainingLifespanJoy | 1 points | Feb 24 2021 23:39:54
thanks very much for this answer.
is there a good summary of ivermectin's mechanisms of action someplace?
permalink
[-] JezSan | 1 points | Feb 24 2021 23:54:27
try this one
https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/comments/lnt4yq/ivermectin_mechanism_of_action_against_the/
permalink