Carlton Supporters Club

Recently moved house so I disposed of all my old vinyls, cds and dvds to save space. The vinyls were in demand which surprised me but cds and dvds not so much. In fact many op shops are reluctant to take them, along with books, these days. Anyway,  I ripped all of my music collection to an electronic library several years ago now.

I have a friend who is a very successful younger musician and her last album was vinyl.  I chucked my old stereo years ago and had to buy a new turntable to play the album she gave me.  Of course, I'm now playing the vinyl albums I refused to throw out.  I did ditch my singles collection - apart from the Aunty Jack coloured record 

Im not sure if its the fact that people don't buy media anymore.

Vynil isn't rising its cds falling as Spotify and apple music take over.  Who wants to house a collection anymore?  A couple of years back, a friend of mine gave me all his DVDs.  With the invention of Netflix and co he doesn't need them anymore. 

It is what it is.  Vynil is still the djs plaything. 

I do have subscriptions to a number of movie streaming services but I've also watched a couple of DVDs in the last few days.
My movie tastes are a bit like my music, and I like a lot of the older movies that just aren't available on the streams, so I'm always on the lookout for older DVDs.

Edward Mills, a health-sciences professor at Canada’s McMaster University, is co-investigator of the Together clinical trial, another rigorous study that is evaluating nine different repurposed drugs as COVID-19 therapies, including ivermectin. It recently completed the ivermectin analysis but found it “did not demonstrate an important benefit,” Mills said in an email. The research may be published this month, he said.

Nevertheless, there is an idea circulating among scientists like Mills that ivermectin may be more likely to benefit COVID-19 patients in areas of the world with a high prevalence of parasitic worms. “What is possible is that co-infection of parasites with COVID may worsen health outcomes,” Mills said.

This is an idea also raised by Boulware, the scientist working on the University of Minnesota’s ivermectin study. Corticosteroids, like dexamethasone, are now considered the standard of care for severely ill COVID-19 patients; however, these drugs can cause what is called a “hyperinfection” and sometimes be fatal in a patient who has a parasitic infection. It’s possible that additional data about ivermectin gathered from different patient populations could show the drug being more beneficial in people who live in parasitic regions of the world, they say.

However, most native-born Americans don’t have parasites. And, since 2005, the U.S. policy has been to recommend that refugees from Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean receive treatment or presumptive antiparasitic treatment — including ivermectin — before arriving in the U.S.

“In certain patient populations, if you have a parasitic infection, it certainly can be beneficial if you’re giving steroids,” Boulware said. “Does that mean [as an] outpatient-setting early therapy in the U.S. that there’s a benefit? We don’t know that, and so I think that is an unknown question.”

For now, the healthcare professionals who have been put in the position of saying “no” to prescribing ivermectin are waiting for the data from the U.S. trials. Dr. Rani Sebti, an infectious-disease physician at Hackensack Meridian Health hospital system in New Jersey, says he’s been fielding calls from primary-care doctors in the U.S. and abroad about whether to prescribe ivermectin when patients ask for it.

“I cannot sit here and tell you ivermectin is the worst drug in the world,” he said. “I need to see a good prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. And then when we get that study, it will answer the question for good.”

Good data on ivermectin coming soon

Sometime this winter or early spring, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health that is testing ivermectin in 1,000 patients is expected to produce results, says Dr. Susanna Naggie, the vice dean for clinical research at Duke University’s medical school and the researcher running the trial.

The University of Minnesota’s randomized study has enrolled 1,196 participants, one-third of whom received ivermectin. (Both trials are evaluating several repurposed drugs as possible COVID-19 treatments.) Within the next few weeks, the Minnesota institution is expected to share the first findings from the ivermectin part of its trial, nearly two years after the first preprint examining ivermectin’s viability was published. 

Or you could look at the plethora of studies.....quoting Boulware? Laughable.

c19early.com

Just because you believe it doesn't work, doesn't make it so.

A mysterious website

There’s one website often cited by ivermectin’s supporters: c19early.com. It’s got a clean, white layout and says it has pulled together “real-time analysis of 1,387 studies” for a wide-ranging list of potential COVID-19 therapies that can be used for early treatment, as of Feb. 7. It includes URLs like Ivmmeta.com and Hcqmeta.com.

No one I spoke with, including Kory, knows who runs the website. The website’s Twitter account has been suspended, and emails asking for information about who owns or operates the site were not returned. Some of the treatment protocols listed are provided by the FLCCC.

“It would be fascinating to know who’s behind such a massive effort,” Meyerowitz-Katz said. “It’s pseudoscientific nonsense, but it is also absolutely a huge effort.”

When I first dropped a sentence written several times on the site — “Elimination of COVID-19 is a race against viral evolution” — into Google, several websites with URLs that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or healthcare pop up with that description. Many of the top search results lead to online pages that have been moved or deleted, but one link redirects to a website selling Stromectol, the brand name for the form of ivermectin marketed by drug giant Merck to treat parasitic worms. That site, which says it is owned by Canadian Pharmacy Ltd., lists phone numbers in London and New York City. Both go directly to a generic voicemail.

Boulware, who is based in Minneapolis, said he messaged a website promoting ivermectin about a year ago, to see if it would accept his help with the medical information being put out. The site has some great charts, he said, but, in some cases, the data were not valid. When the responses to his emails were returned in the middle of the night, it made him wonder if the site’s operators were based in a foreign country. He speculated that maybe the website could be Russian disinformation or coming from a generic-drug maker in India trying to skirt FDA regulations.

“Those websites are a lot of effort. They’re really detailed,” Boulware said. “So it’s got to be either someone who has a lot of free time on their hands, or someone’s got a financial motivation or a political-disinformation motivation.”

Just because you believe it does work, doesn’t make it so…

You lot (yes, I generalise, sorry to those who have an open mind) are such sheep.

You clearly read jack sh%t, yet think you know it all (the old cereal packet professor).

You really think Kory doesn't know because some dumb ass ignorant journo makes that statement? Not that that's a relevant question in any event.

And by the by, any of you read any of the studies linked therein? (i know the answer)

Are you suggesting they're fake or made up?

The data doesn't lie - and I note none of you actually critiques any of the papers referenced therein?

Typical lazy ad hominem carp.

Ivermectin is but one of many viable early treatments, and if those percentages don't whack you in the face and make you pay attention, our society really is doomed.