COVID vaccination required by Safari Company or not, your suggestion

[Rimshot]

I've never seen one post here where anybody implied that we are desperate for a miracle cure. What I have seen are lots of folks making the case for looking into any and all viable options for treatments resulting in more favorable outcomes, and not relying solely on the vaccines to save the world.

There are now several viable treatments being used currently and some still in development. So we're not solely reliant on the vaccines, but so far the vaccines are the best proven weapon available.

This Administration has gone to great lengths to over-invest in a vaccine that has unfortunately not been that miracle cure,

It is astonishing how high the mortality rate is for unvaccinated population vs vaccinated, and the infection protection provided (even from Delta! I'd hardly say 87% efficacy against Delta is worthless Kaiser/Moderna study), that anyone would downplay just how good the vaccines are. The cognitive dissonance must be deafening.

while they have simultaneously done nearly everything in their power to divert from alternative treatments. While anyone who has dared to ask why has been vilified. My problem is not with the vaccines. My problem is how they are being marketed as the only "legitimate" treatment option which they are not.. They are only one of many tools that should be used in the battle against this virus.

The Administration is not preventing your doctor from prescribing hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, injecting bleach, or putting a UV light up your butt. They don't prescribe it because they are educated in how to science and don't fall for half-baked "studies" where people self-selected with no controls and conclusions were drawn based on correlation. They looked at the randomized placebo controlled trials that showed no benefits and based their judgement on that. IF these trials DID show promise or benefits, no amount of vilification from the Admin would keep your doctor from helping you (unless your doctor is a moron).

LOL... No. Not at all... Big Pharma is our friend. They have no special interest in monopolizing treatment options for Covid or any other disease. They are only in this because they care about people's health.. Naïve much?

How do you propose Big Pharma would prevent a study from being published on the next COVID miracle cure?

LMFAO! Who exactly do you think you are addressing here? You must think that you are lecturing a bunch of collective idiots. Your condescension is only surpassed by your arrogant belief that yours is the only credible opinion to be considered in this conversation. Trust me when I tell you that it is not.

Much of the data you have referenced throughout this thread has been dated and/or incomplete. Sorry if that hurts your feelings but it is a fact.. At the same time you have either dismissed or mocked the data others have introduced because it has contradicted the narrative that you choose to believe. YOU are the one who needs to unplug from Google, and all of the other bullshit biased media sources you have been citing. Keep posting BS and I will keep calling you out on it every time.

I'm sorry, but you've been confused or taken by a number of logical fallacies and cognitive biases. I'm not pretending to be an authority on any of this or "belief" in anything other than the method. You are obviously out of your depth if you can't easily differentiate quality data from the noise and garbage methodology of the snake oil salesmen.

 

[BigJohnx13]

This is not for or against the vax. But take the folowing into consideration as I have seen too may forums discussing this. Both vaxed and unvaxed can get virus and spread it if that person contracted it . The Vaxed has a "better" change of not dying 0,01%. if contracted after vax. If the unvaxed is a healthy person, not contracted it yet, what danger can he be to anyone? None!. The unvaxed apply better safety protocols to stay healthy. If your staff is vaxed, why worry about healthy unvaxed person. Your staff is protected? Or do you doubt the effectiveness thereoff.

Restricting someone to enter your property that is not vaxed, maybe is your right. But does your infringement discriminate against that person based on his health seeing that your business is open to the public. Most overseas people just boycott that business that force their staff or customers to get the vaxed.

I cannot give you clear direction,. A better question might be how many money am I going to loose if I force vax rules? If I dont force vax rules, how will this affect the health of my staff? Does my staff have a greater possibility to get infected by my customer or local people? Will an unvaxed infected person still attend or stay at home quarantening to recover?

You decide and please give feedback that others may learn from your experience.

 

[marksman]

I went digging through the "63 studies". You could have 10,000 low quality, uncontrolled studies and they would still be meaningless. This is called "Gish galloping". Go ahead, cherry pick the best study and post it here so we can go through it. Find a randomized, placebo controlled trial in there, you can't. Which is funny, because they have been done on Ivermectin! There is a reason that the site you posted conveniently leaves out all placebo controlled trials, and only posts 63 with dubious methodology. Look through them, half are using multiple treatments and drugs. The others use no controls, no placebo, aren't randomized (self selected even!). You are being duped. Every trial that uses actual standard methods to determine drug effectiveness (randomized, placebo controlled trial) shows that there is no statistical benefit to Ivermectin in COVID.

As to the graph, so what? Correlation DOES NOT equal causation. There are 1,000 variables that aren't controlled for, but MUST be if you want to determine the actual affect. One could draw a graph just like that claiming Ivermectin was used in the USA's Delta wave and point to success, yet we didn't use much at all and it would be make believe.

I get it, we're all desperate for a miracle cure. Test hypothesis: it works or it doesn't. There is no grand conspiracy of the drug companies. Yes, there are some misaligned incentives, but there's also public and private research filling in the gaps.

ROFLMAO, oh really,

thankyou for this mornings belly laugh ROFLMAO l cant stop LOL
you do realize the reason that big pharma has not given Ivermectin the ok is because it is so cheap and they cannot put a patent on it now LOL money money money LOL
Mercks new drug is $700 a dose or Pfizer has a new pill that is Ivermectin
but cannot work because you say Ivermectin does not work although there are plenty around the world who disagree with you, even the Japanese have made Ivermectin a treatment LOL
as for your placebo controlled trials, the graph shows the use of Ivermectin before stopping, stopping and then using again, there's a good one for you and with millions of people ROFLMAO
you have given me the best laugh for the day, better than l could ever expect LOL
Klaus Schwab once said not so long ago that "by the time the sheeple figure it out it will be too late, they will be in the cool room"

 

[Rimshot]

ROFLMAO, oh really,

thankyou for this mornings belly laugh ROFLMAO l cant stop LOL
you do realize the reason that big pharma has not given Ivermectin the ok is because it is so cheap and they cannot put a patent on it now LOL money money money LOL
Mercks new drug is $700 a dose or Pfizer has a new pill that is Ivermectin
but cannot work because you say Ivermectin does not work although there are plenty around the world who disagree with you, even the Japanese have made Ivermectin a treatment LOL
you have given me the best laugh for the day, better than l could ever expect LOL
Klaus Schwab once said not so long ago that "by the time the sheeple figure it out it will be too late, they will be in the cool room"

There ARE some cheap, safe drugs that show results in randomized controlled trials, fluvoxamine for example. Also there's budesonide. Don't forget about remdesivir or dexamethasone as well.

The irony here is that the scientifically ignorant (not an insult) have been duped and are the "sheeple" here. You are trusting pundits and grifters without vetting the information. The only promising ivermectin papers that actually used sound methodology I have heard of were later retracted over falsified data (the Egyptian one) or rejected over conflict of interest by the journal, or refused to share their trial data for review entirely. Meanwhile there have been several controlled trials that have been published showing no benefit at all to ivermectin.

Please, I beg you. Share the randomized placebo controlled trials showing that ivermectin does ANYTHING. You can't because it DOES NOT EXIST.

 

[Scott CWO]

IF (and that’s a big IF) the vaccines drop to 50% efficacy against the delta variant (and other variants yet to come because people aren’t getting vaccinated and become breeding grounds that create more variants) but still decrease chances of hospitalization and death, that’s not fairly worthless in my opinion.

 

[Bill DeHaan]

IF (and that’s a big IF) the vaccines drop to 50% efficacy against the delta variant (and other variants yet to come because people aren’t getting vaccinated and become breeding grounds that create more variants) but still decrease chances of hospitalization and death, that’s not fairly worthless in my opinion.

Scott,
The vaccines reduce the severity of the symptoms and the associated complications of a Covid infection. They do not reduce the likelihood of infection. The vaccinated and unvaccinated can both be infected and both infect others including the vaccinated And the unvaccinated. - Bill

 

[Bhfs300]

We have a plan for April 22 and if the company we are working with isn’t vaccinated we will not go to SA.

 

[machinistbutler]

Got my flu shot a few days ago. Not even a sore arm this time.


How bout them Oilers.......

 

[Red Leg]

We have a plan for April 22 and if the company we are working with isn’t vaccinated we will not go to SA.

I think that is just a little over the top. You will fly on an aircraft, crammed with fellow exhaling human beings, who have only to show a negative test within 72 hrs of takeoff. Who knows where their dirty little hands have been in the interim. They will even have their masks off while eating and drinking. You will be in crowded airports for hours at a time with still more people. Every one of them sitting at an airport bar or restaurant will also be unmasked. And God only knows what viral detritus will be left in all those restrooms. And think of all those sweaty potentially viral palms hanging onto the rails and grips of the shuttle vehicles and trams. When you get to your camp your pillow will have supported another head sometime before your arrival and we all know how questionable a single layer of cotton, however clean, can be in stopping viral material.

I would suggest getting on with life.

 

[Cmekellie]

Would you hunt with a Safari Company that required Covid vaccination for all hunters and staff?

After my wife and I having a bad case of Covid we had our entire staff to have Covid Vaccinations. Here is my question, should Safari Companies require all visiting hunters to have had full vaccination for Covid? Believe me I believe in personal rights as much as anyone, but I am asking for everyones opinion.

Yes

 

[marksman]

There ARE some cheap, safe drugs that show results in randomized controlled trials, fluvoxamine for example. Also there's budesonide. Don't forget about remdesivir or dexamethasone as well.

The irony here is that the scientifically ignorant (not an insult) have been duped and are the "sheeple" here. You are trusting pundits and grifters without vetting the information. The only promising ivermectin papers that actually used sound methodology I have heard of were later retracted over falsified data (the Egyptian one) or rejected over conflict of interest by the journal, or refused to share their trial data for review entirely. Meanwhile there have been several controlled trials that have been published showing no benefit at all to ivermectin.

Please, I beg you. Share the randomized placebo controlled trials showing that ivermectin does ANYTHING. You can't because it DOES NOT EXIST.

just to show that Placebo trials do exist although there dont seem to be many l will post a link here showing one or l should say reviewing one in brazil that apparently is flawed but who am l to say
it was in fact in the last link l posted that you said l was trying to obscure the intended meaning with 64 real time meta analysis studies that you have suggested are all baseless that you checked out https://ivmmeta.com/#top

but anyway while l have your attention
Indonesia is another country who has proven that Ivermectin works.
In June, they had a controlled rolling caseload of 5,000 a day. It was not rising thanks to a philanthropist called Haryoseno who had been arranging for ivermectin supplies at low cost to help people, but in a fit of modern-medicine, in line with the deadly WHO recommendations, the Indonesian government banned ivermectin on June 12th. Cases took off. Mayhem ensued and about 90,000 people died in the following surge.
early July even if Ivermectin was banned a number of high-ranking politicians championed it, and people were flocking to buy it.
July 15th the Indonesian government relented, July 18th new daily cases peaked across Indonesia and now they are lower than they were before. during the surge, at least two million Indonesians were infected.

also you would know that Indonesia has detected 211 variants that Ivermectin has been used as a treatment for

Indonesia detects 211 more contagious variants of concern - Xinhua | English.news.cn

and since you like reviews here is one you may have not seen yet that may interest you

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19... : American Journal of Therapeutics

mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemoprophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, COVID-19 infection. Data sources: We searched bibliographic databases up to April 25, 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were...

journals.lww.com

and something to look forward to

Covid: Ivermectin to be studied as possible treatment in UK

Scientists begin to give the drug to people at home with symptoms to see if it can keep them out of hospital.

www.bbc.com

l'm sure that if it were true that Ivermectin was shown to have no benefit at all the UK would not be wasting time and money trialling such a cheap drug

one last one, remdesivir,
l have heard that 53% of people using this drug for Ebola in trials died,
it apparently is not a good drug

Remdesivir Fails to Prevent Covid-19 Deaths in Huge Trial (Published 2020)

Critics said the study, sponsored by the W.H.O., was too poorly conducted to be definitive.

www.nytimes.com

Ivermectin, the poor mans Vax or should l say it works for the poor man LOL

 

[BSO Dave]

I'm sorry, but you've been confused or taken by a number of logical fallacies and cognitive biases. I'm not pretending to be an authority on any of this or "belief" in anything other than the method. You are obviously out of your depth if you can't easily differentiate quality data from the noise and garbage methodology of the snake oil salesmen.

Out of my depth? LMFAO.. Is there no bounds to your arrogance, and elitist sanctimony? I have long ago realized the futility of trying to have a conversation with somebody who has convinced themselves that they are smarter than everyone else. You can continue to stroke your own ego and peddle your bullshit to everybody else, but I'm no having any more of it.

The irony here is that the scientifically ignorant (not an insult) have been duped and are the "sheeple" here.

You're an pompous ass.. (not an insult).. You are also correct that there are sheeple here. The irony is that you don't realize one of them is staring back at you in the mirror. LOL. History has shown time and again that those accusing others of drinking the Kool-aide are actually the ones who are most intoxicated by it..

IF (and that’s a big IF) the vaccines drop to 50% efficacy against the delta variant (and other variants yet to come because people aren’t getting vaccinated and become breeding grounds that create more variants) but still decrease chances of hospitalization and death, that’s not fairly worthless in my opinion.

The truth is we don't really know the actual stats in regard to the efficacy over time. 6 months seems to be about the extent of any viable efficacy. Yet, instead of acknowledging the real stats, the CDC merely altered their vaccine sales pitch from prevention to reduction of severity of disease, hospitalizations, and deaths. Regardless, I certainly agree that even partial or short term-efficacy is better than nothing especially for those in the highest risk demographics.

In regard to my earlier comment calling the vaccines fairly worthless, in hindsight, I would have used different words.. "Fairly worthless" is an unfair description. The vaccines are certainly not worthless, but their efficacy against prevention has certainly been exaggerated. I honestly wish they delivered the protection as originally advertised. But, what we are seeing are the dynamic results that eventually reveal themselves in real world applications versus hastened clinical trials.

There is a reason that all science begins in theory, and medicine is referred to as a practice.. No reasonable person expects medical science to be perfect. Likewise, we understand that science does indeed change as more is learned through continuing research and clinical study. However, that is not what we are seeing from our bureaucratically controlled public health agencies... Instead of acknowledge the mistakes, and actually setting policy by following the real science reflective of those changing results, they have lied, and continue to move the goal posts with impunity. This has, and continues to be their colossal failure and main reason for public distrust since the beginning.

 

[curtism1234]

I think that is just a little over the top. You will fly on an aircraft, crammed with fellow exhaling human beings, who have only to show a negative test within 72 hrs of takeoff. Who knows where their dirty little hands have been in the interim. They will even have their masks off while eating and drinking. You will be in crowded airports for hours at a time with still more people. Every one of them sitting at an airport bar or restaurant will also be unmasked. And God only knows what viral detritus will be left in all those restrooms. And think of all those sweaty potentially viral palms hanging onto the rails and grips of the shuttle vehicles and trams. When you get to your camp your pillow will have supported another head sometime before your arrival and we all know how questionable a single layer of cotton, however clean, can be in stopping viral material.

I would suggest getting on with life.

All true, but I assume @Bhfs300 will be wearing a brand name N95 mask during his travel, will sanitize surfaces/hands, and keep the airplane vent pointed at him; that will certainly help minimize exposure.

Time spent at the safari will have your guard down. I'd have my N95 on in the vehicle and if you can't confirm all the clients have been vaxed, I'd be taking my dinner plate into my room

I agree we should be getting on with life - everyone go out and get vaccinated so we can do that

 

[Red Leg]

All true, but I assume @Bhfs300 will be wearing a brand name N95 mask during his travel, will sanitize surfaces/hands, and keep the airplane vent pointed at him; that will certainly help minimize exposure.

Time spent at the safari will have your guard down. I'd have my N95 on in the vehicle and if you can't confirm all the clients have been vaxed, I'd be taking my dinner plate into my room

I agree we should be getting on with life - everyone go out and get vaccinated so we can do that

"I take my dinner plate into my room ........ " In all seriousness, I truthfully can not even imagine living like that - or even wanting to do so.

Fortunately, I, and a number of other members here, have been in actual life threatening situations. It is amazing how something like that frees one from this sort of abject fearful nonsense.

Churchill (as he so often did) put it best, "Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." Or jumping out of a C-130 into the night loased with 120 lbs of gear, or pulling over a car in the dark of night with an obviously hopped up driver behind the wheel, or going into a burning building after hearing the cry of a child, ...........

It is a shame that most of our population has no perspective at all when it comes to actual risk. I'll take my meal with the hundreds of thousands - no, actually millions - of fellow Americans sitting in football stadiums across the South and Midwest today, unmasked, and enjoying the concept of personal liberty to the fullest.

 

[flatwater bill]

Remdesavir:
JAMA and 3 other prestigious medical journals report remdesavir's benefits.
"Science:The Wire" 23 Aug, 2020
"In a nutshell, this trial (noted above) encapsulates the issues with trials funded by the pharm industry in the context of the Covid epidemic. by applying an ambiguous end point to a patient population that may not have needed any treatment....this trial bears all the hallmarks of bad science." Gilead Sciences Inc funded this trial, they are a major producer of remdesavir. Considering that all three arms of this trial were randomized, and only one showed questionable, insignificant, improvement., plus, "there was no benefit to any patient at 10 days", why was it reported at all? Why was it seized upon to denigrate Ivermectin and other meds? "Prestigious medical journals should not have allowed this trial to be reported as positive". "It should have been carefully peer reviewed first."...Science Wire's quotes.

"The World Health Organization" does not recommend the use of remdesavir for Covid 19 patients."

FWIW......remdesavir is probably worthless, and possibly harmful...it is heavily used by US hospitals. It's cost is 100 to 1000 times the cost of other meds such as Ivermectin. So a study funded by the manufacturer showed it to be worthless, yet is was reported to be great. Why?

I have read more than 300 papers on various treatments of Covid 19. I have presented my findings locally to medical staff members. I still don't know what is best, the science on both sides has been rushed and poorly pursued. But what alarms me is that people with no training, who have CNN and MSNBC as their only source of info, do. They know what's best. I'm still learning.

In the meantime, I'm vaxxed and ready to go to Africa again..........FWB

 

[Scott CWO]

Out of my depth? LMFAO.. Is there no bounds to your arrogance, and elitist sanctimony? I have long ago realized the futility of trying to have a conversation with somebody who has convinced themselves that they are smarter than everyone else. You can continue to stroke your own ego and peddle your bullshit to everybody else, but I'm no having any more of it.

You're an pompous ass.. (not an insult).. You are also correct that there are sheeple here. The irony is that you don't realize one of them is staring back at you in the mirror. LOL. History has shown time and again that those accusing others of drinking the Kool-aide are actually the ones who are most intoxicated by it..



The truth is we don't really know the actual stats in regard to the efficacy over time. 6 months seems to be about the extent of any viable efficacy. Yet, instead of acknowledging the real stats, the CDC merely altered their vaccine sales pitch from prevention to reduction of severity of disease, hospitalizations, and deaths. Regardless, I certainly agree that even partial or short term-efficacy is better than nothing especially for those in the highest risk demographics.

In regard to my earlier comment calling the vaccines fairly worthless, in hindsight, I would have used different words.. "Fairly worthless" is an unfair description. The vaccines are certainly not worthless, but their efficacy against prevention has certainly been exaggerated. I honestly wish they delivered the protection as originally advertised. But, what we are seeing are the dynamic results that eventually reveal themselves in real world applications versus hastened clinical trials.

There is a reason that all science begins in theory, and medicine is referred to as a practice.. No reasonable person expects medical science to be perfect. Likewise, we understand that science does indeed change as more is learned through continuing research and clinical study. However, that is not what we are seeing from our bureaucratically controlled public health agencies... Instead of acknowledge the mistakes, and actually setting policy by following the real science reflective of those changing results, they have lied, and continue to move the goal posts with impunity. This has, and continues to be their colossal failure and main reason for public distrust since the beginning.

I appreciate you clarifying your comment. We agree more than we disagree.

 

[Scott CWO]

"I take my dinner plate into my room ........ " In all seriousness, I truthfully can not even imagine living like that - or even wanting to do so.

Fortunately, I, and a number of other members here, have been in actual life threatening situations. It is amazing how something like that frees one from this sort of abject fearful nonsense.

Churchill (as he so often did) put it best, "Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." Or jumping out of a C-130 into the night loased with 120 lbs of gear, or pulling over a car in the dark of night with an obviously hopped up driver behind the wheel, or going into a burning building after hearing the cry of a child, ...........

It is a shame that most of our population has no perspective at all when it comes to actual risk. I'll take my meal with the hundreds of thousands - no, actually millions - of fellow Americans sitting in football stadiums across the South and Midwest today, unmasked, and enjoying the concept of personal liberty to the fullest.

+1

 

[Hogpatrol]

Back in May of this year at Tambo, I wish some of our members could have observed the Asians in full hazmat suits. Even the kids were suited up the same way. It looked like their were getting ready to board the space shuttle, bubble helmets and tape around any seam. Meanwhile, I and my good buddy Markm were sitting at one of the eateries, maskless, chowing down and waiting for our flight.

 

[dchamp]

I guess I wouldn't be allowed if they required vaccinations.

LOVE MY CALI SCIENCE TEACHER DROPPING FACTS AGAINST THE MANDATES!!! LET'S GO!!! - Rumble

 

[375Fox]

Back in May of this year at Tambo, I wish some of our members could have observed the Asians in full hazmat suits. Even the kids were suited up the same way. It looked like their were getting ready to board the space shuttle, bubble helmets and tape around any seam. Meanwhile, I and my good buddy Markm were sitting at one of the eateries, maskless, chowing down and waiting for our flight.

It’s still going on in October. I was on the plane from Harare to Addis Ababa. It lands in Lusaka to let people off and pick up new passengers. The first people to come on the plane in Lusaka were the Chinese hazmat suits. I was wondering if it was safe for me to stay on plane with what they were going to spray it down with then I realized they weren’t disinfecting anything just terrified of covid. Ridiculous way to go through life.