is it cool if I skip ahead to the next exit?

No, you will be fined upwards of 240€, lose your license for a month, and get 2 points on your license (8 points means you lose it permanently, you will have to redo the license and take a so-called “idiot-test” beforehand).

So I should ask the Nobel prize winner to find out he doesn’t have an opinion on the matter and that is supposed to be evidence that it doesn’t work?

No you should take it as evidence that what the person answering you before me said, that Ivermectin is not intended for use against Coronaviruses, or any viruses for that matter, is true. There was a false quote from Campbell floating around on social media and he publicly disclaimed it. Ivermectin is not an antiviral, its intended use are roundworm infections. That was the point of OPs comment I believe.

Haruo Ozaki made his recommendation to use Ivermectin as a treatment for covid on February 9th, 2021. Not exactly “early days” of the pandemic. It was well over a year into the virus spreading and nearly a year into it officially being a pandemic.

Well you know, relatively speaking it’s early days, we are in year 6 now. Kind of besides the point really. Anyway I think I tracked down the (second-hand) quote from Haruo from some pro-Ivermectin website:

The Chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association, Dr. Haruo Ozaki, recommends Ivermectin for use with COVID patients.

He notes that the parts of Africa that use ivermectin to control parasites have a COVID death rate of just 2.2 per 100,000 population, as compared to 13 times that death rate among African countries that do not use ivermectin. – SurfguardCR

https://www.brightworkresearch.com/how-the-media-lied-about-japan-not-using-ivermectin-for-coronavirus/

You will note here that he specifically refers to parasite infections, i.e. worms. He could just be saying “Hey if your Covid patient has worms, maybe take care of that first”.

On a side note the Tokyo Medical Association seems to be a private company, not a public medical authority. Japan did recommend and distribute vaccines as soon as they became available.

As far as I can tell there is no “current consensus” regarding Ivermectin outside of the mainstream narrative that its “deboonked conservative quackery”.

It’s a bit more complicated than that, but if you want a one sentence summary I guess it fits. It was a meme that mostly conservatives seem to have fallen for.

Looking into it further there seems to be one side that is willing to point to clinical data like Haruo did when making his recommendation

Any specifics you can share? Like I said above, it seems Haruo was referring to worm infections and was taken out of context.

Coincidently, only one of these positions seems to have a financial incentive for big pharma but im sure that’s not relevant to the conversation.

Lol, who do you think sells Ivermectin? Small pharma?

Looking at the timeline of events regarding Ivermectin there isnt a single study from before the topic became a political issue that found it to be ineffective.

That’s untrue AFAIK, but anyway - My original point was that most of the studies that showed a positive effect came from places with relatively high incidences of roundworm infections. And it just makes sense that if you use ivermectin to treat a pre-existing worm infection it will help a patients immune system to fight an additional later Coronavirus infection. There was a false signal in the data and people just ran with it. No need for big (or small) pharma conspiracy here…

That alleged recommendation from Haruo Ozaki you keep quoting for example is five years old now, and specifically citing “parts of Africa” (many of which have a relatively high incidence of roundworm infections).

Anyone who’s actually looked into the matter and is honest would conclude that at best, we still dont actually know whether its effective or not because the more recent studies on the matter seem to have gone out of their way to ensure that any effect from the ivermectin wouldn’t be found.

Or maybe they are showing no effect because there is no effect (except in patients with a pre-existing roundworm infection, which Ivermectin is meant to treat). Sorry but unless you have something more concrete I’m sticking with my “people were panicking and grasping at straws” perspective.

I dont remember either of the people who won the Nobel prize for ivermectin ever publicly stating anything about its use in treating covid.

One of them specifically said it’s not his area of expertise:

I am a biologist with no claim to expertise in the clinical evaluation of drugs against viral infections. Thus, I have not taken a stand in support of, or against, the efficacy of ivermectin against COVID-19.

https://drew.edu/2021/09/09/drew-university-nobel-prize-winner-refutes-ivermectin-meme/

I remember the chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association Haruo Ozaki publicly recommending the use of ivermectin for treating covid based on several observational studies

A lot of people said a lot of things during the early days of the pandemic. The current consensus seems to be it only helps if you have Covid and also a coincidental worm infection that the ivermectin treats. Which is often true sadly on large parts of the planet.

They could be sick from something else but get rid of a long standing comorbidity of a pariste infection, you bet they are feeling good. They just think that relief from the varied symptoms from parasite is actually something else cured.

Pretty much this, although it seems freeing the immune system from fighting the worm infection really does help it in fighting the Coronavirus infection: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted (Ctrl+F “The Synthesis”).

TL;DR: Studies showing a positive effect from Ivermectin on Covid came mostly from areas with high worm infection incidence, areas with low incidence showed no or smaller positive effect.
NB: Link is a selfhosted Substack, works better with JavaScript turned off.

To be fair the article is called a glossary, so I guess it’s understandable. But if you click the switch language button it brings you to the German one with the table. Guess if we want a real equivalent in English somebody needs to create a new article for that.

I’m not denying that there are such people around, but I don’t really think they are in the majority. Most of the specific things you mention I saw coming just as much if not more from other servers.

I mean I have seen that accusation thrown around a lot, but from what I remember it was a few cases a long time (years?) back. But yeah to be honest I haven’t really been paying attention, so if you have evidence to the contrary feel free to let me know. The goals and rules of the server as stated seem fine to me, and I haven’t seen anything that really deviated too far from that.

Anyway, like I said I may not agree with every moderation decision, but I probably wouldn’t on other instances either. Didn’t your instance just defederate the Germans for their heavy-handed moderation of anything remotely antisemitic? I mean I would get it with any other instance I guess, but your users didn’t get why the Germans would be a bit iffy with this stuff?

Well I can’t speak for others, but I’m on lemmy.ml because the instance says it’s “A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers”. And in my experience that pretty much checks out, for all the talk I see from others about how it’s a den of authoritarianism and whatnot the actual amount of that I see on the actual instance is minimal. Yeah moderation sucks sometimes, but so it does on most every other instance though. Their approach to defederation seems to be avoiding it, and I don’t have to see any Nazi stuff or shit like that, so I’m good for now. Pick your poison.

The West has many flaws. But our flaws are nothing compared to these guys.

Well if you look a bit closer at the history of the cold war you will find that “the West”, mostly in the form of the CIA, destroyed a lot of nascent communist or even just social democratic governments worldwide through covert means, and sometimes even militarily. In the face of such a threat you are basically forced to become even more authoritarian, if you want your communist government to survive that is. So “the West” instituted a process of selection through political (and military) pressure if you will. Hence why there are no surviving liberal communist states left to discuss.

Anyway, I don’t think there is much of consensus here on lemmy.ml whether these countries are good or bad (or even something more nuanced). What I think often happens is that someone voices “critical support”, as in they say something like “Iran has a right to self-defence” although they don’t agree with everything else Iran does, and someone from another instance comes along to read it and confirmation-biases that into “typical lemmy.ml user, fully supports that theocratic regime”.

I mean just look at the straw man you build in your OP, supposedly I’m supporting the Islamic regime in Iran, and the anti-Islamic regime in China!? Bit of a stretch there mate…

I think you mean *wields.

Although *yields would also make sense in this particular context. :D

This wasn’t an example of trigger discipline. All but one of them didn’t even see the guy coming, and the only one that did gave off 3-4 shots, all of them close to the other guards, hitting at least one of them I believe (middle guy in the group to the back goes down and has to be helped up). This was an excellent example of poor trigger discipline, kind of lucky nobody died actually.

Edit: Like these are the rough angles of the shots, all of those were dangerous shots. 2 seems to have hit, 3 might also well have the guy in the suit seems to be in pain and delays drawing his gun.

This kind of behavior simply isn’t possible under anything that can be described as an occupation.

Well if its still a de jure occupation, by virtue of other countries having rights over the subject country, I think that alone already makes it fair to still call it an occupation. If the occupying powers furthermore do in fact still have active military deployments in the country I am beginning to wonder how you could not call it a military occupation.

This is incorrect. Occupation ended in West-Germany in 1955, […] exceptions: The right to station troops […] even without explicit consent from the West-German government

Lol, the occupation ended, except it didn’t end. Yeah ok. The actual end of the Allied Control Council was in 1990/1991, following the two+four treaty and reunification. That’s when the US (and others) lost rights to station troops in Germany at their discretion and Germany was granted full sovereignty. And until then there had been occupation troops there, doesn’t matter that they had been much reduced compared to the first ten years.

the US didn’t just flippantly “figured something out”

I didn’t say figuring out, I said figuring. Presented with two choices, close everything down or pay rent, they chose the latter.

but kept it active as both a logistics center […] and as a deterrent against Russia

Which was all I said, so we agree essentially: “why not rent already existing bases instead of building new ones elsewhere”

Ignoring the rhetoricity of the question: The military occupation of Germany after WW2 lasting for 45 years (1945-1990/1991) resulted in a lot NATO-standard military infrastructure being already established throughout the country; So when the occupation officially ended the US essentially just figured “why not rent already existing bases instead of building new ones elsewhere”.

Man fuck Axel Voss! Damn copyright shill. Guess we can take solace in the fact that he seemed to be the only one clearly taking the publishers side here.

And if I’m not mistaken, the European Commission representative argued in his reply to Voss (around 12:20) that “collective management organisations” or “cultural heritage institutions” might well be allowed to preserve games that are not commercially available anymore already under the current framework.

Well admittance to Mensa is based on IQ tests, so it kind of follows.

But as far as IQ tests do go, Mensa will probably offer a better one than some random ass website that milks its victims for money.

Well yeah kind of, except for the caveat that there are some things in those tests a website can’t really check. The tests are standardised and publicly available. There isn’t really any reason to not implement a (half-way) proper test, even if you are just harvesting data.

Above average that has to count for something right?

Well they aren’t though, 345/1000 people having a worse score than you means there are 654/1000 people who have a better score.

“IQ 100” is a moving target that gets regularly updated to the new average (which relatively speaking has been mostly climbing for decades).

Ah yes the floor: famous for being a ceiling. Makes so much sense the floor could be above the ground.

Well kind of does, the ceiling of the current level is the floor of the level above it.

This is in part a result of translation. Other languages have a different word for ground floor than the word they have for floor 1.

Can confirm, in German we say “erstes Obergeschoss” (first upper floor) or “erste Etage” for the second/first floor, and “Erdgeschoss” (earth floor) for first/ground floor.

If you leave out the words entirely there is one group that counts (3,2,1,-1,-2), another that counts (2,1,-1,-2,-3), and the other three that count (2,1,0,-1,-2). Last one wins obviously, just by virtue of using numbers correctly.