Jump to content

Indonesia Regulator Allows Ivermectin Use For Covid Treatment


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Gandang Smile said:

Again, I 100% agree on your statements that no vaccine is 100% efficient and infection/contagion are still possible.

Again, what I am up against is the political use of the vaccine, to create a two-tier society.

 

The politicians are not using the vaccine to 'create' a two-tier society though.

NB I'm not saying it might not happen... but it's not the pollies who are the root cause of the change, it's being driven by the majority views of the population (which the pollies are just implementing).

And honestly... given that the real percentage of people who cannot medically have a vaccine is miniscule I see it as mostly self inflicted and their choice.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When it comes to most things, particularly if I'm putting something into my body, I'll take the "mainstream" option every time.  Whilst accepting that the big pharmas may or may not be gouging us/gove

The report on the trials I watched highlighted that Invermectin was capable of killing Covid in vitro but at a concentration level that was dangerous to the human body. There was also no standardised

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, GeoffH said:

The politicians are not using the vaccine to 'create' a two-tier society though.

NB I'm not saying it might not happen... but it's not the pollies who are the root cause of the change, it's being driven by the majority views of the population (which the pollies are just implementing).

And honestly... given that the real percentage of people who cannot medically have a vaccine is miniscule I see it as mostly self inflicted and their choice.

That's another big dilemma as we speak...are these politicians aware of the consequences of a Green Pass kind of system? Of the fact that the vaccine offers no evidence of protection against the virus and still allows the virus to be passed on? They're either in it, or stoopid. I like to think that the former is the case.

I don't think the majority of the population has been asking for a Green Pass kind of system. Some people are more overzealous than others in wanting to enforce rules for the sake of the "collective good". It's only human nature. However I am sure the vast majority of people are not sanctioning the idea of the economy that grinds to a halt several times a year while "Covid cases" keep spiking anyway, vaccine or not.

Again, I am myself pro-vaccination, or at least pro-choice. I guess you and I represent the majority. I am personally against the instrumental use of the vaccination as a way to limit people's personal freedoms.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gandang Smile said:

Of the fact that the vaccine offers no evidence of protection against the virus and still allows the virus to be passed on?

Well... it depends upon what you call "evidence of protection against the virus"... yes it does allow the virus to be passed on but as the figures from the UK show the R number of fully vaccinated people is significantly lower than that for unvaccinated people.  And the majority of cases being hospitalized with serious disease are unvaccinated people, people with full vaccination are not getting seriously ill at anything like the percentage of the unvaccinated.

 

As for the politicians "knowing what they're doing"... well... that's something someone else will have to have a go at responding to :cheersty:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Manager
10 hours ago, Gandang Smile said:

Again, I am myself pro-vaccination, or at least pro-choice. I guess you and I represent the majority. I am personally against the instrumental use of the vaccination as a way to limit people's personal freedoms.

Better stock up on necessaries  :smile:

MANILA, PHILIPPINES

The President says he won't wait for a law penalizing persons refusing COVID-19 vaccines: 'The law of necessity is there'


Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte wants police and barangay captains to restrict the movement of people who refuse coronavirus vaccines, in a bid to stem the spread of the feared Delta variant of COVID-19.

"Ang mga barangay captain na lang, 'pag ayaw nila magpabakuna 'wag silang palabasin ng bahay," said Duterte on Wednesday evening, July 28, during a meeting with pandemic task force officials. (If they refuse vaccination, barangay captains should not let them leave their house.)

"'Pag lumabas kayo ng bahay, sabihin ko sa mga pulis, ibalik ka doon sa bahay mo (If you leave your house, I'll tell the police to bring you back). You’ll be escorted back to your house because you are a walking spreader," said Duterte.

The new warning harks back to remarks he made in June threatening to order the arrest of people who refuse a COVID-19 vaccine.

The President said he expects barangay captains to know who in their villages are vaccinated and unvaccinated. The local chiefs should warn the unvaccinated that they pose a danger to others, said Duterte.

Can Duterte order law enforcers to keep unvaccinated people in their houses?

The government has so far not faced any legal challenge over its year-old stay-at-home order covering kids, elderly, and persons with comorbidities. Their reasoning is that these are vulnerable groups that must stay home for their own protection.


Government health experts say unvaccinated persons are much more vulnerable to Delta variant infection than vaccinated persons.

Restricting movements fall under the constitutional right to travel, which the government through the Interagency Task Force (IATF) has done through imposition of lockdowns.

"Restricting movements may be acceptable only if it is pursuant to a reasonable and proportionate regulation in the interest of public health," said National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL) president Edre Olalia. "But the restriction must not amount to actual prohibition especially under pain of punishment."

Olalia said restricting movement of the unvaccinated people is the government's "another jab at liberties," when the could just make sure that "there is adequate and continuous supply of vaccines and that their rollouts are efficiently and equitably distributed."

Justified by 'law of necessity'
In the same meeting on Wednesday, the President also called on Congress to pass a law imposing penalties on persons refusing COVID-19 vaccines.

"We have to come up witha law punishing a guy, a person who has not been vaccinated and is going around," he said.

But a few sentences later, Duterte said he could not wait for such a law and would "assume full responsibility" should he face legal cases in the future for his order.


"Will I wait for a law when so many are going to die? That's the problem. There is no law, but the law of necessity is there," he said.

Low vaccination rate
Only 6.8 million Filipinos, or 6.2% of the population, are fully vaccinated, as of July 27. Only 10.4% of the population have received their first dose.

While daily numbers of doses administered through the local governments have been improving, this is limited to the supply of vaccines the national government is able to get from abroad. Vaccines are even scarcer in some areas outside of Metro Manila, as the government is prioritizing supply for places seeing the highest number of COVID-19 cases.

The government is also yet to open vaccinations to the general adult population, and is currently prioritizing jabs for health workers, elderly, persons with comorbidities, and economic frontliners.

However, Metro Manila mayors have asked to be allowed to vaccinate any willing adult, in a bid to stem any spread of the Delta variant.

On Wednesday, Duterte agreed on some level, saying a shot refused by someone in one of the priority groups should just be given to any willing adult. However, there is no formal directive to change the vaccine priority scheme as of writing.

Currently, persons below 18 years old and above 65 years old are told to stay home in places under general community quarantine with restrictions or higher, except for essential activities like getting food or seeking medical care.Persons 19 years old to 65 years old can go out for work and activities allowed in their areas based on quarantine classification. However, with the rise in number of vaccinated persons, the government has also allowed fully-vaccinated senior citizens to move around freely

https://www.rappler.com/nation/duterte-says-unvaccinated-people-covid-19-should-be-barred-going-out

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Support
7 hours ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte wants police and barangay captains to restrict the movement of people who refuse coronavirus vaccines,

I dont know the word in British English or Ozzie English but us Yanks would call "HORSE Pucky!"  

Sound familiar? Kids under 16 stay indoors, yet we see kids in the streets every say throwing flip flops at tin cans. Face Masks and Shields worn at all times, yet we see Barangay officials wandering around with out shields and masks worn as chin warmers, if customers have shields they are used  as see through sun shields. On and On and ON!

 The only places something like this will be enforced is Malls and supermarkets where the owners have DEEP Pockets and they know the city and Barangays will target them for fines (or bribes). 

I was once told by a wise old soldier...."Son, never give an order you know will not be obeyed!"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jollygoodfellow said:

Better stock up on necessaries  :smile:

[...]

Duterte's presidency has definitely aged like milk. I would be shocked if anyone in his own political cabinet will ever take these kinds of tirades seriously, let alone enact them as bills, or "law of necessity".

 

@scott h if I could extend those wise soldier's words... "Never give an order if you know people behind won't respect, nor fear you".

Edited by Gandang Smile
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, scott h said:

I dont know the word in British English or Ozzie English but us Yanks would call "HORSE Pucky!"  

Sound familiar? Kids under 16 stay indoors, yet we see kids in the streets every say throwing flip flops at tin cans. Face Masks and Shields worn at all times, yet we see Barangay officials wandering around with out shields and masks worn as chin warmers, if customers have shields they are used  as see through sun shields. On and On and ON!

 The only places something like this will be enforced is Malls and supermarkets where the owners have DEEP Pockets and they know the city and Barangays will target them for fines (or bribes). 

I was once told by a wise old soldier...."Son, never give an order you know will not be obeyed!"

Normally I would say someone making decrees like that must think he's prepared for the revolution. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, scott h said:

I dont know the word in British English or Ozzie English but us Yanks would call "HORSE Pucky!"  

 

The closest common expression amongst Aussies would be "Bull Shit" (we tend to use swear words more in normal conversation than a lot of other countries I've visited).

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...