Joe Rogan Podcast discusion thread

Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by DUCKMOUTH, May 13, 2012.

  1. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    It's really not. It's Russell Brand's pseudointellectual psychobabble, delivered in a tone of equanimity that helps his arguments masquerade as fair.

    See how he told on himself when he discussed vaccines as a decision to be made according to one's own personal wishes?

    Sit the rest of this out. None of you, Russell Brand or perhaps least of all, Joe Rogan know what you're talking about in regards to covid treatment and vaccination.
     
    #2051 pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ, Sep 10, 2021
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2021
    wes tegg, IV, jhooked and 6 others like this.
  2. VaxRule

    VaxRule Mmm ... Coconuts
    Donor TMB OG
    Michigan WolverinesSwansea

    Look, whether or not I spray bullets from my AK randomly around a crowded shopping center is a personal decision. Quit trying to shame me for engaging in my second amendment freedom.
     
  3. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    pfft like that would work
     
  4. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Yea, it's pretty obvious that he's trying his best to take no position, at all, on vaccination, how to treat covid, etc., and offer his opinion on media and how media behaves.

    And of course we can't have that. This idea that media in biased, politicizes all information, uses everything as an opportunity to score points from the tribe they are trying to appeal to means nothing unless the person delivering that opinion agrees with you.

    But he addresses your concern head on, doesn't he? He says you will argue that not being vaccinated affects other people. He says that's a fantastic attitude, to consider the way your actions effect others, and says he'd love to see that attitude applied across a range of issues, including distribution of wealth, public speech, education. And if those are areas where you don't take the same approach and consider how your actions affect others, it's interesting that you'd stringently apply that philosophy to medical and public life.
     
  5. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    "I'm not qualified in any way to offer my thoughts and layperson analysis on covid treatments on vaccination, so I won't. But yes I will here I go"
     
  6. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Again, he commented on the media's response. As he said, the initial reporting from the main stream media about Rogan was a) taking delight in that he was sick, b) a sense of hopefulness that he would suffer from it, and c) cynicism about the method of his treatment, including apparent fabrications about him taking horse dewormer
     
  7. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    Cynicism re: his triumphalism about using a slew of medicines and supplements none of which would be prescribed by a physician who adheres to any standard of evidence based practice? Seems entirely fair.

    Why are people like you lining up to come to Rogan's rescue? Wouldn't think MMA masculine super alpha man would need or want that.

    And if you didn't notice the many instances Brand went headlong against his "I'm not qualified to discuss medicines and vaccines" disclaimer, then you're, well, just being you.
     
    wes tegg and VaxRule like this.
  8. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Riner is just a contrarian. He only wants too argue. It's why he seems to have no real position and why he argues over mind numbingly dumb shit so often.
     
  9. beerme

    beerme Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Penn State Nittany LionsNew York YankeesGreen Bay Packers

    except there’s just a couple MINOR different
    1) this is actually life or death
    2) anti vaxxers already agree and subject their kids to all sorts of state mandated vaccinations so this isn’t something that should be contentious
    3) this is an easy, cost effective solution, where as that’s not the case w education overhaul
    4) people here say yes we should also do all those things with education and wealth distribution, and other items on your ridiculously poorly thought out list, and the same people say no to that too because it’s too expensive.
     
    VaxRule likes this.
  10. Killy Me Please

    Killy Me Please I lift things up and put people down.
    Donor

    oh, yeah... but TEAM OUTLAW!!!! JOE DID KNOW BUT LETS ACT LIKE HE DIDNT BECAUSE ITS FUNNY
     
  11. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Am I coming to Rogan's rescue?? Pointing out the shitty way the media reports things and uses their bias would apply to anyone in Rogan's situation if the media reported it the same way. If Rachel Maddow followed the same course of action as Rogan, and the media reported it the same way, I'd feel the same way. And she probably has more alpha masculine energy than Rogan does.

    Also, super cool to be that guy. Hey, aren't all you MMA bros the same?? Also, stereotyping is wrong!

    Brand clearly said he was using a piece he read on Substack, which outlines the facts surrounding Ivermectin, including:
    That the WHO and Merck advise against taking it to treat C19
    That Oxford University is doing a large-scale study in Ivermectin's efficacy in treating C19 based on “small pilot studies show that early administration with ivermectin can reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19,” that it’s “a well-known medicine with a good safety profile,” and “because of the early promising results in some studies, it is already being widely used to treat COVID-19 in several countries.”

    So if you want to say he's going headlong into his admission that he's not qualified to offer medical advise, you have to be willfully ignorant of the fact that he's contrasting, not his personal medical advise, but the advise of the WHO and Merck, with Oxford University and their basis and reasoning for spending time and money conducting large scale clinical trials.

    He no more supports the idea of taking Ivermectin based on that analysis than he advises against taking it based on the same exact analysis. He cites the WHO and Merck, saying not to take Ivermectin. But this is not about Ivermectin, specifically, is it? It's about the way the media slants their reporting and uses their bias. The way they reported and handled Rogan's situation is the latest example. That you can't see the broader message and are zeroed in on the details you personally disagree with (while ignoring the details you do agree with, apparently), is partially emblematic of that broader message Brand is highlighting; you are so used to things being packaged for you to try to score points with your team, that when you can't clearly see points for your team, or see any points being scored for the other team, your gut reaction is to reject it, wholly.

    https://taibbi.substack.com/p/ivermectin-can-a-drug-be-right-wing
     
  12. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Lol Matt Taibbi
     
    The Walrus, Jc6, BWC and 3 others like this.
  13. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Again, the guy who wrote it is sort of irrelevant, if the information is correct. Rejecting good information based on the source is smart.
     
  14. IV

    IV Freedom is the right of all sentient beings
    Donor TMB OG
    Alabama Crimson TideUAB BlazersDemocratAvengersBirmingham LegionUnited States Men's National Soccer Team

    yeah, you clearly do not get it
     
  15. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Completely disagree. The source definitely matters. Taibbi is just a contrarian now. He argues in bad faith.
     
    Jc6 likes this.
  16. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Are his facts incorrect?

    Also, a hilarious take, considering the message of the Brand video
     
  17. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    No clue. I'm not reading Taibbi's substack.

    No idea what the brand video is
     
  18. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Elton Brand made a video about Ivermectin while shooting free throws. It's worth a watch
     
    IV likes this.
  19. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Going to pass on that too
     
    mc415 and steamengine like this.
  20. IV

    IV Freedom is the right of all sentient beings
    Donor TMB OG
    Alabama Crimson TideUAB BlazersDemocratAvengersBirmingham LegionUnited States Men's National Soccer Team

    Was this a joke, I liked it, joke more riner
     
  21. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Shhhh you are blowing it, Redav thinks it was real
     
  22. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    I haven't seen it so I have no opinion of it
     
  23. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    he makes 92 out of 100 free throws. #Stillgotit
     
  24. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

  25. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    The fact that large RCTs are underway to assess the efficacy of Ivermectin is NOT, in any way, evidence of its efficacy. Know what a null hypothesis is? You and RB should quit twisting yourselves in weird ideological knots over things you have no foundational understanding of.

    I don't give a shit which countries are prescribing it, if that's actually true. I know that no one who is prescribing it is prescribing it according to guideline, and is doing so on the basis of extremely flimsy evidence. That's bad medicine.

    So no. "The media" is skewering a guy with a well established anti-vaxx platform, for his use and heavy promotion of non-evidence based treatments for covid. He's a reckless fool. I don't see what's so worth suiting up your white armor for here.

    Extremely clever homophobic dig at Maddow. Par for the course.
     
    popnfresh, npndne, Snakes and 11 others like this.
  26. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Yikes I skipped that. What an asshole
     
  27. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    Aw come on, you are allowed to make an extremely clever par for the course MMA bros dig but I can't make a lezbo dig??? Seems unfair

    That there are RCT trials underway is not the entire body of evidence that supports potential efficacy. The evidence that Oxford University cites is the evidence of that. It's preliminary and needs to be tested, hence the need for RCTs.

    "if that's actually true". Now you are questioning the integrity of Oxford University??
    translation: I have no idea, and don't care to educate myself, but here's my opinion!

    This is political for you. If there were a drug not called Ivermectin that Trump did not endorse, that fit this description: small pilot studies show that early administration with this drug can reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19, that it’s a well-known medicine with a good safety profile, and because of the early promising results in some studies, it is already being widely used to treat COVID-19 in several countries....I don't think you'd be as vociferously against it.
     
  28. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    Jesus I just found myself having a lengthy argument about evidence-based practice with riner on the internet.

    Got him to out himself as a homophobe, though I imagine it wasn't the first time
     
    ~ taylor ~, BP, popnfresh and 8 others like this.
  29. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    ha ha what??? I made a "joke" about rachel maddow being masculine and that's outing myself as a homophobe? goodness

    Again, this is all political, and you know it, hence your shift in an actual discussion to pandering for likes.
     
    Wee Bey likes this.
  30. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    Bruh he's a doctor. He's telling you the studies they're using are unreliable. It doesn't seem like he's the one who's making this political
     
  31. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    The studies who is using are unreliable? Oxford???
     
  32. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    Gonna clarify-- there is enough pre-clinical evidence to shrug at and do an RCT. That's what's happening. But that's not good clinical evidence to legitimize its off-label use outside the context of a clinical trial.

    There is no "where there's smoke, there's fire" in evidence based practice. Because, as I said a couple pages ago, in pre-clinical studies or small, limited clinical trials, there's usually NOT firee where there's smoke. And in fact, it's usually not even smoke you're seeing.

    Evaluating clinical evidence and CFB coaching rumors are not the same thing. There are no flights to track and devine's not gonna have the goods before anyone else
     
    BWC, Eamudo229, LetItSoak and 6 others like this.
  33. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    An edit? Clearly pandering for likes. And VaxRule can't like it quickly enough!
     
  34. IV

    IV Freedom is the right of all sentient beings
    Donor TMB OG
    Alabama Crimson TideUAB BlazersDemocratAvengersBirmingham LegionUnited States Men's National Soccer Team

    What happens if/when Oxford is like, “hey y’all ivermectin is not effective vs. c-19”
     
  35. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    I'm completely sure everyone will align in satisfied agreement.
     
    BWC, Barves2125, Redav and 3 others like this.
  36. TimJimothy

    TimJimothy Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Kansas State WildcatsKansas City Royals

    The same as if ivermectin is proven to be effective; 50% will scoff while 50% gloat.
     
    theriner69er likes this.
  37. IV

    IV Freedom is the right of all sentient beings
    Donor TMB OG
    Alabama Crimson TideUAB BlazersDemocratAvengersBirmingham LegionUnited States Men's National Soccer Team

    I wouldn’t scoff, I would be pretty pumped there’s a functional option on the table.

    That doesn’t change anything about the people avoiding a functional vaccine and acting like children.
     
    #2088 IV, Sep 13, 2021
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2021
    bic, wes tegg and DUCKMOUTH like this.
  38. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    And to be clear, I am not saying Ivermectin is 100% for sure a great drug in treating C19 based on the current available evidence. Odds are it won't be some miracle drug.

    But off-label usage of drugs for any treatment, but particularly to treat a virus causing a global pandemic for almost 2 years now has to look at potential benefit and risk. Waiting years for complete clinical trials isn't possible or necessarily prudent in this case. And how many drugs get used off label? like....almost all of them?

    Treatment has changed because initially we didn't know what the fuck to do. Even a year and a half later we are still not totally sure how to treat this, right?? No drug is 100% safe, but Ivermectin has proven to be, generally, very safe, right? Any drug with very low risk and any potential up side should be considered for treatment for C19, shouldn't it?? As we get more info, we modify our approach.

    You are talking about off-label treatment for C19 the same way you'd talk about off-label treatment for arthritis. It's not the same. Not at this point anyway.

    Where this becomes, and remains political is when Joe Rogan is prescribed human-grade medication Ivermectin by a human medical doctor, and CNN says he ate horse paste. Where CNN ignores the safety data we have on this drug that's been used for 40 years, where media ignores the science and treats it like rat poison.

    Lord help us if the Oxford study reveals some benefit. Holy fuck, the collective sonic boom from leftie's heads exploding. I'm completely sure everyone will align in satisfied agreement.
     
  39. TimJimothy

    TimJimothy Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Kansas State WildcatsKansas City Royals

    Oh that I can agree with 100%
     
  40. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    Oh Christ.

    Why does everyone think "yet no sufficient clinical evidence to merit use outside of clinical trials" is somehow a political statement, or reflects a political idea?

    I'm gonna do what I always do, assess the evidence, wait until there's a couple RCTs out to fully assess reliability and generalizability, and wait to see what the IDSA says. Once there's a satisfying amount of sturdy clinical evidence, of course people practice's will change. That's how this works.

    The "this is all just political for everyone" stance is childish tantrum.
     
  41. TimJimothy

    TimJimothy Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Kansas State WildcatsKansas City Royals

    No, it's really not. If you don't see the political bullshit from both sides, you're either just conveniently ignoring it or you're not nearly as intelligent as some of your posts would indicate.
     
  42. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

  43. DUCKMOUTH

    DUCKMOUTH People don’t you know, don’t you know
    Donor
    Southern Mississippi Golden EaglesNew Orleans SaintsGrateful DeadPoker

    It’s silly to me that someone would refuse the vaccine, but go to Farm Depot and eat horse pills. “ I don’t trust the vaccine so I’ll self medicate even though warnings are there”

    If your doctor wants to prescribe you the human dose then by all means go for it. Silly though when an effective vaccine is in place.
     
    BP, popnfresh, Barves2125 and 5 others like this.
  44. Redav

    Redav One big ocean
    Donor

    "We currently have no evidence ivermectin is effective against covid"

    "You're just saying that because of politics"

    r u srs rite now
     
  45. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    I think the big issue here is time. Time we don't necessarily have that could save lives. People see what you wrote above and hear: give us 3 or 4 years and we can figure out if this is a good drug to use or not.

    And respond: we don't have 3 or 4 years to figure this out. If (IF) there is a drug that's proven to be very safe, and even has a hint of being effective as a treatment, why would we wait years? Of course, in the mean time do the trials, figure out the exact risks and benefits. But let's use the best evidence we have, today, right now, to keep people as safe as possible, while treating the disease.

    Also, there are plenty of doctors supporting the use of Ivermectin. Have you ever prescribed a drug off-label, that hadn't undergone extensive trials?
     
  46. theriner69er

    theriner69er Well-Known Member
    Donor
    Cleveland BrownsFlorida State SeminolesDetroit Red Wings

    That Oxford University is doing a large-scale study in Ivermectin's efficacy in treating C19 based on “small pilot studies show that early administration with ivermectin can reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19,” “because of the early promising results in some studies, it is already being widely used to treat COVID-19 in several countries.”
     
  47. DUCKMOUTH

    DUCKMOUTH People don’t you know, don’t you know
    Donor
    Southern Mississippi Golden EaglesNew Orleans SaintsGrateful DeadPoker

    I’ll take my personal covid cases pre vaccine as example. Only felt like shit for two days first time and shit for like 3 days the second time. If I got human prescribed Ivermectin day 1 both times my outcome would have been the same I feel. I think many folks are probably just healing and getting over Covid while getting this drug and then sing it’s praises.

    Just my non scientific opinion. Once again the vaccine is the most effective way to avoid Covid issues.
     
  48. pnk$krtcrÿnästÿ

    Donor
    Rutgers Scarlet KnightsArizona WildcatsTexas AandM Aggies altTennessee Volunteers

    If you actually want me to respond in earnest, I need you to first be done with these bullshit accusations that my current stances on ivermectin, or other covid treatments, are politically motivated.
     
    wes tegg likes this.
  49. HoosDaMan

    HoosDaMan Grumpy
    Virginia CavaliersDallas Cowboys

    Both Sides Guy sucks and is usually just a Trumper or Republican hiding behind dumb.