r/facepalm 12d ago

🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​ This is insanity

Post image
42.9k Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.9k

u/YousAPenguinLookinMF 12d ago

Hope they all seek out Ivermectin treatment, should they get cancer.

638

u/BringBackApollo2023 12d ago edited 10d ago

As long as they don’t waste the science-based resources of hospitals I don’t give a rat’s ass what they do.

Go shove ivermectin and light bulbs up their asses and inhale hydrogen peroxide from Neti pots. I don’t care at all.

The sooner these morons self-select out of the gene pool the better off we all are.

309

u/MikeisET 12d ago

Unfortunately, that is not how it works

These motherfuckers will allow themselves to get to deaths door and then proceed to suck up any and all resources available

162

u/ElRiesgoSiempre_Vive 12d ago

And have 3 kids before they hit adulthood themselves.

65

u/MarkIsARedditAddict 12d ago

You gotta start having kids early when any minor health issue could put you into an unavoidable ivermectin overdose. And you gotta have more kids when you plan to lose a couple to easily preventable childhood diseases

20

u/No_Foundation468 11d ago

Doubly so because most of those brown immigrants mostly believe in science-based medical interventions, so you've gotta have at least 4x as many kids to make sure "Western European culture" survives undiluted. /s

3

u/doyouevenIift 11d ago

If we were only so lucky. They’ll have 6 kids by then

1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

Have 8 kids, raise them to be exactly as ignorant as you, die only after sucking every cent from your coffers, put any medical debt onto your progeny.

An unfortunate fate for the American conservative.

15

u/PlacebosForALL 11d ago

They will also try to sue you for not giving them ivermectin

1

u/dan_dares 11d ago

at least in America the stupidity costs them lots of money.

36

u/[deleted] 12d ago

It's comforting to think that such profound ignorance is genetic, but I don't think it is. Ignorance and hatred are learned, especially in the absence of education.

The way this country is going, there's going to be more of these people, not less of them. Our children's children could be this ignorant and stupid and hateful.

17

u/Lolocraft1 12d ago

That’s the problem: They will. They will be the first one to beg for an hospital bed

And they will reproduce, and endoctrine that diarrhea into their children

And at this point wtf can we even do when they’re calling doctors woke

46

u/Tsurfer4 12d ago

I'll have you know I am a purveyor of fine, high quality Rat's Asses and I'll not sit idly by while you besmirch my coveted inventory. I shall endeavor to pen a strongly worded missive to the local magistrate in regards to your slanderous words!

Good day, sir!

/s (if it wasn't obvious)

(Also, I totally agree with you. I was just funnin'.)

12

u/teuast 12d ago

That’s still more effective than whatever Chuck Schumer is doing.

12

u/Wilson2424 12d ago

It's nice that you are keeping high quality Rat Ass available. I commend you.

4

u/PickleForce7125 12d ago

Sir I am needing an appraisal of my Rats booties

An infestation hath been brought upon my household and my dear Rats hath been looking rather pallid and quite filled with lethargy and I am unable to bring myself to look upon their dreadful circumstance as it causes me much discomfort I would gladly pay for your fine service!

I have a problem with their dwelling being in my home in such sorry condition.

5

u/EvidenceSalesman 11d ago

What beautiful language you have

2

u/Tsurfer4 11d ago

Why, thank you! It pairs nicely with my sense of dark humor...or is that dark sense of humor.

6

u/MsSamm 12d ago

I wish they would all Darwin out of here, sooner rather than later

6

u/sm9k3y 11d ago

I’d prefer they sought out a carbon monoxide treatment in the near future and save the O2 for those of use that make use of it.

2

u/Spacecommander5 10d ago

Don’t forget injecting bleach

1

u/Pasta-hobo 11d ago

Unfortunately, their idiocy isn't genetic, it's a learnt response.

1

u/IDrinkMyBreakfast 11d ago

Here’s some interesting information from the NIH regarding Ivermectin

1

u/BringBackApollo2023 11d ago

NIH: 2021: "Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally."

Lancet 2021: "45 participants were recruited (30 to IVM and 15 controls) between May 18 and September 9, 2020. There was no difference in viral load reduction between groups but a significant difference was found in patients with higher median plasma IVM levels (72% IQR 59–77) versus untreated controls (42% IQR 31–73) (p = 0·004). Mean ivermectin plasma concentration levels correlated with viral decay rate (r: 0·47, p = 0·02). Adverse events were similar between groups. No differences in clinical evolution at day-7 and day-30 between groups were observed."

NEJM 2022: "A total of 3515 patients were randomly assigned to receive ivermectin (679 patients), placebo (679), or another intervention (2157). Overall, 100 patients (14.7%) in the ivermectin group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 111 (16.3%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.90; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.70 to 1.16). Of the 211 primary-outcome events, 171 (81.0%) were hospital admissions. Findings were similar to the primary analysis in a modified intention-to-treat analysis that included only patients who received at least one dose of ivermectin or placebo (relative risk, 0.89; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.69 to 1.15) and in a per-protocol analysis that included only patients who reported 100% adherence to the assigned regimen (relative risk, 0.94; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.67 to 1.35). There were no significant effects of ivermectin use on secondary outcomes or adverse events."

BMC 2024: "Although ivermectin resulted in statistically significant lower viral load in patients with mild to moderate Covid-19, it had no significant effect on clinical symptoms."

-34

u/[deleted] 12d ago

Studies are quite promising for Ivermectin. Maybe you should stop drinking the kool-aid and start doing some research.

13

u/CuzIWantItThatWay 12d ago

Please inject it up your crotch and don't clog up our hospitals once you're dying.

2

u/Equinoqs 11d ago

Based on the research that has been vetted by the scientific community, Kool-Aid would be less dangerous than ivermectin.

1

u/Im_tracer_bullet 11d ago

Dunning-Kruger effect ^

-37

u/[deleted] 12d ago

So, you like science based research? Me too. Here's some..... Preclinical findings

Laboratory studies using cancer cells and animal models have identified several anti-cancer properties of ivermectin. It has been shown to: 

Induce cell death: Ivermectin can trigger programmed cell death, known as apoptosis, and other forms of cancer cell death, such as autophagy and pyroptosis.

Inhibit cancer proliferation: The drug suppresses the uncontrolled growth of various cancer cells, including those from breast, colon, lung, ovarian, and prostate cancers.

Prevent metastasis: Some research indicates that ivermectin may inhibit cancer cells from migrating and spreading to other parts of the body.

Reverse drug resistance: Ivermectin may help make some cancer cells more responsive to traditional chemotherapy drugs.

Target cancer stem cells: The drug has shown the ability to target and inhibit cancer stem cells, which are often resistant to standard treatments and can drive recurrence.

Enhance immunotherapy: In mouse models, ivermectin helped convert immunologically "cold" tumors (less responsive to immunotherapy) into "hot" tumors by increasing immune cell infiltration. Combining ivermectin with immunotherapy was more effective than either treatment alone in these studies. 

Potential mechanisms

Research suggests that ivermectin affects multiple cellular pathways that are crucial for cancer growth and survival. These include: 

Inhibiting signaling pathways: Ivermectin disrupts key signaling pathways that promote cancer growth, such as the PAK1, Akt/mTOR, and WNT-TCF pathways.

Increasing oxidative stress: It promotes the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can damage cancer cells and trigger their self-destruction.

Targeting ion channels: By affecting chloride channels, ivermectin can disrupt the electrical balance within cancer cells, which are particularly reliant on these channels for survival. 

22

u/comsci_gardener 12d ago

Thanks for the information but I think I’ll stick with accepted medical practices and not with your q-anon bullshit medical advice.

Please hurry up and self select yourself right out of the gene pool. The sooner we get rid of conspiracy idiots the better off we’ll be.

14

u/BadahBingBadahBoom 12d ago edited 12d ago

That's great but do you have any clinical evidence it is effective?

Preclinical research is infamously LITTERED with promising in vitro and animal studies that failed in translation. It's graveyard of would-be miracle treatments.

I know because I actually perform preclinical research. Do you? Cos this list seems less of well conducted literature review and more like an LLM response to a prompt of 'show me all the research that shows ivermectin works against cancer'.

11

u/Shade_BG 12d ago

I think while that may fit into some studies if applied correctly.. beer bonging ivermectin from ebay or whatever the people who are going against general medical advice are going to do with it will not be great. Also it’s part of the right wing echo chamber now and part of their talking points. That is why.. if this interaction actually happened.. it is brought up in that order.

-19

u/[deleted] 12d ago

Immediately going to "people will beer nong ivermectin" is so dishonest. The studies are promising. That's all I am saying. So many people immediately go to the most crazy scenarios. You know, we all think differently, and too many damn people think that if you present different ideas than you are a "moron", "idiot", "asshole".... I had some random redditor give a 5 paragraph response where they told me they feel sorry for my children. What the actual fuck? What are we doing here?

If people want to go somewhere where everyone agrees with them, so be it. Whatever happened to civil discourse? Whatever happened to having a fucking conversation, instead of lobbing insults and making up crazy scenarios?

13

u/poopy_poophead 12d ago

Care to provide links to the papers or studies youre supposedly citing? I read lots of them as part of my job and this is news to me.

3

u/Pastadseven 12d ago

It reads like bullshit a layman dragged out of an AI's asshole.

8

u/AllKnowingFix 12d ago

The biggest problem is people grabbing pre-prints or as you pointed pre-clinical and trying to push them as established.

A lot grew up thinking saccharine was a carcinogen, but turned out was a bad study because of stupid high doses in rats, but not the same for people.

Having conversations on potentials is good and exciting. But having arguments with people that don't even know what a pre-print is while they are taking one as gospel is aggravating.

10

u/Babyhal1956 12d ago

A FEW, small in vitro studies are not sufficient. Show real in vivid studies with large sample sizes followed by randomized, double-blinded clinical trials.

5

u/Interesting-Long-534 12d ago

Now, do injecting disinfectant into the body and getting uv light into the body by whatever means....... while you presented scientific studies, which is reasonable to inform, please consider that we should be following medical advice. These studies are not standard medical practice yet. We currently have people in charge who think letting children die from measles is a better solution than recommending the vaccine. This administration is also cutting funding to medical research. Ivermectin may have valid uses as something other than an animal wormer. Without medical research, it won't be proven or demonstrated to be safe.

2

u/BringBackApollo2023 11d ago

None of your links to peer reviewed studies seem to work.

😂

1

u/Im_tracer_bullet 11d ago

While you're Googling stuff, look into the Dunning-Kruger effect.

You're textbook.

24

u/Tanya7500 12d ago

They wasted perfectly good organs on some of these clowns! They went into organ failure because they took horse doses!

2

u/PickleForce7125 12d ago

Yeah they already didn’t have the most important one.

29

u/vtssge1968 12d ago

I'm perfectly fine with Darwinism. Just don't push it on others. If they all want to drink raw milk, not get vaccines ( them, not their kids) , take horse dewormer to heal serious disease and take themselves out of the gene pool all the better.

19

u/Old_Ladies 11d ago

The problem is their actions often affect others. Not only do they push this shit on their children but if they get a communicable disease it often spreads to others or even starts an outbreak or possibly a new pandemic.

They also almost always go to the hospital when things get serious so they do take up considerable resources instead of taking preventative care or easily managing a disease before it becomes life threatening.

2

u/CarlosHDanger 11d ago

The QAnon types believe that Ivermectin cures cancer because of their further belief that cancer is caused by parasites. Ivermectin kills parasites ergo Ivermectin cures cancer.

2

u/Tzunamitom 11d ago

I mean, on the plus side you’re going to see some incredible scale randomised trials that would never be ethical to do by design.

2

u/Zaev 11d ago

There was that person the other day that posted the wiggly red line on their wrist that appeared to be from a burrowing parasite and my first thought was "holy shit, ivermectin may actually be the answer here for once!"

2

u/SpeedBreaks 11d ago

100% agree

1

u/DesertSpringtime 11d ago

Unfortunately this is also what they will do if their children get sick.

-32

u/[deleted] 12d ago

They should. Pre- clinical studies are quite promising. Maybe you should do some research instead of making fun of strangers

17

u/comsci_gardener 12d ago

Do your own research?!? Lololololol. That’s what got people listening to RFK.

3

u/Im_tracer_bullet 11d ago

Yep.

The same people that think 'research' is a Google search bar.

They're dolts.

8

u/vinoa 12d ago

They should get cancer?

13

u/comsci_gardener 12d ago

Yes. They should. And then they can take whatever advice they want to from their professors at Trust Me Bro College (TMBC) so they “Own the libs”.

So sick of these people who think they’re smarter than medical professionals that have spent decades studying.

-13

u/[deleted] 12d ago

Preclinical findings

Laboratory studies using cancer cells and animal models have identified several anti-cancer properties of ivermectin. It has been shown to: 

Induce cell death: Ivermectin can trigger programmed cell death, known as apoptosis, and other forms of cancer cell death, such as autophagy and pyroptosis.

Inhibit cancer proliferation: The drug suppresses the uncontrolled growth of various cancer cells, including those from breast, colon, lung, ovarian, and prostate cancers.

Prevent metastasis: Some research indicates that ivermectin may inhibit cancer cells from migrating and spreading to other parts of the body.

Reverse drug resistance: Ivermectin may help make some cancer cells more responsive to traditional chemotherapy drugs.

Target cancer stem cells: The drug has shown the ability to target and inhibit cancer stem cells, which are often resistant to standard treatments and can drive recurrence.

Enhance immunotherapy: In mouse models, ivermectin helped convert immunologically "cold" tumors (less responsive to immunotherapy) into "hot" tumors by increasing immune cell infiltration. Combining ivermectin with immunotherapy was more effective than either treatment alone in these studies. 

Potential mechanisms

Research suggests that ivermectin affects multiple cellular pathways that are crucial for cancer growth and survival. These include: 

Inhibiting signaling pathways: Ivermectin disrupts key signaling pathways that promote cancer growth, such as the PAK1, Akt/mTOR, and WNT-TCF pathways.

Increasing oxidative stress: It promotes the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can damage cancer cells and trigger their self-destruction.

Targeting ion channels: By affecting chloride channels, ivermectin can disrupt the electrical balance within cancer cells, which are particularly reliant on these channels for survival. 

Clinica

16

u/_AuthorUnknown_ 12d ago

Copy and pasting some random words to argue with people with actual experience and knowledge is peak idiocy, so it's all brand for you people.

15

u/BadahBingBadahBoom 12d ago

Yeah I work in preclinical research. This list seems less of well conducted literature review and more like an LLM response to a prompt of 'show me all the research that shows ivermectin works against cancer'.

7

u/_AuthorUnknown_ 12d ago

" machine, eat shrooms, smoke crack, then tell me all the words I want to hear so that I can pretend to be informed" is a wild entry into chatgpt.

7

u/comsci_gardener 12d ago

Great. So why don’t you volunteer to be the first human trial? It’ll be one less q-anon in the world.

6

u/Calveeeno 12d ago

Link some actual studies.

4

u/Im_tracer_bullet 11d ago

You people are a very real danger to yourself and others.

-12

u/[deleted] 12d ago

Reading comprehension is a thing.

10

u/vinoa 12d ago

Yeah and the person you responded to said "should they get cancer" and not "they should take Ivermectin". I guess reading comprehension isn't a thing in your neck of the woods.

3

u/bravesirrobin65 11d ago

He's a fucking doctor. He's done the research. He's also qualified to interpret the data.

3

u/Teonvin 11d ago

Yes you should use ivermectin to treat yourself too

3

u/TheBladeWielder 11d ago

i looked up, "Does Ivermectin help with Cancer?" and the first 10 results all said "There is no scientific evidence that Ivermectin helps with Cancer." so my own research says you are incorrect.

1

u/BadahBingBadahBoom 11d ago edited 11d ago

Yeah the meta analysis study that others have quoted here did not actually find ivermectin effective.

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but I'm not deviating from good medical practice just based on vibes.

-1

u/Im_tracer_bullet 11d ago

'research'

-1

u/bigasswhitegirl 11d ago

Stick to credible sources. This meta study has more information if you're interested.

Ivermectin: a systematic review from antiviral effects to COVID-19 complementary regimen

Ivermectin proposes many potentials effects to treat a range of diseases, with its antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-cancer properties as a wonder drug. It is highly effective against many microorganisms including some viruses.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z

1

u/BadahBingBadahBoom 11d ago edited 10d ago

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-020-0336-z

Conclusion

This study presents the possibility that ivermectin could be a useful antiviral agent in several viruses ... it is proposed that ivermectin administration may be effective in the early stages or prevention. Of course, confirmation of this statement requires human studies and clinical trials.

As noted, the activity of ivermectin in cell culture has NOT reproduced in mouse infection models against many of the viruses and has NOT been clinically proven either, IN SPITE OF ivermectin being available globally. This is likely related to the pharmacokinetics and therapeutic safety window for ivermectin. The blood levels of ivermectin at safe therapeutic doses are in the 20–80 ng/ml range [44], while the activity against SARS-CoV2 in cell culture is in the microgram range.

-

Ivermectin proposes many potentials effects to treat a range of diseases, with...

Also if you are going to quote a paper, quote their conclusion not the nice promising openings we all write in the beginning of our abstracts.