dinsdale

Nope. It's a consistent push by the progressive left, pushed by MSM and then parroted by those with the syndrome. Rule of law you say. What do you mean by this? Protecting illegal aliens? Being able to steal as long as it's under a certain amount? Freely entering a country without a visa and the being protected from deportation? A judge assisting in the attempted escape of an illegal immigrant who has been previously deported and now is on charges of domestic assault and battery from Immigration agents? These are examples of the "laws" of the woke left.

My apologies. You seem to have not understood "no problem". By this I mean there is no problem giving out nationalities such as Brits and Israelis. Why have the nationalities in this case been withheld.

I think a better question is how bored should we be with these continuous anti-Trump threads that just repeat over and over the same attack points from the woke progressive left. Like it or not for now he is the POTUS and IMHO doing a better job than the last one who was unfit to be POTUS and his VP who is an idiot.

Yes I agree. It is obvious. Middle East IMO. Disgraceful behaviour.

I wonder why names and nationalities were not disclosed. Brits and Israelis they give out no problem. Look at the vid and make your own mind up. I've got my thoughts.

Of course not and no-one does. Extreme left, extreme right and everything in between. As it is the woke progressive left is way left of centre and Trump is more toward the centre of right.

Stalin and Hitler.

My feeling is the latter. This has AI written all over it.

What psychological factors make so many on the progressive left continually start "orange man bad" threads continuously on here. One could call it a type of disorder. There will be PhDs done on this and books written about. A definite phenonomom pushed heavily by MSM and absorbed totally by the sheeple. Let's face it although Trump might not be the most popular POTUS ever his approval rating is well ahead of the Democratic Party which has it's worst approval rating in it's history. Trump high 40's Dems low 20's.

You've lost it mate. Why would you say I'm repeating myself by double quoting the same post? My previous post on this thread about compromised doctors and scientists was this and it was yesterday: "Experienced, qualified doctors/scientists on Big Pharma's payroll. Tell me why these should be believed over truly independent scientists and doctors."

You're obviously missing the crucial point that not all doctors and scientist are the same. Yes, they've all studied but some, as has been well demonstrated in the past five years, are not independent of Big Pharma funding whilst others are truly independent. For myself I would trust those independent of funding and influence above those that will skewer results to maintain their funding.

Do you mean a new thread about Ivermectin and it application for treating leishmaniasis. No need as this thread is about leishmaniasis and as I have pointed out discussion about affective treatments in relation to leishmaniasis is valid and IVERMECTIN is proving to be affective. Why don't you respond to my previous post about it being a vey cheap (practically free in comparison to Big Pharma alternatives) and affective drug in the treatment of leishmaniasis rather than your simplistic deflection.

Medical science is saying Ivermectin is proving effective and add to this Ivermectin is off license so it's very cheap. A vey cheap and affective drug for the treatment of leishmaniasis. You talk about common sense then common sense should tell you this is a good thing. As for it being available generically what's the problem with that when poverty is seen as a risk factor (*1)? *1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leishmaniasis

Well done. A fantastic comment and represents very well the mindset of the progressive left. This "judge" broke the law. This is a fact. You're ok with that then?

The thread is about leishmaniasis and as such discussing treatments for this is valid. Although Ivermectin isn't being used "officially", as pointed out research is being carried out and the results are positive. What's wrong with you. Here's an off license extremely cheap drug that research is saying is highly effective. Why are you so stubborn not to recognise this.

Over 1.5 billion doses of Ivermectin have been taken by humans.

What part of this do you not understand? Ignorance sir would seem not to be from my side. Ivermectin shows promise as a potential treatment for leishmaniasis, particularly cutaneous leishmaniasis, due to its effectiveness in killing Leishmania parasites and accelerating skin ulcer healing.

Ivermectin was being used here in Thailand for covid before it was shut down so your reference to Trump is bizarre. As for Ivermectin as a treatment for leishmaniasis this is valid as it's an anti-parasitic drug. I previously posted only the AI overview but here's the more detailed look. Why you have "no clue" is because you don't research. Ivermectin shows promise as a potential treatment for leishmaniasis, particularly cutaneous leishmaniasis, due to its effectiveness in killing Leishmania parasites and accelerating skin ulcer healing. Studies have demonstrated its efficacy against various Leishmania species, including L. tropica, L. donovani, and L. amazonensis, both in vitro and in vivo. Here's a more detailed look: Mechanism of Action: Ivermectin's anti-leishmanial activity is thought to involve its ability to disrupt the parasite's plasma membrane, leading to reduced parasite growth and infection. In vitro and in vivo studies: Research indicates that ivermectin can significantly reduce the number of parasites in infected macrophages and effectively reduce lesion size and parasite load in animal models. Comparison to other treatments: In some studies, ivermectin has shown greater efficacy than other drugs used in the treatment of leishmaniasis, such as pentostam, amphotericin B, and rifampicin. Potential for drug repositioning: Ivermectin is already used for treating other parasitic diseases, making it a promising candidate for "drug repositioning," where an existing drug is repurposed for a new indication. Safety and Efficacy: Ivermectin is generally considered safe and well-tolerated, with studies showing high cure rates in patients treated with it. Formulation advancements: Researchers are exploring ways to improve ivermectin's efficacy by incorporating it into sustained-release hydrogels or polymeric micelles to enhance its delivery and therapeutic effects.

This is Big Pharma's approach to treatment. They want to sell their drugs. They don't want an extremely cheap off label product used. I have already posted a couple of links regarding Ivermectin's efficacy in regards to this parasitic infection but there's plenty more scientific papers on the net supporting this approach.

From what I'm seeing Ivermectin doesn't have these severe adverse side-effects and in addition is virtually free. This still though is a very uncommon parasitic infection.

This is trying to refute what I posted? Once again your intellect is on show for all to see. How about doing some research before posting such rubbish. It's easy. It's called GOOGLE. Ivermectin presents effective and selective antileishmanial activity in vitro and in vivo against Leishmania infantum and is therapeutic against visceral leishmaniasis https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014489420305841

AI overview: Ivermectin has shown promise as a treatment for leishmaniasis, particularly cutaneous and visceral forms, in preclinical and clinical studies. While not currently a standard first-line treatment, research suggests ivermectin may be effective against Leishmania parasites and can be a viable alternative for treatment, especially in areas where other medications are less accessible or affordable.

Another activist judge. More madness from the progressive left.

Experienced, qualified doctors/scientists on Big Pharma's payroll. Tell me why these should be believed over truly independent scientists and doctors.

Billions of Ivermectin pills have been taken to battle parasitic infections. Indeed it's the primary function of the drug. How can you not know this after all that's happened? I guess you believed the "it's a horse drug" narrative.