Dr John Campbell YouTube videos - what happened?

[SchnitzelVonCrummsTum]

Can anyone who's watched his videos more regularly than I have explain this to me? Seems to have gone from mainstream to pro-ivermectin in the space of a few months.

No, as I have repeatedly pointed out, you made the original claim of 6 fraudulent studies. It's up to you to justify that claim.

Why are you repeatedly avoiding doing so?

@IncredulousOne

No, as I have repeatedly pointed out, you made the original claim of 6 fraudulent studies. It's up to you to justify that claim.

Why are you repeatedly avoiding doing so?

It's like banging my head against a wall.

I have given you the names of the first authors of the studies shown to be fraudulent. A very basic web search will identify them for you.

You are capable of looking these up and deciding for yourself if you agree. Fair enough if you literally cannot find them on the internet and you come back and say this, but right now you're just being ridiculous for the sake of it.

I actually thought what he said about 'aspiration' re the vaccine was quite plausible. ie that some people seem badly affected may be the way the injection is given, and not the injection itself.
Especially as in many cases those giving the vaccine are untrained health professionals.
However, I note from his youtube intro he is actually a nurse, not a medical doctor. So, I think in some instances he may be talking above his expertise level.
Note, I am double jabbed with no unusual side effects, but do know others who have been seriously ill afterwards.

Riveted1... and you still avoid providing the links that would back up you assertion...

Dr John might be more pro-Ivermectin because it's now being used in an official UK trial run by Oxford Uni "The Principle Trial".

If people don't like Dr John now because he's said something they are against, it's easy enough to stop watching him. However if people have fallen out with Oxford Uni because they are running this trial, it's going to be more awkward to remove their Oxford AZ jab from your body!

@MNHQ I'm assuming my post was deleted because I referenced a problematic website? But it's been fine to mention it before?

Reposting with the name of the website removed...

@CassandraKnew

That's not the issue. Principle is a very well designed study evaluating ivermectin and other drugs for early COVID treatment. Nothing to do with the vaccine. It if did show evidence of effect that would be considered high quality evidence.

John Campbell isn't talking about this - he's promoting the nonsense [blank] website and other studies that have been proven to be fraudulent.

He recent video was a bizarre criticism on the recent BBC article explaining the issues with ivermectin literature: www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58170809

@IncredulousOne

Riveted1... and you still avoid providing the links that would back up you assertion...

If you can’t even find the papers yourself using a first author’s name, you’re clearly in no position to comment on the studies.

Riveted1

You're still claiming fraudulent studies without being willing (or able) to provide links to those studies or evidence that they were fraudulent.

I'm reporting you again for misinformation...

@IncredulousOne

Here’s one link, took me about 5 seconds to google - www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

I’m not particularly knowledgeable or invested but you’ve been incredibly rude to @riveted1. Before this thread, I knew little about this drug nor did I know anything about the studies. It’s so easy to find.

I don't even know why people bang on about bloody ivermectin, it could be a wonder drug but it's academic seeing as you can't buy it or get it why would an antiparisitic be effective for a virus anyway?

I was never convinced by him, seemed to just reiterate other sources, over and over again. Where did Ivor Cummins go haven't heard much from him lately.

@IncredulousOne

Riveted1

You're still claiming fraudulent studies without being willing (or able) to provide links to those studies or evidence that they were fraudulent.

I'm reporting you again for misinformation...

You have zero grounds for that. Riveted provided you with the names; you refused to look them up. You have been repeatedly difficult on this thread and others. Riveted had been quite patient, in fact, whether you agree with her or not.

I found a webpage selling ivermectin direct to consumers in UK -- it was hiding on a primary school website (parasitic hosting?). Is possible for the determined, I guess.

@IncredulousOne

Riveted1

You're still claiming fraudulent studies without being willing (or able) to provide links to those studies or evidence that they were fraudulent.

I'm reporting you again for misinformation...

Oh the irony.

Riveted just wanted to say how much I admire the persistence in your replies. More power to your elbow.

Hi,

So, I was a long time supporter of Dr John last year and I think he did quite a good job of disseminating covid information at a “popular science” type level. When ivermectin became a thing, there was an initial optimism because of the promising published study results. Dr John of course reported on this. Unfortunately, he seems to have become entrenched in his view of its covid efficacy, seemingly ignoring the troublesome studies and what looks to be downright fraud and interpreting data from India in a way that is somewhat twisted to his bias.
I unsubscribed from his channel after that but I pop back there occasionally to see if he’s come to his senses and retracted his support. Today I saw he had a “BBC debunks ivermectin” video and was hopeful that he has seen the light. But after just a few minutes watching it I realise he’s way too far down that rabbit hole for that to happen.
I was curious to know if anyone else had noticed his recent ivermectin craziness, did a Google and ended up here. Good to see that the world is not totally fallen off the crazy cliff. :D

5 part article series by epidemiologist Dr Gideon Meyerowitz-katz on the fraudulent Ivermectin studies. This opens to part 5 but links to all previous parts so you can read them all. gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-part-5-fe41044dab13

[quote Quinner1970]5 part article series by epidemiologist Dr Gideon Meyerowitz-katz on the fraudulent Ivermectin studies. This opens to part 5 but links to all previous parts so you can read them all. gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-part-5-fe41044dab13[/quote]
Thank you for that. I’m done with part 1 and will read the next - no surprises so far but omg, some of the comments to that! SMH These crazy people just cannot be told.

Just visited Dr John’s YouTube channel for the first time in ages. Seems he’s transformed into a platformer for the anti-vax movement. Most of his recent videos feature accounts of vaccine injury and talk up ivermectin. Cynically, I think he may be doing this to keep the hits/funds coming in. There’s no longer enough traffic in general Covid news I suppose.

@IndigoC

Just visited Dr John’s YouTube channel for the first time in ages. Seems he’s transformed into a platformer for the anti-vax movement. Most of his recent videos feature accounts of vaccine injury and talk up ivermectin. Cynically, I think he may be doing this to keep the hits/funds coming in. There’s no longer enough traffic in general Covid news I suppose.

What is exactly wrong with someone talking about vaccine injury?

He’s pandering is what’s wrong with it. He knows what draws an audience now and is pedalling vaccine injury stories and defending ivermectin because he knows that’s what the his current audience seems to want. Seems to be working:

gb.youtubers.me/dr-john-campbell/youtuber-stats#search=Dr.%20John%20Campbell

The odd such feature is fair enough, but look at his last 8 videos.

But people are being injured by the vaccine. It seems sinister to insist they have to stay silent,
There was a lady on my FB insisting that anyone with any side effect from the vaccine at all should "shut the fuck up" because it might put people off it getting it.

I’m pretty happy that people are still investigating ivermectin despite the fraudulent studies.

The premise of his recent video is that ivermectin has been shown Iv to be a protease antiviral drug, and this is the same mechanism as a new Pfizer antiviral.

The reason I’m happy people like him are still talking about this is that Big Pharma are involved here. There’s money to be made and let’s face it, most studies rushed out in the pandemic could be classed as ‘fraudulent’ including, it seems, Pfizer’s vaccine studies. It’s odd people suddenly trust these big Pharma companies, when they have all been involved in high stakes law suits for decades, and certainly don’t have the health of nations as their top priority.

The basic problem with the strange case of ivermectin is that it costs 5 pence per dose, there’s nothing in jt for Pharma. The new Pfizer drug costs a lot more per dose (£100’s) so we’d have to be very very sure that the difference is worth it, and the release of the ‘new anti viral’ isn’t just a well established way that Pharma get round making money when products go unlicensed