SIAP: For you "Ivermectin is horse dewormer!!!1!!" sheep (and everyone else), a truly fantastic...

BoulderFish

Well-Known Member
Oct 31, 2016
10,612
8,394
1
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:
Sorry roswelllion, as you know, I'm more than willing to discuss that which I've heavily researched and understand, but IVM is not one of those things.

I firmly believe that, for some reason (and I have my hypothesis on the reason), there has been a widespread campaign to make sure we don't actually/accurately clinically determine the effectiveness of IVM against Covid -- And that really bothers me for many reasons. But because of the nature of the info out there on IVM -- You have to dig through a lot of crap to find solid info on it -- I haven't invested the time to formulate an informed opinion regarding whether or not it has any efficacy.

Just taking a quick scan of WR's post, what they are seeing there very well could have much to do with IVM, or completely attributed to other factors too. Correlation != causation.

What bothers me isn't that it might be valuable and we're not using it -- It's that it might be valuable and our public health isn't even interested in finding out.

Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
Very good videô. Seems as if money is the most infectious and lethal pathogen that struck in 2020.
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2012
28,485
45,878
1
Ivermectin was the most gaslighted subject of the last 2 years. Why anyone cared if doctors prescribed it or not, was absolutely beyond me. It doesn't hurt humans and has been prescribed over a billion times for human use.

Just another in a long line of fools using the subject to gaslight others.
 

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,055
12,392
1
SE PA
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
Great find, fish.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state
I read an article written in 2017 about ivermectin......several years before the Wuhan scandals......that hailed it as possibly a miracle drug comparable to penicillin. Said it was active against most viruses and effective against many different cancers. Seems most cancers have a specific protein the ivermectin binds to and stops the cancer cells from metastasizing, IIRC. It had some very detailed biochemistry of its actions. Said there was a lot of research ongoing for various cancers.

What is sad is that ivermectin had been so widely disparaged that its use and research will now be restricted. Who would want to come out with a paper praising it after all the crap thrown at it?

From Nature, Feb 15, 2017.
 
Last edited:

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
110,313
65,683
1
Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.

@RoyalT12 is a liberal arts major. He forfeited his rights long ago.
 

BW Lion

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
5,887
7,603
1
Criminal Justice (Law Enforcement and Corrections back in the day at main) actually.
😂😂😂

CJ at PSU is part of the University College….the place where DUS people hang out.

Anyway, per PSU’s own website….

The Bachelor of Arts degree in Criminal Justice provides a broadly based liberal arts background for the study of crime, justice and the criminal justice system. Students should expect reading, writing, and critical thinking skills to be rigorously applied and developed throughout the degree program.

I can see why you felt the need to purchase another degree from Immaculatta
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,325
26,023
1
2020evidence.org
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
The data was clear by late 2020 that IVM worked especially re: prophylaxis. When multiple RCT’s (even if small) all show the same thing the conclusion is easy. When multiple meta analysis of those RCT’s show it works then its irrefutable.

i7eKx7D.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerry

junior1

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
7,317
8,237
1
Criminal Justice is a liberal arts major. Social science, to be exact.

Any advanced math, physics, chemistry, biology, materials science, thermal dynamics courses in that major?
must be some art history, geography, sociology, psychology and women's studies in there somewhere, even as electives. Obviously no political science, economics, management or finance If royal graduated
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

junior1

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
7,317
8,237
1
😂😂😂

CJ at PSU is part of the University College….the place where DUS people hang out.

Anyway, per PSU’s own website….

The Bachelor of Arts degree in Criminal Justice provides a broadly based liberal arts background for the study of crime, justice and the criminal justice system. Students should expect reading, writing, and critical thinking skills to be rigorously applied and developed throughout the degree program.

I can see why you felt the need to purchase another degree from Immaculatta
did royal pass critical thinking????
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
13,790
6,920
1
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.

Wow, that was a waste of 10 minutes of my life. That was very poorly put together...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: The Spin Meister

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
6,944
11,976
1
The data was clear by late 2020 that IVM worked especially re: prophylaxis. When multiple RCT’s (even if small) all show the same thing the conclusion is easy. When multiple meta analysis of those RCT’s show it works then its irrefutable.

i7eKx7D.png
Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that the meta-analysis is flawed, and that there is no benefit to IVM.

It is, after all, possible that those performing the analysis are trying to get the answer they want.

But it is INDISPUTABLE that IVM and HCQ are PERFECTLY safe when taken as prescribed.

What then, can be the possible reason for Fauci and the rest of the criminals to threaten, abuse, and disincentive any doctor from trying it?

It could not hurt, and could only help.

The only theory I can think of is - they WANTED it to be bad, so Trump would lose the election.

I await any other plausible explanation.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state
Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that the meta-analysis is flawed, and that there is no benefit to IVM.

It is, after all, possible that those performing the analysis are trying to get the answer they want.

But it is INDISPUTABLE that IVM and HCQ are PERFECTLY safe when taken as prescribed.

What then, can be the possible reason for Fauci and the rest of the criminals to threaten, abuse, and disincentive any doctor from trying it?

It could not hurt, and could only help.

The only theory I can think of is - they WANTED it to be bad, so Trump would lose the election.

I await any other plausible explanation.
Well that and Fauci’s, et al, stock options and royalty deals.
 
Last edited:

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
25,720
30,465
1
Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that the meta-analysis is flawed, and that there is no benefit to IVM.

It is, after all, possible that those performing the analysis are trying to get the answer they want.

But it is INDISPUTABLE that IVM and HCQ are PERFECTLY safe when taken as prescribed.

What then, can be the possible reason for Fauci and the rest of the criminals to threaten, abuse, and disincentive any doctor from trying it?

It could not hurt, and could only help.

The only theory I can think of is - they WANTED it to be bad, so Trump would lose the election.

I await any other plausible explanation.
In a sample size of you why not try a very safe medicine and see if it helps? Tim Ferris wrote a book called the Four Hour Work week, in it he talks about various new concepts and strategies for "stuff". Trying new efficient ways to do things instead of relying on the status quo. I've done it in a few activities and it's worked well, such as weight training when it wasn't main stream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUEngineer89

roswelllion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 18, 2003
10,150
9,232
1
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
Fish, great video and honestly makes me said and almost feeling hopeless. Interesting that you included the post you did. WhenI saw your thread I immediately recalled our conversation and wondered what you now had to say.
 

SR108

Well-Known Member
Jan 13, 2004
16,741
6,655
1
Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that the meta-analysis is flawed, and that there is no benefit to IVM.

It is, after all, possible that those performing the analysis are trying to get the answer they want.

But it is INDISPUTABLE that IVM and HCQ are PERFECTLY safe when taken as prescribed.

What then, can be the possible reason for Fauci and the rest of the criminals to threaten, abuse, and disincentive any doctor from trying it?

It could not hurt, and could only help.

The only theory I can think of is - they WANTED it to be bad, so Trump would lose the election.

I await any other plausible explanation.
Money, big pharma
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state
Can you believe how quickly and easily they mobilized our media and big tech to brand us as lunatics using a "horse dewormer" to cure covid?

Can't trust anything from anyone anymore.

That and hydroxychloroquine being some kind of toxic "fish tank" cleaner. That sh!t is safer than Tylenol.

Just incredible.
Anyone that calls ivermectin ‘horse dewormer’ or ‘sheep dip’ immediately outed themselves as uninformed left wing nut jobs. It has been used in hundreds of millions of people for several decades. The discovers that perfected it got a Noble Prize for its miraculous success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoulderFish

ChiTownLion

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
32,686
40,323
1
Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that the meta-analysis is flawed, and that there is no benefit to IVM.

It is, after all, possible that those performing the analysis are trying to get the answer they want.

But it is INDISPUTABLE that IVM and HCQ are PERFECTLY safe when taken as prescribed.

What then, can be the possible reason for Fauci and the rest of the criminals to threaten, abuse, and disincentive any doctor from trying it?

It could not hurt, and could only help.

The only theory I can think of is - they WANTED it to be bad, so Trump would lose the election.

I await any other plausible explanation.
Emergency Use Authorization is only allowed when there are no alternative treatments, however I highly doubt that was their motivation in demonizing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Assume their motives were far more sinister.
 

Steve G

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
4,265
1,502
1
Anyone that calls ivermectin ‘horse dewormer’ or ‘sheep dip’ immediately outed themselves as uninformed left wing nut jobs. It has been used in hundreds of millions of people for several decades. The discovers that perfected it got a Noble Prize for its miraculous success.
for river blindness and filarial infections....

STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of the following infections:
Strongyloidiasis of the intestinal tract. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of intestinal (i.e., nondisseminated) strongyloidiasis due to the nematode parasite Strongyloides stercoralis.
This indication is based on clinical studies of both comparative and open-label designs, in which 64-100% of infected patients were cured following a single 200-mcg/kg dose of ivermectin. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Clinical Studies.)
Onchocerciasis. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of onchocerciasis due to the nematode parasite Onchocerca volvulus.

(when you look up those infections agents it turns out they are .......wait for it.........worms)
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
6,944
11,976
1
for river blindness and filarial infections....

STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of the following infections:
Strongyloidiasis of the intestinal tract. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of intestinal (i.e., nondisseminated) strongyloidiasis due to the nematode parasite Strongyloides stercoralis.
This indication is based on clinical studies of both comparative and open-label designs, in which 64-100% of infected patients were cured following a single 200-mcg/kg dose of ivermectin. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Clinical Studies.)
Onchocerciasis. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of onchocerciasis due to the nematode parasite Onchocerca volvulus.

(when you look up those infections agents it turns out they are .......wait for it.........worms)
Why such an effort to prevent its use when it is PERFECTLY safe?

Whether it works or fails to work?

we all know it is used to combat parasitic worms. No one doesn’t know that.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
20,325
26,023
1
2020evidence.org
for river blindness and filarial infections....

STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of the following infections:
Strongyloidiasis of the intestinal tract. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of intestinal (i.e., nondisseminated) strongyloidiasis due to the nematode parasite Strongyloides stercoralis.
This indication is based on clinical studies of both comparative and open-label designs, in which 64-100% of infected patients were cured following a single 200-mcg/kg dose of ivermectin. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Clinical Studies.)
Onchocerciasis. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of onchocerciasis due to the nematode parasite Onchocerca volvulus.

(when you look up those infections agents it turns out they are .......wait for it.........worms)
Ok?

There have also been studies that showed it's an effective antiviral particularly RNA viruses (corona, flu, etc.). We even know the mechanism of action behind it.


Antiviral (e.g. HIV, dengue, encephalitis)

Recent research has confounded the belief, held for most of the past 40 years, that ivermectin was devoid of any antiviral characteristics. Ivermectin has been found to potently inhibit replication of the yellow fever virus, with EC50 values in the sub-nanomolar range. It also inhibits replication in several other flaviviruses, including dengue, Japanese encephalitis and tick-borne encephalitis, probably by targeting non-structural 3 helicase activity.97 Ivermectin inhibits dengue viruses and interrupts virus replication, bestowing protection against infection with all distinct virus serotypes, and has unexplored potential as a dengue antiviral.98

Ivermectin has also been demonstrated to be a potent broad-spectrum specific inhibitor of importin α/β-mediated nuclear transport and demonstrates antiviral activity against several RNA viruses by blocking the nuclear trafficking of viral proteins. It has been shown to have potent antiviral action against HIV-1 and dengue viruses, both of which are dependent on the importin protein superfamily for several key cellular processes. Ivermectin may be of import in disrupting HIV-1 integrase in HIV-1 as well as NS-5 (non-structural protein 5) polymerase in dengue viruses.99,
100


 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
26,932
32,363
1
An altered state
for river blindness and filarial infections....

STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of the following infections:
Strongyloidiasis of the intestinal tract. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of intestinal (i.e., nondisseminated) strongyloidiasis due to the nematode parasite Strongyloides stercoralis.
This indication is based on clinical studies of both comparative and open-label designs, in which 64-100% of infected patients were cured following a single 200-mcg/kg dose of ivermectin. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Clinical Studies.)
Onchocerciasis. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of onchocerciasis due to the nematode parasite Onchocerca volvulus.

(when you look up those infections agents it turns out they are .......wait for it.........worms)
But that is not horse deworming or sheep dipping you dipstick. It is proof that hundreds of millions have safely used ivermectin for decades!
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
6,944
11,976
1
Money, big pharma
Before the vaccine was out?

I don't think that makes sense.

And the entire EUA argument - they didn't have to list Ivermectin as an effective treatment. They only had to not restrict it from use.
 

indynittany

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2005
6,194
7,638
1
Ivermectin was the most gaslighted subject of the last 2 years. Why anyone cared if doctors prescribed it or not, was absolutely beyond me. It doesn't hurt humans and has been prescribed over a billion times for human use.

Just another in a long line of fools using the subject to gaslight others.
It should not be beyond you or anyone. If ivermectin or any other alternative strategy was known to be effective, the EUA for the jabs could not have been granted. Without the EUA, legal immunity doesn’t exist. Without legal immunity, these death shots would never see the light of day. As usual, follow the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2002
41,055
12,392
1
SE PA
for river blindness and filarial infections....

STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of the following infections:
Strongyloidiasis of the intestinal tract. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of intestinal (i.e., nondisseminated) strongyloidiasis due to the nematode parasite Strongyloides stercoralis.
This indication is based on clinical studies of both comparative and open-label designs, in which 64-100% of infected patients were cured following a single 200-mcg/kg dose of ivermectin. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Clinical Studies.)
Onchocerciasis. STROMECTOL is indicated for the treatment of onchocerciasis due to the nematode parasite Onchocerca volvulus.

(when you look up those infections agents it turns out they are .......wait for it.........worms)
So NOT used just for horses or sheep. Got it. Thanks for confirming it is used widely in humans for multiple indications.
 

Marylovesthelions

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2008
7,302
3,498
1
78
Mt Dora FL
...video. For those who have read my Covid-related posts, you know I've never been pro or anti IVM. That's because unlike most people that you hear/read say "I follow the science/data," I actually follow the science/data, and there just never was good, strong science/data produced regarding IVM's efficacy against Covid. Given the seemingly strong anecdotal evidence of efficacy, I always thought that was odd (with all the money we were printing and throwing around, why didn't a quality trial on IVM start as soon as the anecdotes started to surface?).

Here is a post of mine from September 2021:


Now, to the video. By the way, if you've ever tried to shame someone ("IVM is horse dewormer!!!1!!") for supporting IVM, you have forfeited any/all right to ever claim that you follow data/science (or support following data/science). If you ever voice or write that claim, you're also a liar with no credibility.

And no, this video isn't at all about how great is Ivermectin at fighting Covid.
Drain the swamp and because we are Christians, we will not drown doctor Fauci in the process. If his face is the 1st face you see after you die you are in h***
 

BoulderFish

Well-Known Member
Oct 31, 2016
10,612
8,394
1
Emergency Use Authorization is only allowed when there are no alternative treatments, however I highly doubt that was their motivation in demonizing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Assume their motives were far more sinister.

The EUA angle actually is my hypothesis as to why they pushed IVM and HCQ away so hard.

Remember at the very beginning, Fauci was talking (and emailing - as seen from his FOIA emails) like a rational/intelligent infectious disease doctor? He was honest about the efficacy of masks, he was honest about the likelihood and power of immunity upon recovery. He was honest about how inciting fear in the public was wrong, and pursuing a plan based on "harm reduction" was appropriate. This was every pre-2020 pandemic response plan, and of course Fauci understood all of it well.

Then, Fauci had a meeting with Moderna.

Almost immediately after that, everything changed where he went all-in on lockdowns, masks, and casting doubt on the immunity conferred upon recovery. "Harm reduction" was out the window. Protecting the high-risk was never mentioned (even though there was a clear and well-known, extremely stark risk stratification), because the new message was EVERYONE is - or should consider themselves - high-risk. If not for themselves, for the moral failing they would experience if they contracted it and passed it on to "grandma." The only option we were given from PH was preventing every infection/transmission at any/all cost.

My hypothesis:
In that meeting, where we know from FOIA emails Moderna showed him a little progress they had already made with coding the virus into the mRNA vaccine, they sold him on the idea that they could have a highly-effective vaccine ready for EUA as early as [some very surprisingly early date].

This excited Fauci, as he could imagine all the awards, magazine covers, and his name in lights all over the place as he saved the world from SARS-Cov-2 with this new paradigm of a pandemic response where an mRNA vaccine is so rapidly developed, there is no need to build population immunity via infection/recovery.

Only two things could derail this plan:
1. The population feeling comfortable enough to return to normal (which was likely to happen if the population understood their real odds of an infection being a benign event - and especially if they understood that their recovery conferred immunity).
2. If another drug was found that provided reasonable/considerable efficacy against Covid (because then the EUA would be off the table).

I'm not even going to get into the potential financial incentives (which I think are massive btw) via the relationships with Moderna, as Fauci is such an ego-driven, narcissistic piece of sh*t, I think is visions of hero status were enough for him to go all in on the plan and lead the campaign to take that approach.

What an absolute piece of human garbage. Potentially hundreds of thousands of additional lives lost - in the USA alone - as a result of his uncontrollable narcissism.
 
Last edited:

BoulderFish

Well-Known Member
Oct 31, 2016
10,612
8,394
1
Drain the swamp and because we are Christians, we will not drown doctor Fauci in the process. If his face is the 1st face you see after you die you are in h***
100%

If it turns out the bible is accurate and there is in fact a heaven and hell - and all the bad people go to spend eternity in hell - Fauci will be found back in the very hottest corner of hell along with all the most awful people in history.

Personally, while I doubt it is, I really really hope the bible is accurate.