100 Comments

" isolated demands for rigor"

May I be the only one who thinks this sounds straight out of a subset of naughty Japanese manga...

Now that that's out of the way: As a genuine admirer of yours, and especially because of your gift for clearly explaining, as much as anyone can, complicated stuff generally over the heads of people like me--please don't let yourself devolve into a sort of Alex Berenson who can't let go when others have been nasty to him.

I perceive you as a genuinely nice, remarkably talented young man with an authentic passion for truth-seeking and a great deal of mature self-restraint during this dungfest that The Plague Era has been from the start, and I'll bet, for once, I'm holding a majority position. Scott's worth no more of your time.

Expand full comment
Jun 6, 2022Liked by Alexandros Marinos

These same people deny the possibility of (exquisitely safe and cheap) IVM efficacy for Covid, while conspicuously jumping up and down, lobbing insults and begging for expensive medical adventurism via more experimental vaxxes and a heaping side of Paxlovid and Molnupiravir, without the self awareness to see they're continuously dodging their moving goalposts. The insults are the giveaway that they're not serious. They hold us in contempt. Honestly, why bother?

Expand full comment
Jun 7, 2022Liked by Alexandros Marinos

The vibe I’m getting from Scott Alexander is defensive. Defensive in the face of the fact that your opinion is more likely right than his own and your actions are more likely more ethical than his.

As mentioned by someone else, forget about him (and G M-K) and focus on evidence based rational thinking. They’re dragging you into an emotional tug of war that’s not worth getting involved with.

If you want another project then a rational analysis of this study is worth your while

https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching

A really good approach would be to adopt an “anti-IVM” starting point and try to prove that the paper is flawed beyond all doubt.

Expand full comment
Jun 10, 2022Liked by Alexandros Marinos

Don’t buy in to the minutiae Alexandros.

At the very least, Avi Bitterman and Scott Alexander have indentified a role for Ivermectin in countries with parasites/strongyloides.

They should have been shouting this from the rooftops for all such countries.

They haven’t.

If they’ve got it wrong, then it works for Covid. As such, as a fail safe given its extraordinary safety record is that AB and SA should have recommended its use for Covid, certainly would have not resulted in net harm.

They haven’t and it’s on their consciences.

You’ve have it all over them, don’t let the psychological word play affect your mental health

Expand full comment
Jun 6, 2022·edited Jun 6, 2022

I was thinking of that as well. You spent so much time reviewing that fucker's articles. I was on the fence whether I should write you a message about it. As far as I am concerned, he is a human being, you tried to point out his mistakes in the articles, but at one point you have to stop even though he continues to do it over and over again. In the end it is also the readers' responsibility to sort the wheat from the chaff. I always keep in mind that we are up against a machinery that invested a lot of money in studying the human behaviour in different contexts. You might think these guys have the same drive as you do to find out the truth, and present it, and correct their mistakes publicly on record. Maybe he's not that smart, or maybe he's obeying his masters that dictated a certain narrative.

Expand full comment

"disagreement is over the cause"

One cause I have not seen mentioned often is suppression of IgE by ivermectin.

https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/pharma-conflicted-washington-post?s=w

Expand full comment

Thank you for writing on this topic. I get tired of getting wrapped up in "debates" on-line with people who disagree with with what I've written. We go back and forth but they won't listen to facts. Instead of getting tangled up in the details, sometimes I point out the big picture which shows that it is irrelevant if, for eg ivermectin helps or not 'cos the ones pulling the strings can make their own reality. So if they don't want it to work, it won't. Even if it does. Quoting a study on its effectiveness led to me being banned from Twitter and they won't let me back on. Ever. That says something.

Expand full comment

"fluvoxamine is only effective in depressed patients"

Fluvoxamine and other SSRIs are mast cell stabilizers.

https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/covid-19-severity-is-a-result-of

Expand full comment

They were both unvaccinated, like myself.

Expand full comment

Hey, thank you for this.

Ever-since Scott tongue-in-cheek misrepresented someone's points and then summed it up with "whatever", I'm \0_0/ about this. I think this is probably a case of "everyone disappoints if they live long enough"?

That said, I do agree with your last paragraph, dramatic as it may sound: I'm sad that it's coming to that, and that "the rationalist community" has so little grip on their biases. Actually, I feel resigned about that. These people genuinely set out to overcome this kind of thinking, and there they are, plunging head-first into the same traps that they set out to avoid.

If our best and brightest and most rational minds don't stand a chance, what does that spell for the rest of humanity, who aren't even trying?

Expand full comment
Jun 7, 2022·edited Jun 15, 2022

I very much like your wit, intellect and ability to explain the matter rationally. Does IVM work? yes, when used in combination with the other components of the protocol. This is what needs to be analysed. Only tonight, I spoke to a diabetic in her late 50's, who contracted Omicron. She immediately started her course of IVM, Quercetin, Vits D3 and C , Zinc and NAC, with the result that her symptoms were short lived and no worse than a mild cold. Her 70 year old husband, the same, though he is not a diabetic.

They were both unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

> Scott: "I don't think Alexandros is engaging in good faith, and I urge people not to take anything he says about me, my opinions, or my actions at face value."

> it should probably be haram in rationalist circles to tell others what to think, never mind unilaterally and immediately declaring your interlocutor as “bad faith,” as a response to criticism.

He urged people not to take what you say at face value. That is not even close to telling others what to think.

Expand full comment

Dr. Alexander starts his response with his annoyance that:

> Instead of waiting to see if I'd post it, or asking me about it like I suggested, he published this post implying that I'm trying to hide it.

Do you have a response to that?

Relatedly, in one of your posts, you wrote:

> On some level, I understand the cognitive dissonance of having to correct perhaps your most popular article ever (hell, it even made it to The Economist the next day). It might have been read by millions.

I'm sure it's extremely frustrating that Dr. Alexander is seemingly not giving this the attention it deserves; however, it's not surprising that accusations of "cognitive dissonance" and the like are making Dr. Alexander combative.

Expand full comment
deletedJun 6, 2022·edited Jun 7, 2022Liked by Alexandros Marinos
Comment deleted
Expand full comment