Seeking clarifications and justifications

[Geneco]

Ivermectin is a prescribed drug. There are dangers of misusing it not for it’s intended purpose or overdosing on it. Sharing of anecdotal experience can cause bodily harm. Please see the straits times article about the elderly lady.

Any drug / substance or treatment also carries its own potential risks and side effects.

The stance on Lian Hua Qing Wen is consistent to the advisory from the HSA. Please see.
https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/...ion-standards-at-edmw.6684754/#post-139452309

That said, so why the forum is still abundant with post on anecdotal use of vit a c, d, e, zinc, quercetin, fruits, lemon juice, povidone-iodine, lian hua qing wen, juicing/blending, etc.

Even one of your moderators is sharing what drugs/medication to be used for in a large covid symptoms sharing thread and allowed to persist.

Hence the issue of consistency has not been adequately addressed...

 

[Intrinion]

Any drug / substance or treatment also carries its own potential risks and side effects.

I am glad we can agree to that then, and so your post was removed based on those grounds.
Thread title: “Those who haven't tio covid yet, how u managed to avoid it”

 

[paul02]

Perhaps it would be best that you read from the source directly.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115869
There is also a recently published study on ivermectin from our neighbors across the causeway.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2789362

I have, and shared a well meaning critique of it, have you?

 

[Geneco]

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115869
There is also a study on ivermectin from our neighbors across the causeway.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2789362

If all you find and present are studies that find no significant effect, when there are other studies showing significant effects.

How can forums users here be reasonably assured you are not "picking a side" and hence your neutrality and objectivity in such issues are suspect?

 

[Intrinion]

I have, and shared a well meaning critique of it, have you?

This is not the right thread for sharing.

 

[Intrinion]

If all you find and present are studies that find no significant effect, when there are other studies showing significant effects.

How can forums users here be reasonably assured you are not "picking a side" and hence your neutrality and objectivity in such issues are suspect?

With such inconclusiveness, don’t you reckon that the topic warrants further investigation? Now, do you understand why we had to remove your post in the first place?

With regards to neutrality and objectivity. I shall refer you to my first response in this thread: We adhere to HSA/MOH’s guidelines on the use of ivermectin.
https://www.hsa.gov.sg/consumer-safety/articles/ivermectin-advisory

 

[Geneco]

I am glad we can agree to that then, and so your post was removed based on those grounds.
Thread title: “Those who haven't tio covid yet, how u managed to avoid it”

View attachment 30844

Well it is clearly within your power and prerogative to remove it based on your own subjective opinion. Not solely on the grounds that we agree on the point that drugs / substances can potentially have side effects.

But is it worthy of 3 points given since your objectiveness and neutrality in such issues are clearly suspect?

We are still awaiting on evidence and justification on how you made the jump from "sharing of anecdotal experience" to "advocating its use".

When given your "generosity" in making such a leap of logic, you can clearly apply your same reasoning to all forums users who are sharing their anecdotal experience on any matter, no?

 

[Intrinion]

Well it is clearly within your power and prerogative to remove it based on your own subjective opinion. Not solely on the grounds that we agree on the point that drugs / substances can potentially have side effects.

But is it worthy of 3 points given since your objectiveness and neutrality in such issues are clearly suspect?

We are still awaiting on evidence and justification on how you made the jump from "sharing of anecdotal experience" to "advocating its use".

When given your "generosity" in making such a leap of logic, you can clearly apply your same reasoning to all forums users who are sharing their anecdotal experience on any matter, no?

In this thread, we have established and agreed that the drug is dangerous and its ability to cause bodily harm. Both of us also agreed that on going studies and recently published 2022 studies highlighted conflicting results. With so many uncertainties on the use of ivermectin, it’s advocating or mention has the ability to mislead the general public with devastating effects.



Your post was removed on those grounds.

 

[Geneco]

With such inconclusiveness, don’t you reckon that the study warrants further investigation? Now, do you understand why we had to remove your post in the first place?

No we don't understand the rationale. As said, we were sharing our own anecdotal experience, not asking people to take it.

With regards to neutrality and objectivity. I shall refer you to my first response in this thread: We adhere to HSA/MOH’s guidelines on the use of ivermectin.
https://www.hsa.gov.sg/consumer-safety/articles/ivermectin-advisory

It is not an advisory on the removal or censuring of sharing of anecdotal experience on using certain drugs / substances / treatment.

So the censuring is clearly done at your own subjective discretion which is called into question by all the points raised in this thread.

 

[Geneco]

The danger of the controlled substance was the

We have established and agreed that the drug is dangerous and its ability to cause bodily harm.

No it has not been established. Neither have we reached any consensus or agreement on this.

 

[Intrinion]

No we don't understand the rationale. As said, we were sharing our own anecdotal experience, not asking people to take it.

It is not an advisory on the removal or censuring of sharing of anecdotal experience on using certain drugs / substances / treatment.

So the censuring is clearly done at your own subjective discretion which is called into question by all the points raised in this thread.

We removed it cause your own anecdotal experience on your alleged consumption of ivermectin poses a risk to the general public and forum population. The removal is with reference to MOH / HSA guidelines on ivermectin consumption

 

[paul02]

This is not the right thread for sharing.

Perhaps but it does not address the points made.

Anyway hope the points can be reversed if TS isn't outright advocating users to do so.

 

[Geneco]

We removed it cause your own anecdotal experience on your alleged consumption of ivermectin poses a risk to the general public and forum population. The removal is with reference to MOH / HSA guidelines on ivermectin consumption

We are not here to challenge the removal of the content per se.

The government has mechanism/s to order the removal or corrections of such contents if they are indeed misinformation or fake news.

We are here to question the objectivity and neutrality of the infraction issued as the "perceived risk" is your own subjective interpretation and opinion; since you make the unjustified leap of logic that sharing an anecdote experience is equivalent to advocating its use or giving medical advice.

The latter is crux of the issue that needs to be answered and clarified.

How can the forum count on you to be objective and neutral on this issue when you have shown time and again that you are "picking a side" and have your own inherent bias in this issue to act fairly and consistently?

Aren't you acting as the final arbitor of "truth" and not allowing fair discussion of the evidence, be it anecdotal or not by removing content and issuing warnings at your own subjective whim and fancies?

Isn't this in contradiction to what was preeched by cranthir?

 

[Intrinion]

We are not here to challenge the removal of the content per se.

The government has mechanism/s to order the removal or corrections of such contents if they are indeed misinformation or fake news.

We are here to question the objectivity and neutrality of the infraction issued as the perceived risk is your own subjective interpretation and opinion since you make the unjustified leap of logic that sharing an anecdote experience is equivalent to advocating its use or giving medical advice.

The latter is crux of the issue that needs to be answered and clarified.

How can the forum count on you to be objective and neutral on this issue when you have shown time and again that you are "picking a side" and have your own inherent bias in this issue to act fairly and consistently?

Aren't you acting as the final arbitor of "truth" and not allowing fair discussion of the evidence, be it anecdotal or not by removal content and issuing warnings at your own subjective whim and fancies?

Isn't this in contradiction to what was preeched by cranthir?

Let’s agree to disagree. You may think it is harmless from your point of view.

We have to consider and weigh the blast radius of your post based on its inherent risk to public health and safety. An advisory on the use and risk of ivermectin was already issued by a public health body. Even recent 2022 studies illustrate the inconclusiveness of the efficacy of ivermectin on the novel cornonavirus, and in all studies they mention that the use of ivermectin warrants further investigation.

To illustrate further, a well read person reading the literature body and limitation of any research paper will know that there is lack of quality literature on ivermectin and Covid. Authors world wide have acknowledged the inherent risk of fraud.

https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/9/2/ofab645/6509922?login=false
https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...-fraud-scientists-found-trials-ivermectin-use
At the end of the day, the buck falls on the forum moderation team. With regards to medication, we will err to the side of caution than cause bodily harm.

 

[Geneco]

In this thread, we have established and agreed that the drug is dangerous and its ability to cause bodily harm.

There is no agreement to any effect and your statement is a misleading and/or misinformation unless clarified.

If it were inherently "dangerous" as you have alleged, why is it in the WHO's list of essential medicine and used/deployed in the general population with a safety profile that is clinical superior to even drugs like Tylenol and others?

Both of us also agreed that on going studies and recently published 2022 studies highlighted conflicting results. With so many uncertainties on the use of ivermectin, it’s advocating or mention has the ability to mislead the general public with devastating effects.

View attachment 30845

Your post was removed on those grounds.

Once again your allegation of "advocating" and "misleading the general public" has yet to be justified in the context of our anecdotal post.

But now you want to go further to say even "mentioning" ivermectin can lead to your unjustified assumption of being able to mislead the general public with devastating consequences?

Seriously? How far are you going with this? Are these allegations and assumptions even justified?

 

[Intrinion]

There is no agreement to any effect and your statement is a misleading and/or misinformation unless clarified.

If it were inherently "dangerous" as you have alleged, why is it in the WHO's list of essential medicine and used/deployed in the general population with a safety profile that is clinical superior to even drugs like Tylenol and others?

Once again your allegation of "advocating" and "misleading the general public" has yet to be justified in the context of our anecdotal post.

But now you want to go further to say even "mentioning" ivermectin can lead to your unjustified assumption of being able to mislead the general public with devastating consequences?

Seriously? How far are you going with this? Are these allegations and assumltkoms even justified?

Any medication is dangerous if it’s taken not for it’s intended purpose. Perhaps you and your team should take a look at why it in the WHO list.

To your second point. It’s clear.
You mentioned ivermectin in the thread titled:
“Those who haven't tio covid yet, how u managed to avoid it”


And went on respond say that you potentially managed to avoid by the occasional use of horse paste / ivermectin.

That is a dangerous statement to make based on the overall context of the thread in question.

I hope this clarifies.

 

[Geneco]

Let’s agree to disagree. You may think it is harmless from your point of view.

We have to consider and weigh the blast radius of your post based on its inherent risk to public health and safety. An advisory on the use and risk of ivermectin was already issued by a public health body. Even recent 2022 studies illustrate the inconclusiveness of the efficacy of ivermectin on the novel cornonavirus, and in all studies they mention that the use of ivermectin warrants further investigation.

To illustrate further, a well read person reading the literature body and limitation of any research paper will know that there is lack of quality literature on ivermectin and Covid. Authors world wide have acknowledged the inherent risk of fraud.

https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/9/2/ofab645/6509922?login=false
https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...-fraud-scientists-found-trials-ivermectin-use
At the end of the day, the buck falls on the forum moderation team. With regards to medication, we will err to the side of caution than cause bodily harm.

In all due respect, it was never about the efficacy of the drug or its perceived/alleged harms per se.

Sharing studies and news from just one side of the debate which indicate to us you are "picking a side" does not clarify the crux of the issue here.

The buck falls on the moderation to be objective and neutral in their evaluation.

Not "picking a side" and making subjective interpretations and allegations which till now have yet to be justified and censuring users based on a subjective interpretation or leap of logic.

We are still waiting on the evidence and justification as to how sharing anecdotal experience can be made out to imply that we are advising on medication or giving medical advice.

 

[Geneco]

You mentioned ivermectin in the thread titled:
“Those who haven't tio covid yet, how u managed to avoid it”

View attachment 30846
And went on respond say that you potentially managed to avoid by the occasional use of horse paste / ivermectin.

That is a dangerous statement to make based on the overall context of the thread in question.

Well you are certainly entitled to your subjective opinion that it is a "dangerous" statement.

By your logic and reasoning aren't those users sharing on vit a c, d, e, zinc, quercetin, fruits, lemon juice, povidone-iodine, lian hua qing wen, juicing/blending, etc, also "dangerous" because they might / might not work and can also have side effects or the whole slew of "devastating" effects?

Do you see how your subjective line of reasoning would pan out if generalised?

This also means the basis of your infraction is not necessarily neutral or objective.

 

[Mecisteus]

I support Intrinion on this.

This is a public forum to protect the best interests of the general public.

Any discussion or opinions which lead to the promotion or encouragement of crimes, illegal activities or use of unapproved health products shouldn't be allowed in the forum.

I thought this is so obvious and straight forward.

And I'm very sure I'm not the only one that hold such views. So let's just err to the safe side and stop promoting IVM as a covid treatment. No developed country in this world has approved such treatment yet.

 

[reddevil0728]

I support Intrinion on this.

This is a public forum to protect the best interests of the general public.

Any discussion or opinions which lead to the promotion or encouragement of crimes, illegal activities or use of unapproved health products shouldn't be allowed in the forum.

I thought this is so obvious and straight forward.

And I'm very sure I'm not the only one that hold such views. So let's just err to the safe side and stop promoting IVM as a covid treatment. No developed country in this world has approved such treatment yet.

Dunno why it is so difficult for people to get it that "freedom of speech" is not unlimited and only applies to government from restricting speech.

It does not precludes private companies from doing so.

people seems to think their "threat" of leaving the forum so that the moderation team will change tact is of any use, when the threats are literally empty.