Ivermectin, the CURE to homosexuality?

Yonebayashian

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
145
Location
Colorado Springs
A few people go on raw meat diets until tapeworm resolves on its own, common in the Primal Diet community and I personally know someone who has had success doing so to treat it.
 

Chophouse360

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2021
Messages
198
If the parasites cause hormonal changes i dont see why this shoudn't be possible? I mean Lokzo i think posted a case study of a man becming gay from a antipsychotic which i think haidut explained trough a hormonal mechanism.

I think parasites are underrated in treating many ailments. On another note tho, removing certain parasites have been shown in a few case studies to actually inflict chronic issues instead of resolving them. much like bacteria and fungi they realy play their role in this wierd ecosystem that is our body.
@Lokzo
 

Sam321

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Messages
652
Shitty theory.

Much like the rest of the stuff basement dwellers post on pol/.
 

Daft

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
146
This is hilarious because the whole premise is wrong. Please go back and study biological evolution.

Homosexuals can and do reproduce. Just because many don't doesn't mean they can't, and this is an important distinction in evolutionary biology. Homosexuals are fertile, therefore they serve a natural selection function. They have had children throughout history. Even in the modern world, it's not uncommon for a person to take an opposite sex partner to fulfill familial duties and have a same-sex lover on the side. The notion that homosexuals can't have opposite-sex sex and heterosexuals can't have homosexual sex is a modern social invention.

Besides that, heterosexuals produce homosexuals even in the complete absence of homosexuals. The parents are not secretly homosexual.

Homosexuality seems to be tied to female fecundity. The more fertile a woman is, the more likely she is to produce homosexual offspring. There is likely an altruistic advantage to this because an offspring that is less likely to reproduce is more likely to aid the fecundity of females in the community. In other words, homosexuals are biological altruists because they aid the fitness advantage of other reproductive humans at the cost to their own reproduction. It doesn't mean they don't reproduce though, it just means they are less likely to. Nature is cool like that. Even in those less likely to reproduce, they are not sterile and therefore can still contribute to natural selection.

Go back and learn some biology!
Sources for this theory?
 

Daft

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
146
It was proven a very long time ago (1960s-70s) that hormones have zero impact on sexual orientation. They know because they tried altering homosexuality with hormone treatment and it not only destroyed lives, it led to suicides. That led to it being removed from the DSM as a psychiatric condition. NOTHING cures homosexuality because it's not a disease.

The theory you're pushing so passionately has already been thoroughly debunked like half a century ago.
Except where they seem to:

 

Daft

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
146
Also (from above): birth order correlates with it in men: "when we classified our male subjects based on factors known to influence sexual orientation, we saw a relationship. That factor is birth order: the more older brothers a man has, the more likely that man is to be gay in adulthood."

Hmmm

"We think the two are related; that is, that one of the reasons later-born men are more likely to be gay is because they saw more prenatal androgen."

Counter-intuitive. I wasn't even aware of that last part until looking this up again.

The pre-natal higher androgens is a speculative inference from the two findings though:

"Gay men, however, showed no difference in this ratio compared to straight men, but men with older brothers showed a more masculine finger pattern than men without older brothers, whether they were straight or gay. Since other research has shown that later-born men with older brothers are more likely to be gay, researchers surmise that they may have been exposed to more prenatal androgen."

Also: "Animal and human studies have shown that gay males have a greater mean number of lifetime sexual partners, more circulating androgen, and larger penises than straight males, according to Breedlove and colleagues."
 
Last edited:

Ben.

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2020
Messages
1,722
Location
Austria
You're just pushing incorrect theories that make it seem like homosexuality is part of the pathogenesis of an infection.
I am not pushing theories, i've never said or implied that homosexuality is a disease or of pathogenic nature. No idea why you are so passioned about explaining people what they supposedly said and how wrong they are. Seems like this is for some reason, personal to you. Read my posts carefully again and do not mix it with someone elses.

I joined this conversation, based on what i've read and know from certain special incidences and the nature of certain organisms that there could be the chance that some individual might be subject to one of these circumstances that influence behaviour and perhaps arousal trough a organism using a human or a animal as a host.
Saying that does not imply that homosexuality is a problem nor that it is of pathogenic nature.

If a parasite can make a animal kill itself or run into a predator, why shoudn't i consider it to be be possible for it to make it have sexual intercourse with everything that moves?
You think scientists didn't look into that decades ago?

That statement is nonesense. They also investigated bacteria, cancer and alot of other stuff and we still have worldwide health decline especially from the chronic kind. Having a explanation for it does not mean one understands the subject in its entireity nor its causation for it.

Even in the last 10-20 years so much new findings and research has been conducted in many areas which broaded and maybe even clouded our understanding of this world. Why should it be impossible to acuqire new knowledge that could explain in more detail or with more nuances why certain things are the way they are? Including homosexuality? Right, since they "looked" into it decades ago there seems to be nothing else to do or try. Sounds intellectual lazy to me.


That was the thread with the antipsychotic :

 

LeeLemonoil

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,265
In other words, homosexuals are biological altruists because they aid the fitness advantage of other reproductive humans at the cost to their own reproduction

Needs validation. In which times of human life and civilization were homosexuals in the family not helpful but a burden?
Or were repelled or separated from families.

Also, only because homosexuality obviously survives (as do many pathologies) that’s not excluding that there are hormonal factors at play that define if or when that trait actually comes through.

Not being able to treat homosexuality with hormones doesn’t prove they don’t factor in causing it. It’s extremely unlikely they don’t given how endocrine alterations factor in almost every physiological occurrence or pathology.

If you claim that homosexuality is mostly genetic (which I also assume) then you ad a biologist should know by now that epigenetic influences can alter genetics and epigenetic factors can be influenced.

To claim that homosexuality is something different than other phenomena is too far fetched
 

Marcine

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
215
Location
Ecuador
This is hilarious because the whole premise is wrong. Please go back and study biological evolution.

Homosexuals can and do reproduce. Just because many don't doesn't mean they can't, and this is an important distinction in evolutionary biology. Homosexuals are fertile, therefore they serve a natural selection function. They have had children throughout history. Even in the modern world, it's not uncommon for a person to take an opposite sex partner to fulfill familial duties and have a same-sex lover on the side. The notion that homosexuals can't have opposite-sex sex and heterosexuals can't have homosexual sex is a modern social invention.

Besides that, heterosexuals produce homosexuals even in the complete absence of homosexuals. The parents are not secretly homosexual.

Homosexuality seems to be tied to female fecundity. The more fertile a woman is, the more likely she is to produce homosexual offspring. There is likely an altruistic advantage to this because an offspring that is less likely to reproduce is more likely to aid the fecundity of females in the community. In other words, homosexuals are biological altruists because they aid the fitness advantage of other reproductive humans at the cost to their own reproduction. It doesn't mean they don't reproduce though, it just means they are less likely to. Nature is cool like that. Even in those less likely to reproduce, they are not sterile and therefore can still contribute to natural selection.

Go back and learn some biology!
You might want to read the Bible. It's all about Satan, who owns this world and apparently you. No one is born homosexual unless the dna has been manipulated via all kinds of toxins, including parasites. It is NOT a natural phenomenon. God doesn't work that way, but the controllers want you to believe something else.
 

Marcine

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
215
Location
Ecuador
All of those things are complex and chronic stressors. Same with parasites.

We also know that in animals hormones and drugs can change sexuality. Gay frogs etc

I do agree with not taking 4chan at face value.

Related to this, there is a woman who claims to have helped countless autistic kids with antiparasite regime:


View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/MJhlztQffkBM/

Well, I get Ivermectin for practically nothing down here in Ecuador and my gut has never been better since taking it prophylactically for several months.
 
K

Kayaker

Guest
Well, I get Ivermectin for practically nothing down here in Ecuador and my gut has never been better since taking it prophylactically for several months.
I heard Ecuador is a great country to live.
 

Marcine

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
215
Location
Ecuador
I could definitely see some kind of connection here although I would wager there are many straight men who are also infected with intestinal parasites.

Hasn't haidut mentioned that there are other anti parasite substances that are much safer and more effective than ivermectin? Can't recall what they are off the top of my head. Think he mentioned it on one of his podcasts with Danny Roddy.
Ivermectin is extremely safe and tested ad nauseum. It's cheap, easily manufactured anywhere in the world. It's basically a treatment for Scabies, which is mange in dogs and fairly common in 3rd world countries.
 

Soren

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
1,648
Ivermectin is extremely safe and tested ad nauseum. It's cheap, easily manufactured anywhere in the world. It's basically a treatment for Scabies, which is mange in dogs and fairly common in 3rd world countries.
I agree it is very safe but there is a small risk when compared to some other alternatives that are more effective.
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
There may be something to this. Probably not in the way retardchan explains it

I took Ivermectin a couple times for a podcast as an experiment and noticed on those days women noticed me more then usual.

So I decided to take a 5 day run of 12mg per day.

It was amazing. I couldn't stop. Very masculinizing. Have probably put on a pound of muscle in a month. Doing 12mg per day.

It did increase my insulin needs dramatically. I could also be benefiting from the anti-viral properties
 
OP
H

HumanLife

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2019
Messages
365
Age
27
There may be something to this. Probably not in the way retardchan explains it

I took Ivermectin a couple times for a podcast as an experiment and noticed on those days women noticed me more then usual.

So I decided to take a 5 day run of 12mg per day.

It was amazing. I couldn't stop. Very masculinizing. Have probably put on a pound of muscle in a month. Doing 12mg per day.

It did increase my insulin needs dramatically. I could also be benefiting from the anti-viral properties

That’s pretty interesting. How did you get it, or did the podcast help with that?

Any info on how to get it would he much appreciated if that’s ok!
 

Risingfire

Member
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
1,063
It was proven a very long time ago (1960s-70s) that hormones have zero impact on sexual orientation. They know because they tried altering homosexuality with hormone treatment and it not only destroyed lives, it led to suicides. That led to it being removed from the DSM as a psychiatric condition. NOTHING cures homosexuality because it's not a disease.

The theory you're pushing so passionately has already been thoroughly debunked like half a century ago.
This is false.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom