Originally posted by mikewhitney
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Trump follows and endorses crazy Doctor
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostConsidering that HCQ provides more risk than benefit, the "cure" option means not taking HCQ.
I think it was the other thread where we listed the C19study.com. I was waiting to hear what was wrong with the list of studies there. The studies included positive results and negative ones from studies done. Was there a specific study you like to highlight?Last edited by mikewhitney; 08-03-2020, 02:40 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostAFAIK, HCQ has been rejected specifically because the risks outweigh the rewards. If maximizing its efficacy entails administering it before tests come back - that'd seem to be the exact opposite of what should be being done.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostWho cares "when" you can take it. The point is that according to the scientific and medical communities, the risks outweigh the benefits.
It would be more precise to say something like, "With some notable exceptions, 'orthodoxy' among medical academecians and to a lesser extent clinicians holds that the risks of HCQ outweigh its benefits."
On this site, the focus has been on the notably colorful Dr. Immanuel. Little attention has been paid to Drs. Harvey Risch, Stephen Smith, and Ramin Oskoui, the former being an academic, the latter practicing clinicians (in my understanding).Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View PostBut most people do not prefer the cure of death -- which ends all other diseases. The goal of science is to help you. But you can deny science and just take the natural consequence of an early death. And you can let those around you die because you want to scare them away from HCQ. It would be nice to know you are also so persistent for some good goals.
I think it was the other thread where we listed the C19study.com. I was waiting to hear what was wrong with the list of studies there. The studies included positive results and negative ones from studies done. Was there a specific study you like to highlight?
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostOn this site, the focus has been on the notably colorful Dr. Immanuel. Little attention has been paid to Drs. Harvey Risch, Stephen Smith, and Ramin Oskoui, the former being an academic, the latter practicing clinicians (in my understanding).Last edited by Whateverman; 08-03-2020, 07:00 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostRisch is being interviewed on CNN now as I type. This is the first time I've seen or heard from him...
Risch is a competent scientis, and yes there have been some positive results of using HCQ in combination with azithromycin.The article goes over different research, and the limited positive results. It empasises that the previous reasearch is without control and good randomized studies. One with a good research design showed decidedly negative results,
Name droping without the details is not an adegaute response,
Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-03-2020, 08:14 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View Post... when the average test takes up to two weeks to get the results back from...That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostThe FDA gave "emergency authorization" only for hospital settings, then revoked the authorization because of the poor risk/benefit ratio. They basically authorized its use *only* in the settings in which most advocates said it was least likely to work and most likely to have harmful side-effects, then stopped it when that proved true.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View PostNo. HCQ can still be used in scientific trials. Problem is, the randomized trials that have tested its efficacy for post-exposure prophylaxis have given negative results.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638
Here is a some of the rebuttal to the study's conclusion
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View PostThe study has many shortcomings, beyond the ones the study itself mentions.
Here is a some of the rebuttal to the study's conclusion
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAs before, and it has not changed, this research is considered flawed by almost everybody except Trump, the Wacky Witch Doctor. and you.
You seem only able to do such mockery rather than actually responding to the studies themselves. Please show us what you understand about the studies, rather than just mocking people.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View PostYou fail to convince anyone of anything when you speak under the influence of Trump-Derangement Syndrome and you make the issue about personalities instead of research.
You seem only able to do such mockery rather than actually responding to the studies themselves. Please show us what you understand about the studies, rather than just mocking people.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostI do have to convince anyone virtuallu by far most of scientific community, NIH, and CDC have the medical research on their side. and of course the facts of the fatalities and fatality rate world wide for CIVID-19.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View PostThe deaths are happening largely because people are not aware of the benefits of HCQ. Your reasoning is cyclic and it relies on a blind trust of the CDC and NIH rather than on science itself. You have been unable to examine and discuss the science thus far.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:50 PM
|
0 responses
9 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 09:50 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 04:03 AM
|
23 responses
113 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 12:19 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 12:51 PM
|
97 responses
532 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by carpedm9587
Today, 10:36 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
5 responses
45 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by mossrose
Yesterday, 12:18 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:36 AM
|
5 responses
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 07:37 AM
|
Comment