15 Jun 21
@no1marauder saidSo you quote more lies?
More "liars" at the Infectious Diseases Society of America:
"Recommendation 1: Among patients with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends against hydroxychloroquine. (Strong recommendation, Moderate certainty of evidence)"
"Recommendation 2: Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends against hydroxychloroquine plus azithrom ...[text shortened]... dence)"
https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/covid-19-guideline-treatment-and-management/
A peer reviewed study shows otherwise. Where is your secret study nobody can find? It doesn't exist!
Where is the study to justify Recommendation 1&2? Let me guess, their recommendation was based on the redacted study from the Lancet, right?
Meanwhile, Fauci is knee deep in crap because of all of his lies. In 2012 he spoke favorably of gain of function research, yet he claims it was never done...but if it was done they did it right and it was done in NC....lol!
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fauci-2012-video-gain-of-function-experiments-benefit-society/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=d23d97a3-a34f-4b9f-82b0-5a034097b363
15 Jun 21
@no1marauder saidOh the hell you say, all the lamestream media had their talking heads deliver op-ed pieces about how it had harmful side effects up to and including death, all in an effort to criticize Trump..
No one claimed it was "dangerous";
15 Jun 21
@metal-brain saidThis may be a naive question, but why are you still bothering with Hydroxychloroquine when there are clearly much better treatments available now? Aside from vaccines (obviously), re-purposed drugs like Dexamethasone, Tocilizumab, Fluvoxamine and others have done better than Hydroxychloroquine in randomized trials. Convalescent plasma and certainly the COVID-specific monoclonal antibody treatments are much better than Hydroxychloroquine.
No1 marauder has a conspiracy theory that the FDA has access to a nonexistent study that is being suppressed from him. He doesn't want to accept that the redacted Lancet study proves that Hydroxychloroquine (not Chloroquine, not the same thing) is not dangerous.
Show us all the study that does not exist. no1, I am calling you out on your claim of a nonexistent study ...[text shortened]... studies are relevant and which are not unless you can prove someone lied. I can do that, you cannot.
I'll grant that the Hydroxychloroquine debate was important last Spring and I'll also grant that I see the evidence regarding Hydroxychloroquine as mixed (though more negative than positive). But why still bother?
It's like arguing whether throat lozenges and chicken soup help for strep throat. Maybe a little, but we have doxycycline and azithromycin and cephalex which all clearly work better.
15 Jun 21
@dood111 saidThat is true. The evidence that Hydroxychloroquine was dangerous was always suspect (especially after the Lancet study got debunked) and it was used against Trump. But that doesn't mean you should NOW forsake real treatments for a treatment that probably won't hurt but also probably won't help much.
Oh the hell you say, all the lamestream media had their talking heads deliver op-ed pieces about how it had harmful side effects up to and including death, all in an effort to criticize Trump..
15 Jun 21
@Duchess64
That is how Metal head rolls. He is poster boy for troll. He chose his handle here well.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147482
15 Jun 21
1 edit
@sh76 said"But why still bother?"
This may be a naive question, but why are you still bothering with Hydroxychloroquine when there are clearly much better treatments available now? Aside from vaccines (obviously), re-purposed drugs like Dexamethasone, Tocilizumab, Fluvoxamine and others have done better than Hydroxychloroquine in randomized trials. Convalescent plasma and certainly the COVID-specific monoclonal ...[text shortened]... Maybe a little, but we have doxycycline and azithromycin and cephalex which all clearly work better.
you might want to ask the families of those that were denied treatment and died because fauci lied.
15 Jun 21
@sh76 saidRight wingers have very peculiar memories. I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous (it's been FDA approved for decades); I do recall its effectiveness as a treatment for COVID 19 was questioned. As my links show, it was given an extraordinary amount of interest by researchers with many studies some quite large and the scientific consensus was there was insufficient evidence to show it had any use as a treatment for COVID19. All credible professional organizations and health organizations which took a stand came to the same conclusion.
That is true. The evidence that Hydroxychloroquine was dangerous was always suspect (especially after the Lancet study got debunked) and it was used against Trump. But that doesn't mean you should NOW forsake real treatments for a treatment that probably won't hurt but also probably won't help much.
Now we can believe they are just all "liars" who for some bizarre reason decided to knowingly block an effective treatment so they could kill a lot of people in furtherance of the Gates, Rockefeller, Kissinger conspiracy or we can believe that they evaluated the results of the studies and all came to the same conclusion.
I'm Occam Razoring this one.
15 Jun 21
@mott-the-hoople saidGuess who didn't take Hydroxychloroquine when he came down with COVID19? https://www.zmescience.com/science/hydroxychloroquine-advocates-are-angry-trump-didnt-take-it-for-himself/
"But why still bother?"
you might want to ask the families of those that were denied treatment and died because fauci lied.
16 Jun 21
@sh76 saidWhat is your source of information?
This may be a naive question, but why are you still bothering with Hydroxychloroquine when there are clearly much better treatments available now? Aside from vaccines (obviously), re-purposed drugs like Dexamethasone, Tocilizumab, Fluvoxamine and others have done better than Hydroxychloroquine in randomized trials. Convalescent plasma and certainly the COVID-specific monoclonal ...[text shortened]... Maybe a little, but we have doxycycline and azithromycin and cephalex which all clearly work better.
Hydroxychloroquine costs about 60 cents per pill. Not much profit for big pharma. What about Ivermectin? I noticed you didn't mention that drug. Let me guess, all of the drugs you listed are under patent by big pharma for the greatest profits possible. Right?
https://chananyaweissman.com/article.php?id=263
16 Jun 21
@no1marauder said"I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous"
Right wingers have very peculiar memories. I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous (it's been FDA approved for decades); I do recall its effectiveness as a treatment for COVID 19 was questioned. As my links show, it was given an extraordinary amount of interest by researchers with many studies some quite large and the scientific consens ...[text shortened]... ated the results of the studies and all came to the same conclusion.
I'm Occam Razoring this one.
Then apparently you did not read this article like you claimed to.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/04/an_effective_covid_treatment_the_media_continues_to_besmirch_143875.html
“This will kill you!” Fox News Channel’s Neil Cavuto exclaimed."
"To a media unrelentingly hostile to Donald Trump, this meant that the president could be portrayed as recklessly promoting the use of a “dangerous” drug. Ignoring the refutation of the VA study in its May 15 article, the Washington Post cited a Brazil study published on April 24 in which a COVID trial using chloroquine (a related but different drug than hydroxychloroquine) was stopped because 11 patients treated with it died. The reporters never mentioned another problem with that study: The Brazilian doctors were giving their patients lethal cumulative doses of the drug"
16 Jun 21
@metal-brain saidThere are many possible COVID treatments. Ivermectin has a better record than Hydroxychloroquine, but weaker than Tocilizumab and Fluvoxemine. I doubt the latter two cost much either.
What is your source of information?
Hydroxychloroquine costs about 60 cents per pill. Not much profit for big pharma. What about Ivermectin? I noticed you didn't mention that drug. Let me guess, all of the drugs you listed are under patent by big pharma for the greatest profits possible. Right?
https://chananyaweissman.com/article.php?id=263
Why would I give a damn about profits for Big Pharma?
@no1marauder said===I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous===
Right wingers have very peculiar memories. I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous (it's been FDA approved for decades); I do recall its effectiveness as a treatment for COVID 19 was questioned. As my links show, it was given an extraordinary amount of interest by researchers with many studies some quite large and the scientific consens ...[text shortened]... ated the results of the studies and all came to the same conclusion.
I'm Occam Razoring this one.
Eat some ginko, man. Last Spring, the link between Hydroxychloroquine and heart-related deaths was all over outlets like WaPo and CNN.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-study/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13/health/chloroquine-risks-coronavirus-treatment-trials-study/index.html
https://www.nbcboston.com/on-air/as-seen-on/researchers-find-dangerous-side-effect-in-hydroxychloroquine/2123145/
@sh76 saidGet out the Unguentine because Marauder just got BUUURNED!
===I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous===
Eat some ginko, man. Last Spring, the link between Hydroxychloroquine and heart-related deaths was all over outlets like WaPo and CNN.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-study/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13/health/chloroquine-risks-coronavirus- ...[text shortened]... bcboston.com/on-air/as-seen-on/researchers-find-dangerous-side-effect-in-hydroxychloroquine/2123145/
16 Jun 21
1 edit
@sh76 said
===I do not recall any claims that Hydroxychloroquine was inherently dangerous===
Eat some ginko, man. Last Spring, the link between Hydroxychloroquine and heart-related deaths was all over outlets like WaPo and CNN.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-study/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13/health/chloroquine-risks-coronavirus- ...[text shortened]... bcboston.com/on-air/as-seen-on/researchers-find-dangerous-side-effect-in-hydroxychloroquine/2123145/
no1 - I do recall its effectiveness as a treatment for COVID 19 was questioned
That's what your links are saying sh76 - COVID plus HQ leads to increased death, not HQ alone.
Last Spring, the link between Hydroxychloroquine [used in COVID patients] and heart-related deaths was all over outlets like WaPo and CNN.
Much better.
16 Jun 21
@dood111 saidNah sh76 is just too lazy to read no1's post
Get out the Unguentine because Marauder just got BUUURNED!