cryptoadam
Banned
That’s why I’ve been supplementing D3 everyday. Also, it ain’t real D, if it ain’t got the 3.
I have been taking the D too. Added some Zinc and Vitamin C as well.
That’s why I’ve been supplementing D3 everyday. Also, it ain’t real D, if it ain’t got the 3.
I like to have a long ride ...we already dead, might as well enjoy the ride to hell
So we’ve heard .I like to have a long ride ...
I tend to agree that the side effects are played up generally for most vaccines. But as a healthcare worker who is under 40 and very healthy, I hope my job doesn’t try to mandate that I get this thing right away. I was ok with being forced to get the flu vaccine every year because it has been rigorously tested. This is a bit different. I’m confident it will be safe, but I am also confident I will be fine if it got covid.There are a number of pre-existing vaccines that have side effects like fever / chills, etc. In both of my kids, one of the vaccines that they got at 12 months caused them to actually get sick for about 2 days. I don't even understand what the concern here is. The vaccine will be absolutely necessary for old farts that don't take care of themselves. I think they will be willing to risk some fever / chills to avoid dying from bilateral pneumonia.
Man I'm not sure if this relates to anyone else here but covid about to take frischs big boy out they are closing alot of their restaurants. Fuckthis virus fr.
Thoughts?
"99%+ of coronavirus infections will survive & have no serious health complications. 80% of Bill Gates' vaccine recipients had negative complications, but he assures us it's worth taking several shots as some of the complications were just "super painful"."
Britain records just SEVEN more Covid-19 deaths in lowest daily toll
Department of Health chiefs revealed the lowest number of deaths since March 13, when one death was reported. However, cases of the coronavirus appear to be on an upward trajectory.www.dailymail.co.uk
Good job for the UK.
Go back 6-8 weeks ago and UK was the worst place on earth and millions will die. Glad to see it worked out for them. Hopefully Dr. Campbell is proud.
So basically, the US has another 6-8 weeks to go. As the cases and deaths start to fall I'm sure folks will cheer the distancing measures and the mask mandates, etc. In reality, the virus will have simply run its course in all of the areas that got it lightly at the beginning.
Good job for the UK.
Go back 6-8 weeks ago and UK was the worst place on earth and millions will die. Glad to see it worked out for them. Hopefully Dr. Campbell is proud.
Cases in the UK are flat, but not dropping, which indicates the virus has been suppressed, but herd immunity has not been reached.So basically, the US has another 6-8 weeks to go. As the cases and deaths start to fall I'm sure folks will cheer the distancing measures and the mask mandates, etc. In reality, the virus will have simply run its course in all of the areas that got it lightly at the beginning.
Fringe politically motivated groups attempting to control the narrative using social media.Why is this video so....weird. The way its filmed and if this is a big press conference or something, where are the people? Not saying its bogus but it seriously looks like one of those infomercial "doctor testimonials".
Also their website looks bootleg as fuck.
What is going on here?
What is going on here?
Believe it or not, we acutally want HCQ (or anything) to work for COVID19. What ticks me off is when posters like yourself cherry pick news stories to push their ridiculous conspiracy theories.The question everyone should have been asking from the start.
"Masks work" and several weeks after being mandated California's cases were higher than ever.
Deaths are down drastically, but now we're focused on positive cases even though the average age is down significantly.
"Hydroxychloroquine doesn't work" say those citing highly questionable trials and studies lacking zinc and/or z-pak, like the retracted one from The Lancet. Surgisphere refused an audit and editor Funck-Brentano said: "This is my first retraction story in my whole [decades-long] career."
Case reporting errors and fake/misleading news stories don't get much attention when they're corrected, instead facing push back.
What is going on here? Those that ask seem to get silenced and told to just follow the rules... made by the people that have been wrong time and time again. Curious, isn't it?
Who is "we"? Maybe (maybe) you want it to work. But legions of Dems and Trump haters don't, and in fact don't want anything to work. Not until November 4th at least.Believe it or not, we acutally want HCQ (or anything) to work for COVID19
Believe it or not, we acutally want HCQ (or anything) to work for COVID19. What ticks me off is when posters like yourself cherry pick news stories to push their ridiculous conspiracy theories.
The fact is, at the moment the balance of evidence points to HCQ not working. The only treatment that has shown any evidence of improving survival is dexamethasone. Perhaps new studies will change this, but we can only deal with the facts as we know them.
The Surgisphere study was a retrospective analysis, and has been retracted due to an inability to verify the provenance of its data. However, there have been several other retrospective analysis since then that essentially confirmed its findings. More importantly, there have been good quality RCTs that also confirmed the same findings. We also have an RCT that did not show any benefit to HCQ as a prophylaxis. Anyone with an inkling of knowledge of the scientific process knows that RCTs are generally the highest quality of evidence and their findings supercede those of retrospective analyses.
Errors are a fact of life. The fact that these are being discovered and fixed by public health officials shows that the system is working. In the end, these errors are a drop in the bucket compared to the true amount of cases. Even the much ballyhooed Florida reporting situation that drove the fever swamps of conspiracy theorists into a frenzy would have only effected the state's positivity rate by 0.1%.
A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.
So my city, Melbourne Australia has had one of the toughest lockdowns in Australia. In fact, this is our second lockdown given our second wave. Our state was suppsedly a poster child among the academic community on how to respond to the virus.
In all likelihood, the harsh laws will likely apply to the rest of the state. Our progressive government has mandated the following:
1) Only leave your home for four reasons
2) Don't leave your suburb
3) Mandatory masks
4) Police checkpoints circling the city of Melbourne (with military help). For the past months, Melbournians have not been allowed to leave the city
5) Other Australian states have effectively isolated Victoria (rightly).
6) Joint patrols between local police and the military enforcing mask rule.
Yet, the lockdowns are failing:
Coronavirus cases aren't coming down despite Victoria's lockdowns. Experts seek to explain why
I don't buy the story re masks in the article. 99% of people are wearing masks with the exception of a few clowns on social media.
The majority of our cases are in aged homes and among health professionals. The state government has horribly bungled the entire situation, but insists the population is at fault. Tests gone missing from aged care homes, hotel quarantine security staff bonking the quarantined (yes, really!), those tested told to go back to work while waiting test results. The list goes on and on.
Our Premier, Dan Andrews, has now threatened to shutdown entire industries - including meat processing facilities.
This is true. I can’t vouch for whether it’s effective in certain situations, as it may well be, but I can say it’s not silver bullet. There isn’t one at this time. At least not for certain people.Cool vid, but unfortunately it just isn't true. Lots of patients are given that treatment and die.
Cool vid, but unfortunately it just isn't true. Lots of patients are given that treatment and die.
I mean I’ve seen it used in critically ill patients to no avail. It might have some utility early on before things progress. At least that’s the argument I’ve seen for it. But once things get bad, it doesn’t really seem to help.Have we seen any studies on the specific combination she is talking about? Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Zitromax?
The ones I've heard mostly about, if I'm recalling correctly, looked only at the effects of Hydroxychloroquine administered alone.
We've already established the Surgisphere Lanclet paper was discredited. I'm not sure why you would frame my post as if I were defending the paper - I literally said in the post you quoted that it was retracted.
I mean I’ve seen it used in critically ill patients to no avail. It might have some utility early on before things progress. At least that’s the argument I’ve seen for it. But once things get bad, it doesn’t really seem to help.
You do understand why that debacle might have made the whole discussion around this worse, right? I mean it certainly has contributed to the idea that there is a nonscientific reason why this drug is so controversial.We've already established the Surgisphere Lanclet paper was discredited. I'm not sure why you would frame my post as if I were defending the paper - I literally said in the post you quoted that it was retracted.
These are not the experts that we rely on. The paper is retracted. We are not relying on it. The experts came out and found fault with the paper, voiced their concern, and the paper was reviewed and removed. That's the fail safe we have in place, and it worked. Studies on HCQ have resumed.
In the interim, there are three RCTs that show no efficacy for HCQ as treatment and one that shows no efficacy as prophylaxis. Perhaps we should move onto those instead of clinging to a paper that has widely been discredited?
Surgisphere was a business that wanted to make money and was looking to make a name for itself. They either made up the data or cut corners in obtaining it. There has been plenty of journalism as to their motivations - you just haven't read it. There was also a paper that looked at Ace Inhibitors and COVID 19 that was based on data from Surgisphere and retracted at the same time, but this paper rarely gets mentioned by the conspiracy theorists because it doesn't fit their narrative.We did, but we haven't established how or why it happened. Important, don't you think? It suspended HCQ trials around the world.
Trust in science is as strong as ever. Trust in scientific reporting is the real problem. There are a lot of questions not getting the attention they deserve and I find that lack of curiosity troubling.
I don’t begin to know. It’s such a difficult thing to parse. I only know my very limited experience and what I’ve read. I know it’s not a silver bullet. Maybe it has some use, maybe not. The whole discussion has been poisoned.I hear you, but I also feel like there's got to be something to all of these random doctors from around the world (usually from poorer countries) singing the praises of this combination and how they have treated dozens if not hundreds of patients successfully. Is it really just a bunch of conspiracy nonsense? Who is propping them up?
Of course I do.You do understand why that debacle might have made the whole discussion around this worse, right? I mean it certainly has contributed to the idea that there is a nonscientific reason why this drug is so controversial.
I personally don’t subscribe to the idea that it’s some sort of cure. But it’s hard to see some of this and not wonder how that tripe study got published in the fucking Lancet.
This doesn’t answer the question of how they made it into the Lancet though. Just the motivations of the authors. I get that they probably were looking for money/prestige. What I have a hard time with as the 2nd leading medical journal in the US publishing something that was literally made up. It calls into question the credibility of the journal as a whole.Of course I do.
You can read this if you want some genuine insight into what motivated the authors of the study:
Science | AAAS
www.sciencemag.org
This doesn’t answer the question of how they made it into the Lancet though. Just the motivations of the authors. I get that they probably were looking for money/prestige. What I have a hard time with as the 2nd leading medical journal in the US publishing something that was literally made up. It calls into question the credibility of the journal as a whole.
New pandemic, rush to be the first to publish, too much trust in the lead author (who himself likely was taken for a ride by Surgisphere). It was definitely a mistake, but there are obvious reasons that don't resort to conspiracy.This doesn’t answer the question of how they made it into the Lancet though. Just the motivations of the authors. I get that they probably were looking for money/prestige. What I have a hard time with as the 2nd leading medical journal in the US publishing something that was literally made up. It calls into question the credibility of the journal as a whole.
Surgisphere was a business that wanted to make money and was looking to make a name for itself. They either made up the data or cut corners in obtaining it. There has been plenty of journalism as to their motivations - you just haven't read it. There was also a paper that looked at Ace Inhibitors and COVID 19 that was based on data from Surgisphere and retracted at the same time, but this paper rarely gets mentioned by the conspiracy theorists because it doesn't fit their narrative.
I suppose. But it’s wild to think that something like this happens. Especially considering the ramifications at multiple levels. The obvious medical issues where you might be depriving people from a treatment that had at least some potential. The political consequences. The trust in the scientific community. At a time when the stakes couldn’t have been higher.New pandemic, rush to be the first to publish, too much trust in the lead author (who himself likely was taken for a ride by Surgisphere). It was definitely a mistake, but there are obvious reasons that don't resort to conspiracy.
If they had not investigated and retracted the paper, yes, it would have. But they responded to concerns swiftly and made an appropriate determination based on Surgisphere's lack of transparency. This isn't the first time the Lancet had to retract a paper - they were the journal that published Wakefield's bogus MMR/autism study, and it took them twelve years to retract that. By comparison, this study was retracted within two weeks.