Some Potentially Very Good News: Hydroxychloroquine and Z-pac

J

jmog

Well-known member
ProV1 said:
Great. Contradicting studies does not mean that an ignorant president should push an unapproved drug over approved ones.
Click to expand...
Just admit you were wrong. It’s ok to do so.
Oh, and the studies that said it didn’t work were looking at if it prevented COVID infection. The problem is that no one ever said it would prevent infection, they said it helped with the symptoms after you already were infected.

The Henry Ford research proved this to be true.
 
P

ProV1

Well-known member
jmog said:
Bull crap and you know it.

it’s ok to admit when you f’d up and were wrong.
Click to expand...
No. You still can’t find a single person who said that it definitely was not an effective drug. Several people just posted stories about trials as evidence that it is stupid to endorse a drug without any clinical evidence. If you read the entire thread, all that was challenged was the stupid and ignorant premature promotion of an unproven drug. Read below from April and wise up.
 

Attachments

J

jmog

Well-known member
ProV1 said:
No. You still can’t find a single person who said that it definitely was not an effective drug. Several people just posted stories about trials as evidence that it is stupid to endorse a drug without any clinical evidence. If you read the entire thread, all that was challenged was the stupid and ignorant premature promotion of an unproven drug. Read below from April and wise up.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you are full of crap. Plenty of you left wingers not only stated multiple times that it wasn’t effective but that it was DANGEROUS!

Just admit the truth, you can do it.
 
P

ProV1

Well-known member
jmog said:
Sorry, but you are full of crap. Plenty of you left wingers not only stated multiple times that it wasn’t effective but that it was DANGEROUS!

Just admit the truth, you can do it.
Click to expand...
No. They said it could be dangerous unless it was properly trialed. I know things are horrendous for Trump right now but you gotta find a better win than a single drug study.
 
J

jmog

Well-known member
ProV1 said:
No. They said it could be dangerous unless it was properly trialed. I know things are horrendous for Trump right now but you gotta find a better win than a single drug study.
Click to expand...
I don’t care about Trump, not a big fan.
I just call out hypocrisy when I see it and right now you are 100% being a hypocrite and it’s rather funny.
 
L

lotr10

Well-known member
This Tweet brings up a good point - are those Governors and health departments that banned the use of chloroquin on covid19 patients now in legal jeopardy?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279044039950639104


It has typically been the prerogative of physicians to be able to prescribe a drug for off label use if in their professional opinion such use would help their patient. Doctors have traditionally been given wide latitude by the FDA & health boards for this. It was a key feature of our learning to control AIDS.

It was highly unusual for Governors to issue orders banning the use of chloroquin in covid19 patients. Taking away a doctors right to use drugs off label to help their patients was a huge leap by the authorities. It could only be supported if there was clear and compelling evidence of a danger for folks to use this drug.

Now that a major, controlled clinical trial has shown that chloroquin cuts the death rate in half the actions of these governors could be considered irresponsible. This is the 2nd decision by several blue state democrat governors, the 1st being placing infected people in nursing homes, that directly killed people. These governors really do have blood on their hands.
 
B

bob22

Well-known member
lotr10 said:
This Tweet brings up a good point - are those Governors and health departments that banned the use of chloroquin on covid19 patients now in legal jeopardy?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1279044039950639104


It has typically been the prerogative of physicians to be able to prescribe a drug for off label use if in their professional opinion such use would help their patient. Doctors have traditionally been given wide latitude by the FDA & health boards for this. It was a key feature of our learning to control AIDS.

It was highly unusual for Governors to issue orders banning the use of chloroquin in covid19 patients. Taking away a doctors right to use drugs off label to help their patients was a huge leap by the authorities. It could only be supported if there was clear and compelling evidence of a danger for folks to use this drug.

Now that a major, controlled clinical trial has shown that chloroquin cuts the death rate in half the actions of these governors could be considered irresponsible. This is the 2nd decision by several blue state democrat governors, the 1st being placing infected people in nursing homes, that directly killed people. These governors really do have blood on their hands.
Click to expand...
Never change Laura.
 
Q

Qcity

Well-known member
ProV1 said:
No. They said it could be dangerous unless it was properly trialed. I know things are horrendous for Trump right now but you gotta find a better win than a single drug study.
Click to expand...

Literally hilarious. It has been in use for over 60 years.

Hundreds, if not thousands of people got up from their death beds and walked out hospital doors, and they and their doctors directly credit the drug for their recovery from the communist Chinese coronovirus.
 
P

ProV1

Well-known member
Qcity said:
Literally hilarious. It has been in use for over 60 years.

Hundreds, if not thousands of people got up from their death beds and walked out hospital doors, and they and their doctors directly credit the drug for their recovery from the communist Chinese coronovirus.
Click to expand...
Good. Then it should have no problem gaining FDA approval for Covid like remdesivir.

www.fda.gov

FDA cautions use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for COVID-19

Does not affect FDA-approved uses for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis
www.fda.gov www.fda.gov

nypost.com

FDA approves remdesivir as emergency use for coronavirus treatment

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had announced the positive news about the drug on Wednesday.
nypost.com nypost.com
 
H

Happygoluckky

Well-known member
Last edited:
Red14

Red14

Well-known member
So a question I'm having is the reliability of the testing? Supposedly, Juan Soto of the Washington Nationals has tested negative 6 times over the weekend, but not two consectutive negagtive tests, per MLB rules?

So what do we make of this? Are the test largely speculative? Are they even reliable? What if all of these positive tests across the country are found to be unreliable? Especially when hospital and death rates continue to drop?
 
Y

Yorktown

Well-known member
Lies n dam lies again... Dems are murdering fanatics. Taking away a treat because of politics. Mao could not be prouder!
 
my2sense

my2sense

Well-known member
“None of my lupus patients have developed covid, which is quite remarkable,” Dr. Daniel Wallace, a rheumatologist at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles, said in a teleconference for the Lupus Research Alliance.

Wallace said that of around 1,000 patients with coronavirus that have showed up at his hospital network, “one has had lupus.”

“It may be that the drugs that these patients are taking provides them with type of protection. I find this rather interesting and I can’t quite explain it,” Wallace said.

Go ahead and debunk this guy Happ

Daniel Jeffrey Wallace (born October 27, 1949) is an American rheumatologist, clinical professor, author, and fellow. Wallace has published 450 peer reviewed publications, 9 textbooks, and 28 book chapters on topics such as lupus, Sjögren syndrome, osteoarthritis, and fibromyalgia. He has the largest cohort of lupus patients in the United States (2000). A full professor of medicine (Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA), he is associate director of the Rheumatology Fellowship Program at Cedars-Sinai
 
SayMyName

SayMyName

Well-known member
USMC6789 said:
Even if it worked (it doesn’t) making it OTC would be negligent. HCQ has an elevated risk of heart issues. Those who use it need to be under the care of a doctor.
Click to expand...
If you have heart issues...Ever seen a Tylenol package insert? Is everyone on Tylenol under the care of a doctor?
 
OhioBobcatFan06

OhioBobcatFan06

Well-known member
USMC6789 said:
Even if it worked (it doesn’t) making it OTC would be negligent. HCQ has an elevated risk of heart issues. Those who use it need to be under the care of a doctor.
Click to expand...
My body my choice

Do you think you’re opinion is more qualified than this Yale epidemiologist who says it works? Did you go to Yale and study medicine?
www.newsweek.com

The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it | Opinion

Contrary to what you hear, there is clear-cut medical evidence for the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine.
www.newsweek.com
 
U

USMC6789

Active member
SayMyName said:
If you have heart issues...Ever seen a Tylenol package insert? Is everyone on Tylenol under the care of a doctor?
Click to expand...
Acetaminophen is considered a heart safe medication and is reccomended by the AHA for heart patients. HCQ has a long history of cardiac issues. Those issues caused at least one study to be killed when participants suffered heart issues. To allow the drug to be handed out like candy without medical screening would be malpractice.
 
U

USMC6789

Active member
OhioBobcatFan06 said:
My body my choice

Do you think you’re opinion is more qualified than this Yale epidemiologist who says it works? Did you go to Yale and study medicine?
www.newsweek.com

The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it | Opinion

Contrary to what you hear, there is clear-cut medical evidence for the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine.
www.newsweek.com
Click to expand...
I’m trusting the overwhelming body of science on this issue. Here’s a study done last week showing it didn’t work for mild to moderate cases.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014?query=featured_home

Here’s one about HCQ usage for prophylaxis and it failed

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638



There’s more out there but it would be a waste of time to link them. HCQ is a political issue to you not a health issue. Otherwise you wouldn’t be caught taking advise from a doctor who thinks endometriosis can be caught from having sex with a witch.
 
OhioBobcatFan06

OhioBobcatFan06

Well-known member
USMC6789 said:
I’m trusting the overwhelming body of science on this issue. Here’s a study done last week showing it didn’t work for mild to moderate cases.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014?query=featured_home

Here’s one about HCQ usage for prophylaxis and it failed

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2016638



There’s more out there but it would be a waste of time to link them. HCQ is a political issue to you not a health issue. Otherwise you wouldn’t be caught taking advise from a doctor who thinks endometriosis can be caught from having sex with a witch.
Click to expand...
Funny how you pretend the “science” is on your side. Please like your medical degree from Yale.
 
P

ProV1

Well-known member
Irwin20

Irwin20

Well-known member
Why are we still arguing this? It seems to help, sometimes immensely, in some situations for some people and not so much in other situations for other people. It’s been around for years so clearly vetted. Trump likes it thus the controversy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2h
You must log in or register to reply here.
.
Top