Page 38 of 92

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:36 pm
by DfromCT
Show Me wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:52 pm The Doctors lawsuit vs the FDA continues against interference on life saving hydroxychloroquine
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 69576.html
We had this argument when you or someone else posted the same link to the same article two months ago when it came out. The AAPS is a splinter group that represents a very, very, very small portion of licensed doctors and surgeons. It's two months later, how'd that lawsuit work out?

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:05 pm
by GreenPuddleSplash
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:40 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:22 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:56 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 1:05 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 12:48 pm I’ll believe the patients and clinical physicians, as opposed to the medical academics.
And what if, just what if, and think about this before you answer, if those clinical physicians are also medical academics especially all of those at University hospitals who train the clinical physicians, will you believe them? Regardless, just like MBA stated this thread is extremely disappointing. A ton of people in here deserve a refund from TU as they clearly didn't learn anything while in school.
If they serve and treat patients then they have far more credibility, even if they also pursue clinical research at university hospitals, than those whose noses never come up out of a book, or who spend their career playing bureaucratic games. As far as those on this board who didn't learn at Tulane--you'll have a great disparity of opinion as to who exactly failed to learn. The one kind of diversity that the Left hate--diversity of thought.
There's no diversity of thought when science has proven certain things like how wearing masks cut down the spread of carona, but somehow we're acting like this is debatable.
While I wear a mask constantly, there is diversity in thought regarding masks--led by our own Dr. Fauci who has flipped flopped on that very issue. And as far as the Dem's "believe the scientist"--what a crock that is. Science inherently deals with topics of uncertainty, where there is usually various views and beliefs. Science doesn't have a role in whether the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, as there is no diversity of thought about that topic. But any topic that involves science, by definition has disagreements of views and thoughts. Hence the Dems warped view that science offers absolute answers--it rarely does. If there isn't disagreement on a topic, then there probably isn't much science involved. Science only concerns itself with matters of disagreement and the unknown, and therefore science rarely concerns itself with absolutes--like Pelosi tries to suggest---listening to her babble on about science is hysterical.
I certainly applaud you for wearing a mask unlike some people on here. A subject is scientifically controversial when actively debated by legions of scientists, not when actively debated by the public, the press, or by politicians. I wonder why you can't find any scientific peer reviewed paper that supports the premise that face masks don't curb the carona spread, however you can point to voluminous academically peer reviewed papers that support the opposite. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true, as the evidence backing it begs the differ. I can literally point to countries with loads of evidence on how face masks work, but somehow here we are again, debating the validity of whether masks work. Cognitive dissonance is real and it has clearly checked your common sense at the door if you think this subject is even remotely debatable.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:10 pm
by tpstulane
Glenn Beck’s entire family went on HCQ after getting Covid. One of the Dr’s promoting its use yesterday was his guest.
https://vm.tiktok.com/J2yPjjT/

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:37 am
by MicMan
Citing a conservative talking head with his own failed presidential bid and not spelling his name correctly = I must be right, dammit! LOL

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:48 am
by GreenLantern
Let's see:
  • Hydroxychloroquine works
  • Face masks don't
  • Having sex in your dreams with demons and witches causes cysts
  • Alien DNA is used in medical treatments
  • A vaccine is being developed to prevent people from being religious
  • The government is run in part by 'reptilians' and other aliens
Take off your masks and enjoy the treat favored by White House staff:

Image

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:35 am
by tpstulane
GreenLantern wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:48 am Let's see:
  • Hydroxychloroquine works
  • Face masks don't
  • Having sex in your dreams with demons and witches causes cysts
  • Alien DNA is used in medical treatments
  • A vaccine is being developed to prevent people from being religious
  • The government is run in part by 'reptilians' and other aliens
Take off your masks and enjoy the treat favored by White House staff:

Image
Dr.’s prescribing HCQ because it works. Nothing more. There’s zero profit in it for big Pharma is my guess as to why the pushback.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:48 am
by DfromCT
But conspiracy theories say the guy that lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is profiting from it. Hey, the GOP has it's propaganda machine, so do the Dems.

That box of Oreos is an instant classic. I didn't find the Surgeon General's warning about heart attacks and other cardiovascular related side affects.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:25 am
by tpstulane
DfromCT wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:48 am But conspiracy theories say the guy that lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is profiting from it. Hey, the GOP has it's propaganda machine, so do the Dems.

That box of Oreos is an instant classic. I didn't find the Surgeon General's warning about heart attacks and other cardiovascular related side affects.
Yes that was thrown out there but was immediately debunked.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:46 am
by HoustonWave
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:05 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:40 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:22 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:56 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 1:05 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 12:48 pm I’ll believe the patients and clinical physicians, as opposed to the medical academics.
And what if, just what if, and think about this before you answer, if those clinical physicians are also medical academics especially all of those at University hospitals who train the clinical physicians, will you believe them? Regardless, just like MBA stated this thread is extremely disappointing. A ton of people in here deserve a refund from TU as they clearly didn't learn anything while in school.
If they serve and treat patients then they have far more credibility, even if they also pursue clinical research at university hospitals, than those whose noses never come up out of a book, or who spend their career playing bureaucratic games. As far as those on this board who didn't learn at Tulane--you'll have a great disparity of opinion as to who exactly failed to learn. The one kind of diversity that the Left hate--diversity of thought.
There's no diversity of thought when science has proven certain things like how wearing masks cut down the spread of carona, but somehow we're acting like this is debatable.
While I wear a mask constantly, there is diversity in thought regarding masks--led by our own Dr. Fauci who has flipped flopped on that very issue. And as far as the Dem's "believe the scientist"--what a crock that is. Science inherently deals with topics of uncertainty, where there is usually various views and beliefs. Science doesn't have a role in whether the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, as there is no diversity of thought about that topic. But any topic that involves science, by definition has disagreements of views and thoughts. Hence the Dems warped view that science offers absolute answers--it rarely does. If there isn't disagreement on a topic, then there probably isn't much science involved. Science only concerns itself with matters of disagreement and the unknown, and therefore science rarely concerns itself with absolutes--like Pelosi tries to suggest---listening to her babble on about science is hysterical.
I certainly applaud you for wearing a mask unlike some people on here. A subject is scientifically controversial when actively debated by legions of scientists, not when actively debated by the public, the press, or by politicians. I wonder why you can't find any scientific peer reviewed paper that supports the premise that face masks don't curb the carona spread, however you can point to voluminous academically peer reviewed papers that support the opposite. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true, as the evidence backing it begs the differ. I can literally point to countries with loads of evidence on how face masks work, but somehow here we are again, debating the validity of whether masks work. Cognitive dissonance is real and it has clearly checked your common sense at the door if you think this subject is even remotely debatable.
I haven't found scientific journals supporting or disavowing the use of masks because I haven't looked for one. As I have said, I don't put much stock in "scientific" journals which are often skewed for a variety of reasons. As far as my own views, not withstanding your on-going misinterpretations, I do believe masks help--that's why I wear them. That said, there is clearly disagreement throughout society, and the "scientific" academic journals will never be the referee in such a discussion--over the years, the scientific community, that love to get on the soap box, have largely lost their credibility. The scientific researchers that actually do the heavy lifting don't get into the public fray and are not bedazzled by the bright media lights. I could care even less what "scientist" from other countries say--I'll let the clinical physicians who treat patients make those assessments. You continue to be mesmerized and starry-eyed by the "scientists"--just like Pelosi and Schumer want you to.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:51 pm
by GreenPuddleSplash
HoustonWave wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 11:46 am
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:05 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:40 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:22 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:56 pm
GreenPuddleSplash wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 1:05 pm
HoustonWave wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 12:48 pm I’ll believe the patients and clinical physicians, as opposed to the medical academics.
And what if, just what if, and think about this before you answer, if those clinical physicians are also medical academics especially all of those at University hospitals who train the clinical physicians, will you believe them? Regardless, just like MBA stated this thread is extremely disappointing. A ton of people in here deserve a refund from TU as they clearly didn't learn anything while in school.
If they serve and treat patients then they have far more credibility, even if they also pursue clinical research at university hospitals, than those whose noses never come up out of a book, or who spend their career playing bureaucratic games. As far as those on this board who didn't learn at Tulane--you'll have a great disparity of opinion as to who exactly failed to learn. The one kind of diversity that the Left hate--diversity of thought.
There's no diversity of thought when science has proven certain things like how wearing masks cut down the spread of carona, but somehow we're acting like this is debatable.
While I wear a mask constantly, there is diversity in thought regarding masks--led by our own Dr. Fauci who has flipped flopped on that very issue. And as far as the Dem's "believe the scientist"--what a crock that is. Science inherently deals with topics of uncertainty, where there is usually various views and beliefs. Science doesn't have a role in whether the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, as there is no diversity of thought about that topic. But any topic that involves science, by definition has disagreements of views and thoughts. Hence the Dems warped view that science offers absolute answers--it rarely does. If there isn't disagreement on a topic, then there probably isn't much science involved. Science only concerns itself with matters of disagreement and the unknown, and therefore science rarely concerns itself with absolutes--like Pelosi tries to suggest---listening to her babble on about science is hysterical.
I certainly applaud you for wearing a mask unlike some people on here. A subject is scientifically controversial when actively debated by legions of scientists, not when actively debated by the public, the press, or by politicians. I wonder why you can't find any scientific peer reviewed paper that supports the premise that face masks don't curb the carona spread, however you can point to voluminous academically peer reviewed papers that support the opposite. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true, as the evidence backing it begs the differ. I can literally point to countries with loads of evidence on how face masks work, but somehow here we are again, debating the validity of whether masks work. Cognitive dissonance is real and it has clearly checked your common sense at the door if you think this subject is even remotely debatable.
I haven't found scientific journals supporting or disavowing the use of masks because I haven't looked for one. As I have said, I don't put much stock in "scientific" journals which are often skewed for a variety of reasons. As far as my own views, not withstanding your on-going misinterpretations, I do believe masks help--that's why I wear them. That said, there is clearly disagreement throughout society, and the "scientific" academic journals will never be the referee in such a discussion--over the years, the scientific community, that love to get on the soap box, have largely lost their credibility. The scientific researchers that actually do the heavy lifting don't get into the public fray and are not bedazzled by the bright media lights. I could care even less what "scientist" from other countries say--I'll let the clinical physicians who treat patients make those assessments. You continue to be mesmerized and starry-eyed by the "scientists"--just like Pelosi and Schumer want you to.
Wow, just wow. Your last few sentences are beyond comprehension and saving at this point. I will just leave it at that.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:35 pm
by MicMan
As always, big LOL from the very stable board jeniuses!

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:38 pm
by ajcalhoun
Can y'all please not quote the half the thread when replying? Try cutting everything but the sentence or two that you responding to.

Thanks in advance.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:24 pm
by Show Me
MicMan wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:35 pm As always, big LOL from the very stable board jeniuses!
Hey LSU fanboy go put on your goggles as your told by your boy Fauci. :shock: :shock: :shock:

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:07 pm
by NOLABigSteve
ajcalhoun wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:38 pm Can y'all please not quote the half the thread when replying? Try cutting everything but the sentence or two that you responding to.

Thanks in advance.
Image

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:20 am
by Show Me
Hydroxychloroquine ban reversed in Ohio.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/hea ... 547751002/

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:27 am
by MicMan
Show Me wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:24 pm
MicMan wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:35 pm As always, big LOL from the very stable board jeniuses!
Hey LSU fanboy go put on your goggles as your told by your boy Fauci. :shock: :shock: :shock:
"You're told,". Not "your". Try to remember your first grade grammar.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:48 am
by RobertM320
The problem with all these "failed trials" of HCQ is that they're purposely using ONLY HCQ, and giving it to hospitalized patients. All the people having success with it are using it WITH Z-pak and Zinc, and using it in early treatment. Those failed trials are purposely set up to fail, so as to push the vaccine and/or a patented drug like Remdesivir. This particular doctor got his degree from Columbia university, so he's not just some hack from another country.



Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:12 pm
by HoustonWave
MicMan wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:35 pm As always, big LOL from the very stable board jeniuses!
The Peanut Gallery stirs to life again.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:13 pm
by HoustonWave
MicMan wrote: Sat Aug 01, 2020 10:27 am
Show Me wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:24 pm
MicMan wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:35 pm As always, big LOL from the very stable board jeniuses!
Hey LSU fanboy go put on your goggles as your told by your boy Fauci. :shock: :shock: :shock:
"You're told,". Not "your". Try to remember your first grade grammar.
He was trying to communicate with you.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:18 pm
by HoustonWave
RobertM320 wrote: Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:48 am The problem with all these "failed trials" of HCQ is that they're purposely using ONLY HCQ, and giving it to hospitalized patients. All the people having success with it are using it WITH Z-pak and Zinc, and using it in early treatment. Those failed trials are purposely set up to fail, so as to push the vaccine and/or a patented drug like Remdesivir. This particular doctor got his degree from Columbia university, so he's not just some hack from another country.


These medical bureaucrats live by their "randomized controlled trials"--never mind that practicing physicians are saving peoples lives with HCQ.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:43 pm
by GreenPuddleSplash
RobertM320 wrote: Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:48 am The problem with all these "failed trials" of HCQ is that they're purposely using ONLY HCQ, and giving it to hospitalized patients. All the people having success with it are using it WITH Z-pak and Zinc, and using it in early treatment. Those failed trials are purposely set up to fail, so as to push the vaccine and/or a patented drug like Remdesivir. This particular doctor got his degree from Columbia university, so he's not just some hack from another country.


It's funny you cite a doctor who's "academic paper" is a google doc and his partner Gregory Rigano is a fraud and a half claiming to be associated with Stanford. You're being fooled by modern day snakeoil salesmen. By the way, both James and Gregory have some scammy-crypto they can sell you.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chloroqu ... b77946c3b3

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:07 pm
by greenie78
RobertM320 wrote: Sat Aug 01, 2020 11:48 am The problem with all these "failed trials" of HCQ is that they're purposely using ONLY HCQ, and giving it to hospitalized patients. All the people having success with it are using it WITH Z-pak and Zinc, and using it in early treatment. Those failed trials are purposely set up to fail, so as to push the vaccine and/or a patented drug like Remdesivir. This particular doctor got his degree from Columbia university, so he's not just some hack from another country.


Ok Dr. Robert. You do realize that typically talking HcQ and Z-Pak is contraindicated because it can increase the QT interval and increasing the risk for heart arrhythmia. Also Dr Robert, they’ve had much more success using a cheap drug like Dexamethasone in critically ill patients. Most people not in the hospital don’t need any treatments for the COVID.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:24 pm
by RobertM320
And greenie78, you'll notice I said its recommended NOT to use it on critically ill patients. But there's a difference between hospitalized and critically ill. And you are correct, most people not in the hospital don't need treatments. But what about those that do? Should we just ignore something that may work for a certain segment of the population, just because we feel "Orange Man Bad". I mean, come on, people, wake up. Since when did we get to the point where we're not willing to TRY and save people's lives? There's enough evidence from enough doctors worldwide that show HCQ can be helpful. To ignore that just because you hate Trump is willful ignorance, and its causing people to die.

Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:40 pm
by MicMan
The Cultists here will find a way to discredit this. LOL


Re: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:16 pm
by Show Me
MicMan wrote: Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:40 pm The Cultists here will find a way to discredit this. LOL

Lol. Discredited for you
https://khn.org/morning-breakout/study- ... loroquine/