Try bleach. Highly effective.
hydroxychloroquine works
30,707 Views |
210 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by BearForce2
hanky1 said:
Here's a leading epidemiologist on hydroxychloroquine citing a paper he published (as well as several others that followed) in the world's top epidemiology journal. Basically hydroxychloroquine works to save COVID lives.
So why is the MSM trying to denigrate this solution that would save lives? Because they hate Trump and are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of people So that it will make him look bad so he doesn't win the election. COVID is really no big deal because we have the solution in our hands. What I underestimated is the tenacity, ruthlessness, and pure evil of those with Trump Derangement Syndrome who hate him so much that they are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of their countrymen to get him out of office. Pure evil.
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535
janky1 hoarded all of it!
Old handle: hanky1
New handle: hydroxy1
New handle: hydroxy1
I just participated in a 5 month long Harvard study about COVID. effin bullshiet. I'll post about it tomorrow.
"Yogi is right" - Oaktown Bear
What do you have to say now?Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:I attribute it to malice because you constantly post out of date charts or charts without citations. What's tiring is when you pass off misleading and unverified charts as reliable data to prove a point that you can't prove with sourced reliable data. If you don't want to be accused of posting in malice, start posting good faith data that we can examine. I continually poke holes in the data you post because there are holes to be poked. That's your problem, not mine.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:
Your attribution of a strawman to me is risible. You said that deaths and infections have become decoupled which means that there is no relation. I've claimed that there is a relationship, not that the relationship will remain constant over time (eg the multiplier will not remain constant). As I've noted, the mix has shifted younger (which drives the death rate lower) and that we have improved treatments which further reduce the rate. Nonetheless, some portion of the infected will die weeks after they become infected. Also, the lag will vary over time depending on how early in the infection cycle we are diagnosing people. I would expect we've cut the death rate by at least half if not more, but that it will still be proportional to infected.
"It will still be proportional to infected"
The ratio has decreased by a factor of 4. I've actually quantified the level of decoupling between the number of new cases and the new deaths, here is what I've said above: the new case curve has decoupled from the new death cases, overshooting it by a factor of 4+:"
We have today is:
-deaths rising, but still less than half the death levels from the peak,
-more than twice the case numbers from the peak,
>>> hence the factor of 4 in the change in proportionality between the data sets. That is a very large fundamental shift in the data.
I don't have a premium membership so I can't post graphs generated with the very latest data, I've done a search where those two charts are side by side. Your combined tendency to attribute malice on my part is pretty tiresome.
Basically here is the situation as I see it in the US:
-All the large eastern/northern states with large urban centers have already cycled through and are not likely to bounce back, and they haven't. Those were the low-hanging fruits: NY/NJ (170), Boston/MA (124), Philly/PA (56), Detroit/MI (64), Chicago/IL (60). All these death curves look like those from W. Europe, late stage bell-shaped.
Numbers in parentheses are deaths per 100k, as tabulated here:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/
-Sun Belt states have not experienced a large number of deaths to date relative to their size: FL (28), TX (20), CA(22) and maybe GA (33). They account for the current bounce. There is a relatively high level of uncertainty about where they will go, for example how far TX (20) will close the gap with on Louisiana (84), or NC(18) with Maryland (57).
None of these states are likely to get sustained ICU shortages like those that hit NY, their vitamin D levels are higher, with heat and humidity a factor, and their nursing home policies are probably not going to be as reckless as those in NY. We'll see how it goes...
People like you were saying that the sunbelt states would be saved by the heat and now they're saying the heat makes it worse because people flee to AC indoors. There is always some wild unverified theory that you are certain of but can't provide any objective and well-supported evidence for. You almost never cite peer-reviewed studies because your self-sealing conspiracy theories rule them out as the product of big pharma or other nefarious actors.
Yet you constantly cherrypick misleading or out of date data to support an argument that you can't make with good sourced data.
I let this one go earlier, but here we go from your first post in this thread.
What is your source for this chart? Who is gummibear737? How did he/she/they determine which countries had different levels of usage of HCQ?
Based on articles I've read, many of the countries in the "No HCQ Use" category did prescribe HCQ. Many of them stopped after study after study showed it to be ineffective, but by that time the bulk of the deaths was behind them. If I were you I would say that the deaths stopped when they stopped prescribing HCQ but I'm not you so I will acknowledge that there is probably no relation. Brazil is basically the poster child for HCQ use and yet is put into the mixed category. You frequently tout Iran as a success but it's in the mixed category (you will say they didn't use it from the get go). So you cite Iran both as evidence of HCQ because of their success and because of their failure. How convenient for you.
So why don't you start by agreeing to only cite data that you can support and acknowledge in good faith the limitations in the data (including when you can't find more recent data). I endeavor to post limitations that I'm aware of and if you think I'm being disingenuous I welcome you to challenge me on my data. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, right?
If you were here in good faith that would be easy to do but I suspect you will disappear for a few weeks and retool your conspiracies and come back with ever yet misleading data and the struggle will begin anew.
The chart above is a good introduction to the topic of HCQ use across countries. I agree it's not bulletproof. A much better approach would have been to show the difference in death rates per million, virtually all the countries that have relied primarily on HCQ have had very good results.The study you referred to here, the one yanked by the Lancet, was complete bull****, based on fraudulent data. That study was used to ban HCQ in several countries overnight, which is really outrageous, they didn't even wait for the ink to dry. Other studies like the British Recovery trial were set to fail, they've used recklessly high doses of HCQ (2,400mg, which is 4 times the normal high end for a daily dose!) and administered them to late-stage patients, which was already understood to be useless and not done by even staunch advocates for the drug.Quote:
Based on articles I've read, many of the countries in the "No HCQ Use" category did prescribe HCQ. Many of them stopped after study after study showed it to be ineffective, but by that time the bulk of the deaths was behind them. If I were you I would say that the deaths stopped when they stopped prescribing HCQ but I'm not you so I will acknowledge that there is probably no relation.
HCQ works very well when prescribed EARLY, in combination with azythromycin and zinc, not after the damage is done to the lungs and other organs in the late stages, and it should be applied for ten days.
Brazil isn't mandating HCQ to its patients, from what I've been told that situation is similar to the US or France, where local/state health establishments tend to be against it while the president or (a local champion in France) is strongly for it. Algeria on the other hand is all in on HCQ, mandated at the national level with a highly centralized health system, it should be a green bar not a yellow.
Back in March, the situation in Turkey looked pretty dire, they were very successful in controlling its outbreak through HCQ after getting hit hard early in March. Greece, Russia, Portugal and Israel as well have had very low death rates per capita using HCQ across their health system:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-deaths-per-million?tab=chart&time=2020-02-15..&country=FRA~GRC~IRN~ISR~ITA~TUR~RUS~PRT~ESP
It's interesting to look at Morocco, which has also fully gone behind HCQ with great success, because the death rates for their expat communities in W. Europe has been over 20 times their domestic national death rate. This is a country that's a stone throw from Spain with a very large diaspora in Spain, France and Belgium and travel between there and Europe was widespread in March when the pandemic was growing rapidly there.
It's quite clear that every country that has gone all in on HCQ has had good results with it, and this group includes countries with high scientific standards like Israel, Russia, Greece and the UAE.
I will provide proper documentation for thisand other aspects of HCQ use on this thread.
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=earliest..latest&country=FRA~GRC~IRN~ISR~ITA~TUR~RUS~PRT~ESP~BRA~USA~MAR®ion=World&deathsMetric=true&interval=smoothed&hideControls=true&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=location&pickerSort=asc
Many of the countries you pointed to as exemplar are experiencing spikes now. In another thread you told us that COVID would disappear in the US like it did in Europe. Do you still feel good about that call?
At what point will you accept responsibility for spreading misinformation? Or will you just ignore it and begin anew with fresh misinformation? I'm betting on the latter.
Herman Cain Highway for Chuck, I'm afraid. At least he will have died for a good cause, tRump enabling.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Peru is on the chart and since then Peru has risen to 2nd in the world in deaths per capita right behind Belgium, who again has a different method of tracking deaths that leads to higher numbers than other countries.Unit2Sucks said:What do you have to say now?Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:I attribute it to malice because you constantly post out of date charts or charts without citations. What's tiring is when you pass off misleading and unverified charts as reliable data to prove a point that you can't prove with sourced reliable data. If you don't want to be accused of posting in malice, start posting good faith data that we can examine. I continually poke holes in the data you post because there are holes to be poked. That's your problem, not mine.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:
Your attribution of a strawman to me is risible. You said that deaths and infections have become decoupled which means that there is no relation. I've claimed that there is a relationship, not that the relationship will remain constant over time (eg the multiplier will not remain constant). As I've noted, the mix has shifted younger (which drives the death rate lower) and that we have improved treatments which further reduce the rate. Nonetheless, some portion of the infected will die weeks after they become infected. Also, the lag will vary over time depending on how early in the infection cycle we are diagnosing people. I would expect we've cut the death rate by at least half if not more, but that it will still be proportional to infected.
"It will still be proportional to infected"
The ratio has decreased by a factor of 4. I've actually quantified the level of decoupling between the number of new cases and the new deaths, here is what I've said above: the new case curve has decoupled from the new death cases, overshooting it by a factor of 4+:"
We have today is:
-deaths rising, but still less than half the death levels from the peak,
-more than twice the case numbers from the peak,
>>> hence the factor of 4 in the change in proportionality between the data sets. That is a very large fundamental shift in the data.
I don't have a premium membership so I can't post graphs generated with the very latest data, I've done a search where those two charts are side by side. Your combined tendency to attribute malice on my part is pretty tiresome.
Basically here is the situation as I see it in the US:
-All the large eastern/northern states with large urban centers have already cycled through and are not likely to bounce back, and they haven't. Those were the low-hanging fruits: NY/NJ (170), Boston/MA (124), Philly/PA (56), Detroit/MI (64), Chicago/IL (60). All these death curves look like those from W. Europe, late stage bell-shaped.
Numbers in parentheses are deaths per 100k, as tabulated here:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/
-Sun Belt states have not experienced a large number of deaths to date relative to their size: FL (28), TX (20), CA(22) and maybe GA (33). They account for the current bounce. There is a relatively high level of uncertainty about where they will go, for example how far TX (20) will close the gap with on Louisiana (84), or NC(18) with Maryland (57).
None of these states are likely to get sustained ICU shortages like those that hit NY, their vitamin D levels are higher, with heat and humidity a factor, and their nursing home policies are probably not going to be as reckless as those in NY. We'll see how it goes...
People like you were saying that the sunbelt states would be saved by the heat and now they're saying the heat makes it worse because people flee to AC indoors. There is always some wild unverified theory that you are certain of but can't provide any objective and well-supported evidence for. You almost never cite peer-reviewed studies because your self-sealing conspiracy theories rule them out as the product of big pharma or other nefarious actors.
Yet you constantly cherrypick misleading or out of date data to support an argument that you can't make with good sourced data.
I let this one go earlier, but here we go from your first post in this thread.
What is your source for this chart? Who is gummibear737? How did he/she/they determine which countries had different levels of usage of HCQ?
Based on articles I've read, many of the countries in the "No HCQ Use" category did prescribe HCQ. Many of them stopped after study after study showed it to be ineffective, but by that time the bulk of the deaths was behind them. If I were you I would say that the deaths stopped when they stopped prescribing HCQ but I'm not you so I will acknowledge that there is probably no relation. Brazil is basically the poster child for HCQ use and yet is put into the mixed category. You frequently tout Iran as a success but it's in the mixed category (you will say they didn't use it from the get go). So you cite Iran both as evidence of HCQ because of their success and because of their failure. How convenient for you.
So why don't you start by agreeing to only cite data that you can support and acknowledge in good faith the limitations in the data (including when you can't find more recent data). I endeavor to post limitations that I'm aware of and if you think I'm being disingenuous I welcome you to challenge me on my data. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, right?
If you were here in good faith that would be easy to do but I suspect you will disappear for a few weeks and retool your conspiracies and come back with ever yet misleading data and the struggle will begin anew.
The chart above is a good introduction to the topic of HCQ use across countries. I agree it's not bulletproof. A much better approach would have been to show the difference in death rates per million, virtually all the countries that have relied primarily on HCQ have had very good results.The study you referred to here, the one yanked by the Lancet, was complete bull****, based on fraudulent data. That study was used to ban HCQ in several countries overnight, which is really outrageous, they didn't even wait for the ink to dry. Other studies like the British Recovery trial were set to fail, they've used recklessly high doses of HCQ (2,400mg, which is 4 times the normal high end for a daily dose!) and administered them to late-stage patients, which was already understood to be useless and not done by even staunch advocates for the drug.Quote:
Based on articles I've read, many of the countries in the "No HCQ Use" category did prescribe HCQ. Many of them stopped after study after study showed it to be ineffective, but by that time the bulk of the deaths was behind them. If I were you I would say that the deaths stopped when they stopped prescribing HCQ but I'm not you so I will acknowledge that there is probably no relation.
HCQ works very well when prescribed EARLY, in combination with azythromycin and zinc, not after the damage is done to the lungs and other organs in the late stages, and it should be applied for ten days.
Brazil isn't mandating HCQ to its patients, from what I've been told that situation is similar to the US or France, where local/state health establishments tend to be against it while the president or (a local champion in France) is strongly for it. Algeria on the other hand is all in on HCQ, mandated at the national level with a highly centralized health system, it should be a green bar not a yellow.
Back in March, the situation in Turkey looked pretty dire, they were very successful in controlling its outbreak through HCQ after getting hit hard early in March. Greece, Russia, Portugal and Israel as well have had very low death rates per capita using HCQ across their health system:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-deaths-per-million?tab=chart&time=2020-02-15..&country=FRA~GRC~IRN~ISR~ITA~TUR~RUS~PRT~ESP
It's interesting to look at Morocco, which has also fully gone behind HCQ with great success, because the death rates for their expat communities in W. Europe has been over 20 times their domestic national death rate. This is a country that's a stone throw from Spain with a very large diaspora in Spain, France and Belgium and travel between there and Europe was widespread in March when the pandemic was growing rapidly there.
It's quite clear that every country that has gone all in on HCQ has had good results with it, and this group includes countries with high scientific standards like Israel, Russia, Greece and the UAE.
I will provide proper documentation for thisand other aspects of HCQ use on this thread.
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=earliest..latest&country=FRA~GRC~IRN~ISR~ITA~TUR~RUS~PRT~ESP~BRA~USA~MAR®ion=World&deathsMetric=true&interval=smoothed&hideControls=true&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=location&pickerSort=asc
Many of the countries you pointed to as exemplar are experiencing spikes now. In another thread you told us that COVID would disappear in the US like it did in Europe. Do you still feel good about that call?
At what point will you accept responsibility for spreading misinformation? Or will you just ignore it and begin anew with fresh misinformation? I'm betting on the latter.
If you were gravely sick and potentially dying of COVID, I bet every one of you would take HCQ. Hypocrites.
And here's a French study published this summer about HCQ. I dare you to read it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7315163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7315163/
Did Trump receive HCQ treatment in Walter Reed, janky?hanky1 said:
If you were gravely sick and potentially dying of COVID, I bet every one of you would take HCQ. Hypocrites.
I guess you don't follow the news. The author is under investigation for his HCQ advocacy.hanky1 said:
And here's a French study published this summer about HCQ. I dare you to read it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7315163/
I TRIPLE DOG DARE you to read this.
Quote:
French professor faces disciplinary case over hydroxychloroquine claims
Didier Raoult stands accused of touting drug as a coronavirus treatment without evidence
A French professor who touts the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine as a coronavirus treatment without evidence, scientists say will appear before a disciplinary panel charged with ethics breaches, an order of doctors has said.
Marseille-based Didier Raoult stands accused by his peers of spreading false information about the benefits of the drug. His promotion of hydroxychloroquine was taken up by the US and Brazilian presidents, Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, who trumpeted its unproven benefits in a way critics say put people's lives at risk.
No clinical trials have yet found in favour of using hydroxychloroquine against Covid-19, and critics say that due to potential serious side-effects, treating coronavirus patients with it is worse than no treatment at all.
In June, the British-led Recovery trial team said hydroxychloroquine did nothing to reduce coronavirus mortality.
A group representing 500 specialists of France's Infectious Diseases Society (SPILF) filed a complaint with the national order of doctors of the Bouche-du-Rhne department, which includes Marseille, in July. They accused Raoult of breaking nine rules of the doctors' code of ethics. Other doctors and patients have also lodged complaints.
On Thursday, the order confirmed it had given the go-ahead for a disciplinary hearing after reviewing the complaints against Raoult. The hearing will probably take place next year.
Geraldo Rivera: Call Virus Vaccine 'The Trump' to Credit Him
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/21/geraldo-rivera-call-virus-vaccine-the-trump-to-give-president-credit-for-his-efforts/
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/21/geraldo-rivera-call-virus-vaccine-the-trump-to-give-president-credit-for-his-efforts/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Maybe this is why Trump and janky1 are becoming steadily more unhinged:
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-hydoxychloroquine-psychiatric-dis-orders-052026586.html
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-hydoxychloroquine-psychiatric-dis-orders-052026586.html
chazzed said:
Maybe this is why Trump and janky1 are becoming steadily more unhinged:
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-hydoxychloroquine-psychiatric-dis-orders-052026586.html
I'm sure tRump never took it since he never actually had Covid. The claim was little more than a sales pitch to increase the value of his Crime Family's financial stake in the company that makes it. Finally, if he did take it, any degradation of his mental state would be indiscernible from his baseline.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
I know he never did and lol @ the baseline comment.
B.A. Bearacus said:
hanky1, you need to write the senator from Wisconsin a thank you note for continuing to pursue the issue you felt most passionate about in 2020.
tRump ain't leaving office until the Crime Family's aggressive equity position in Hydroxychloroquine "matures." There is a second wave of sick people now and many of them are the very same dumb dumbs contributing to his post election shenanigans funds. They may just H up too.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
You do have to wonder how the money around HCQ is flowing. I will give hanky1 credit for going out on a limb because IF he is not right, his original post is the #1 all-time worst take in BI history.
hanky1 said:
Here's a leading epidemiologist on hydroxychloroquine citing a paper he published (as well as several others that followed) in the world's top epidemiology journal. Basically hydroxychloroquine works to save COVID lives.
So why is the MSM trying to denigrate this solution that would save lives? Because they hate Trump and are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of people So that it will make him look bad so he doesn't win the election. COVID is really no big deal because we have the solution in our hands. What I underestimated is the tenacity, ruthlessness, and pure evil of those with Trump Derangement Syndrome who hate him so much that they are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of their countrymen to get him out of office. Pure evil.
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535
Hi hanky1. I can only assume that you still stand by your strongly stated post that was so full of passion and conviction. Can you please clarify how many lives would have been saved had we followed your guidance here? So instead of 300K Americans dead we would have had how many? Ballpark is ok.
Have to bump this up because janky started another covid-related thread.
B.A. Bearacus said:hanky1 said:
Here's a leading epidemiologist on hydroxychloroquine citing a paper he published (as well as several others that followed) in the world's top epidemiology journal. Basically hydroxychloroquine works to save COVID lives.
So why is the MSM trying to denigrate this solution that would save lives? Because they hate Trump and are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of people So that it will make him look bad so he doesn't win the election. COVID is really no big deal because we have the solution in our hands. What I underestimated is the tenacity, ruthlessness, and pure evil of those with Trump Derangement Syndrome who hate him so much that they are willing to kill hundreds of thousands of their countrymen to get him out of office. Pure evil.
https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535
Hi hanky1. I can only assume that you still stand by your strongly stated post that was so full of passion and conviction. Can you please clarify how many lives would have been saved had we followed your guidance here? So instead of 300K Americans dead we would have had how many? Ballpark is ok.
B.A. if Biden was president, he would have closed the schools earlier so less kids would die. But even then, the dead kids would have voted for him even though they were under age.
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
Janky, does HCQ work on covid yet?
As long as you don't break anything, it is usually just a misdemeanor assault and battery. Worth it right there....or else just announce: "You are not getting past me. Feel free to file a lawsuit for violating your rights by not letting you enter without a mask. I will not be verbally responding to you any further.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Featured Stories
See All
Bears Add Portal Edge Defender Deamontae Diggs
by Jim McGill
NFL Draft results and their relation to Collegiate success
by Bear Insider