Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 56 minutes ago, Scraps said: Turns out they weren't doing anyone any favors. Might have done some damage though. That's right. HCQ suddenly became dangerous when Trump mentioned it. 49 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: They did do some damage: A meta‐review 21 of systematic reviews and updated meta‐analysis concluded that treatment with HCQ and CQ with or without azithromycin did not reduce mortality in COVID‐19 infection but was associated with a higher risk of adverse events. However, despite the lack of clear evidence of efficacy and presence of valid concerns regarding safety, HCQ continues to be used widely in the management of COVID‐19 infection. (from my first linked paper) Keep digging "Doc". you and they were wrong then and you're wrong now. You've beaten that broken drum long enough. Amazing how this drug that's been used for 70+ years and is in use my millions daily suddenly became dangerous. When are they going to pull it from the market? And you don't think the vaccines did "some damage" to kids who were vaccinated unnecessarily? Think that more clinical trials should have been done there before indiscriminately forcing everyone to get it?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 6 Posted June 6 (edited) 1 hour ago, Doc said: Amazing how this drug that's been used for 70+ years and is in use my millions daily suddenly became dangerous. When are they going to pull it from the market? any idea on how long the AOA has recommended close f/u of all patients on HCQ? It's a question you'd get on a 2nd year pharmacy test in med school. Kind of a cool thing that it changes eyes and skin pigments through melanin. But you wouldn't be interested....musta got that question wrong.... The rest is pointless ranting. Look for some windmills to joust with. Edited June 6 by Joe Ferguson forever
Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: any idea on how long the AOA has recommended close f/u of all patients on HCQ? It's a question you'd get on a 2nd year pharmacy test in med school. Kind of a cool thing that it changes eyes and skin pigments through melanin. But you wouldn't be interested....musta got that question wrong.... Since you mentioned it, I looked it up. Major risk factors are high dose and duration of use, as well as renal disease. But even for those on HCQ for 5 years, the risk of toxicity is just 1%. Ten years is 2%. No one was talking about using high doses or taking it for very long.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 6 Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Doc said: Since you mentioned it, I looked it up. Major risk factors are high dose and duration of use, as well as renal disease. But even for those on HCQ for 5 years, the risk of toxicity is just 1%. Ten years is 2%. No one was talking about using high doses or taking it for very long. Think about it in a population health context. Hundreds of millions of people were infected and by your reasoning treated with it. 1% of 100 mil is 1 mil, so no big deal right? C'mon. Give it up....
Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Think about it in a population health context. Hundreds of millions of people were infected and by your reasoning treated with it. 1% of 100 mil is 1 mil, so no big deal right? C'mon. Give it up.... You know what "duration of use" means, right? It means that at 5 years and without surveillance...it's 1%. It's not like they develop it after a week or two of being on it. Hell there isn't even a follow up needed for that short of a course.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 6 Posted June 6 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Doc said: You know what "duration of use" means, right? It means that at 5 years and without surveillance...it's 1% nope. not what it means. Try again grasshopper...you took me away from a thread on spaghetti O's with or without meatballs. Can't get this song out of my mind.... Edited June 6 by Joe Ferguson forever
B-Man Posted June 6 Posted June 6 Back to the thread. Dr. Fauci: 'Level of Vitriol' During Hearings Was 'Quite Unfortunate.' Really, Doc? By Ward Clark The chutzpah of this guy! Late on Monday, Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared on CNN's The Source with Kaitlan Collins, to talk about the "level of vitriol" in the Congressional hearings being undertaken by the House of Representatives Oversight Committee's Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, before whom Dr. Fauci testified on Monday. Dr. Fauci said: I've testified literally hundreds of times over the last forty years in front of Congress and there's always been differences of opinions, differences of ideology, criticisms and things like that. But the level of vitriol that we see now just in the country in general, but just played out during this hearing, was really quite unfortunate, because the purpose of hearings is to try to figure out how we can do better, so that we can, next time, if and when we are faced with a pandemic, we'd be better prepared, and we could benefit if mistakes were made, we could identify them, and we try to correct them for the future. Wow. Just... wow. What a load of steaming, odoriferous output of the digestive process in the male bovine. To sum up, yes, Dr. Fauci testified, and he also tossed some of his staff members under the proverbial bus. We also know that there will likely be little or no accountability for this cluster foul-up, even though some states have grand juries looking into it. But the statement above, with Anthony Fauci complaining of vitriol, that's just a bridge too far. Were I to reply to Dr. Fauci, in that Congressional hearing, on CNN, or anywhere else (and I guess I am, right here) I would say this: Dr. Fauci, what about the level of horse squeeze we endured from you people's panic-mongering for over a year? What about the education of our kids, when between your COVID mandates and the teachers' union's official policy of "we don't want to go back to work" you messed up schooling for months upon months? What about the trillions that were added to the national debt in the name of COVID-19 emergency spending? https://redstate.com/wardclark/2024/06/04/dr-fauci-level-of-vitriol-during-hearings-was-quite-unfortunate-really-doc-n2175033
Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 (edited) 9 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: nope. not what it means. Try again grasshopper...you took me away from a thread on spaghetti O's with or without meatballs. Can't get this song out of my mind.... High dose and long duration mean exactly what they say. That's first week Pharmacology in med school. No one is getting any eye problems after 1 week or even 2 weeks at moderate dose. But cite away... Edited June 6 by Doc
Scraps Posted June 6 Posted June 6 2 hours ago, Doc said: That's right. HCQ suddenly became dangerous when Trump mentioned it. Amazing how this drug that's been used for 70+ years and is in use my millions daily suddenly became dangerous. When are they going to pull it from the market? And you don't think the vaccines did "some damage" to kids who were vaccinated unnecessarily? Think that more clinical trials should have been done there before indiscriminately forcing everyone to get it? I didn't mention Trump. Try responding to the arguments that were actually made. I know that is difficult since your natural inclination is to nurse grievances.
daz28 Posted June 6 Posted June 6 Well, ya all didn't get your slippery slope to communism from the pandemic, so ya may as well cry about having to stand 6 feet away from the people you really didn't like standing close to anyways. If you've ever asserted there's no proof that being closer to someone who is infectious(with ANY disease), then you just might be in a cult. 1
Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 8 hours ago, Scraps said: I didn't mention Trump. Try responding to the arguments that were actually made. I know that is difficult since your natural inclination is to nurse grievances. You don't need to mention him. He's always on your minds.
4th&long Posted June 6 Posted June 6 Who carried their tape measure worrying about six feet? Dumb assess. Seeing all the fighting still going on I’m afraid we have learned nothing! 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 6 Posted June 6 7 hours ago, daz28 said: Well, ya all didn't get your slippery slope to communism from the pandemic, so ya may as well cry about having to stand 6 feet away from the people you really didn't like standing close to anyways. If you've ever asserted there's no proof that being closer to someone who is infectious(with ANY disease), then you just might be in a cult. It’s interesting to me, given the totality of the events leading up to and post-COVID, how little people care about the facts. What seems to be established is that our government was partnering with a nation often hostile to our interests, experimenting with dangerous viruses, that it’s highly likely security/process was lax and that the virus was allowed to escape. It seems obvious thereafter there was substantial overreach, with recommendations and requirements that were untested and/or unlawful, and confusion about who should do what, where, when and why. Meanwhile, several years later, the full story has not been told. We did find that generally speaking, people will acquiesce as Fauci indicated.
Scraps Posted June 6 Posted June 6 23 minutes ago, Doc said: You don't need to mention him. He's always on your minds. Projection.
aristocrat Posted June 6 Posted June 6 Dems-why aren’t people trusting doctors and scientists? well they lied to us, made ***** up as they went along then fined and jailed people for not following their made up orders.
Doc Posted June 6 Posted June 6 3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: It’s interesting to me, given the totality of the events leading up to and post-COVID, how little people care about the facts. What seems to be established is that our government was partnering with a nation often hostile to our interests, experimenting with dangerous viruses, that it’s highly likely security/process was lax and that the virus was allowed to escape. It seems obvious thereafter there was substantial overreach, with recommendations and requirements that were untested and/or unlawful, and confusion about who should do what, where, when and why. Meanwhile, several years later, the full story has not been told. We did find that generally speaking, people will acquiesce as Fauci indicated. It's interesting to me that so many so-called smart people continue to push back on the idea that it came from the lab. I mean, is it just because Trump said it? Is it a desire to shield Fauci? Sympathy for China? 1 1
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted June 6 Posted June 6 1 hour ago, Doc said: It's interesting to me that so many so-called smart people continue to push back on the idea that it came from the lab. I mean, is it just because Trump said it? Is it a desire to shield Fauci? Sympathy for China? Damn pangolins
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 6 Posted June 6 (edited) 2 hours ago, 4th&long said: I’m afraid we have learned nothing! only half of us. the usual suspects...studies are wasted on them. They neither understand nor appreciate the process and have no inkling of the work and intellect behind it. How would they? It's not in their wheelhouse. 1 hour ago, Doc said: It's interesting to me that so many so-called smart people continue to push back on the idea that it came from the lab. I mean, is it just because Trump said it? Is it a desire to shield Fauci? Sympathy for China? sure. 4 of 6 federal agencies believe it mutated from an animal source. Most microbiologists and ID docs also do. But they're all part of a conspiracy. You really should get some drugs to stop the hallucinations... Edited June 6 by Joe Ferguson forever
Recommended Posts