Westside Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 On 9/7/2021 at 7:09 AM, SectionC3 said: You could, you know, show us the science. Especially since so many people still die as a result of this virus. Your miracle cure could save lives. Might even get you a prize. You could be the 2022 winner of the Nobel for physiology or medicine. The world demands no less, “Doc.” Show the science that it doesn’t help. I don’t care about your “feelz” either. Either put up or shut up!
SectionC3 Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 8 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said: Show the science that it doesn’t help. I don’t care about your “feelz” either. Either put up or shut up! And that’s the logic that had people squeezing Lysol on their innards last year.
Tenhigh Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 20 hours ago, SectionC3 said: You’ve proven you can use large fonts. Now, what about the science, “Doc?” Let’s see the study. Looks like you’re referring to the study that was withdrawn from publication due to data manipulation and plagiarism. So we await the science to support the Ivermectin claim. What is your argument exactly, that HCQ (with or without Azithromycin) was not ever considered a viable treatment? Or that the medical community shouldn't try to leverage existing drugs to treat new conditions? Its hard to really understand why your being so douchy, other than the fact that you clearly hate Doc.
Westside Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 1 hour ago, SectionC3 said: And that’s the logic that had people squeezing Lysol on their innards last year. Still no proof, you make a claim, back it up.
SectionC3 Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Tenhigh said: What is your argument exactly, that HCQ (with or without Azithromycin) was not ever considered a viable treatment? Or that the medical community shouldn't try to leverage existing drugs to treat new conditions? Its hard to really understand why your being so douchy, other than the fact that you clearly hate Doc. I don’t hate anyone. And I’m not douchy. I’m also not the one who promoted the false narrative that HCQ was an effective treatment for COVID. In point of fact, those are the douche bags and the people with whom you should be concerned. The ungrounded belief in HCQ, in addition to undermining public trust in nonpartisan institutions like the FDA and the CDC, contributed to casual behavior that precipitated the mess in which we’re in right now. The same thing is happening with Ivermectin. It might work. It might not. But it should not be relied upon in any setting other than clinical trial/right to try because it is an unproven approach to COVID. Fools like “Doc” have put us in a place where we induce and encourage reliance on BS miracle cures (HCQ has no clinical success with respect to COVID, but “Doc” took enough “to keep himself safe”’ from that virus; jury is out on Ivermectin, but only indicia of success is a flawed study) instead of doing the simple things that benefit everyone: get a vax, wear a mask, respect each other, and work together to get our people and our economy out of this mess. Edited September 8, 2021 by SectionC3 1 1
Doc Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 Only a fool keeps talking when he's just been given a facial. 1
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: “….nonpartisan institutions like the FDA and the CDC…” All the rest aside this is a HIGHLY naive perception. Federal institutions like the FDA and CDC are as impartial as those who run them. They can be very political and very partisan particularly dependent upon where they have allies. 1
Tenhigh Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 28 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I don’t hate anyone. And I’m not douchy. I’m also not the one who promoted the false narrative that HCQ was an effective treatment for COVID. In point of fact, those are the douche bags and the people with whom you should be concerned. The ungrounded belief in HCQ, in addition to undermining public trust in nonpartisan institutions like the FDA and the CDC, contributed to casual behavior that precipitated the mess in which we’re in right now. The same thing is happening with Ivermectin. It might work. It might not. But it should not be relied upon in any setting other than clinical trial/right to try because it is an unproven approach to COVID. Fools like “Doc” have put us in a place where we induce and encourage reliance on BS miracle cures (HCQ has no clinical success with respect to COVID, but “Doc” took enough “to keep himself safe”’ from that virus; jury is out on Ivermectin, but only indicia of success is a flawed study) instead of doing the simple things that benefit everyone: get a vax, wear a mask, respect each other, and work together to get our people and our economy out of this mess. Actually I recall quite a bit of documentation from credible sources talking about the possibility of HCQ being a viable treatment for Covid. In vitro it showed a lot of antiviral properties, and at the time it was as close as we had for a treatment for a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. Your "false narrative" claim is ironically a false narrative in and of itself, and essentially just Monday morning quarterbacking. There was nothing saying that it was a snake oil solution at any time. It's an effective drug with several uses, unfortunately clinically Covid 19 treatment doesn't seem to be one of them. For the record, I have never heard Doc tell anyone they shouldn't wear a mask or get vaccinated. And if stalking a guy around a message board with the same attack several times a day doesn't quantify as douchbaggery to you, you may want to reconsider your position. 1
Doc Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 8 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: All the rest aside this is a HIGHLY naive perception. Federal institutions like the FDA and CDC are as impartial as those who run them. They can be very political and very partisan particularly dependent upon where they have allies. They've become highly political and only a naive fool would say otherwise, much less write it down. Why do you think the FDA waited until after the election to announce that vaccines were on their way at the end of the year? 1 1
SoCal Deek Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 16 minutes ago, Doc said: They've become highly political and only a naive fool would say otherwise, much less write it down. Why do you think the FDA waited until after the election to announce that vaccines were on their way at the end of the year? I'd put it a little differently. All of these DC based Federal Departments are only interested in one thing....growing their budget so they can hire more staff. They'll support whichever side aligns with that core mission statement.
Doc Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 Just now, SoCal Deek said: I'd put it a little differently. All of these DC based Federal Departments are only interested in one thing....growing their budget so they can hire more staff. They'll support whichever side aligns with that core mission statement. That's still politics.
SoCal Deek Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 Just now, Doc said: That's still politics. It is, but it's really more about agenda. Their agenda is not conservative or liberal. Their agenda is to grow their department. It's at the very core of how you get to be $30 TRILLION in debt.
Doc Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: It is, but it's really more about agenda. Their agenda is not conservative or liberal. Their agenda is to grow their department. It's at the very core of how you get to be $30 TRILLION in debt. But if they believe the Dems will give them more money, they're actively choosing a political party. 1
SectionC3 Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: Actually I recall quite a bit of documentation from credible sources talking about the possibility of HCQ being a viable treatment for Covid. In vitro it showed a lot of antiviral properties, and at the time it was as close as we had for a treatment for a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. Your "false narrative" claim is ironically a false narrative in and of itself, and essentially just Monday morning quarterbacking. There was nothing saying that it was a snake oil solution at any time. It's an effective drug with several uses, unfortunately clinically Covid 19 treatment doesn't seem to be one of them. For the record, I have never heard Doc tell anyone they shouldn't wear a mask or get vaccinated. And if stalking a guy around a message board with the same attack several times a day doesn't quantify as douchbaggery to you, you may want to reconsider your position. I’d like to see your “documentation” from “credible” sources. And, for what it’s worth, even if HCQ was possibly viable in the early stage of this it shouldn’t have been promoted as a “game changer” based on Trump’s “feeling” about the drug. It also shouldn’t have been touted as a prophylactic (with zinc and fairy dust and a Z-pac!) by our resident “Doc.” It should have been tested, and stronger, more reliable approaches should have been encouraged. They were not. Today, we have Internet fools like “Doc” yammering about gut punches and facials and the effectiveness of HCQ and Ivermectin as COVID treatments when literally none of those things is true. Not a single one. It’s dangerous and irresponsible. And, the infirm nature of the position is evidenced not only by the fact that there is no science to support the hypotheses, but by the fact that none of these self-styled fools put their names and professional reputations behind the treatments. 42 minutes ago, Doc said: They've become highly political and only a naive fool would say otherwise, much less write it down. Why do you think the FDA waited until after the election to announce that vaccines were on their way at the end of the year? It wasn’t the FDA’s announcement to make. It was Pfizer’s announcement to make. Another “Doc” theory debunked. Edited September 8, 2021 by SectionC3
SoCal Deek Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 8 minutes ago, Doc said: But if they believe the Dems will give them more money, they're actively choosing a political party. But that isn't always true from Department to Department. It will blow back and forth with each new election. The Swamp remains the problem.
Doc Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 10 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I’d like to see your “documentation” from “credible” sources. And, for what it’s worth, even if HCQ was possibly viable in the early stage of this it shouldn’t have been promoted as a “game changer” based on Trump’s “feeling” about the drug. It also shouldn’t have been touted as a prophylactic (with zinc and fairy dust and a Z-pac!) by our resident “Doc.” It should have been tested, and stronger, more reliable approaches should have been encouraged. They were not. Today, we have Internet fools like “Doc” yammering about gut punches and facials and the effectiveness of HCQ and Ivermectin as COVID treatments when literally none of those things is true. Not a single one. It’s dangerous and irresponsible. And, the infirm nature of the position is evidenced not only by the fact that there is no science to support the hypotheses, but by the fact that none of these self-styled fools put their names and professional reputations behind the treatments. It wasn’t the FDA’s announcement to make. It was Pfizer’s announcement to make. Another “Doc” theory debunked. Debunked. Tell us again how dangerous and unsciency HCQ was again, chump. No, better yet, tell Tony, your so-called hero.
Tenhigh Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 12 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I’d like to see your “documentation” from “credible” sources. And, for what it’s worth, even if HCQ was possibly viable in the early stage of this it shouldn’t have been promoted as a “game changer” based on Trump’s “feeling” about the drug. It also shouldn’t have been touted as a prophylactic (with zinc and fairy dust and a Z-pac!) by our resident “Doc.” It should have been tested, and stronger, more reliable approaches should have been encouraged. They were not. Today, we have Internet fools like “Doc” yammering about gut punches and facials and the effectiveness of HCQ and Ivermectin as COVID treatments when literally none of those things is true. Not a single one. It’s dangerous and irresponsible. And, the infirm nature of the position is evidenced not only by the fact that there is no science to support the hypotheses, but by the fact that none of these self-styled fools put their names and professional reputations behind the treatments. Here are some articles from a simple. You should probably reconsider calling ANYONE an internet fool. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7102549/ Conclusion Despite its small sample size, our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin. https://www.rcpjournals.org/content/clinmedicine/20/3/278 Wang et al carried out a study investigating the antiviral effects on SARS-CoV-2 of several drugs, some of which had previously been used against SARS or MERS. These included ribavirin, penciclovir, nitazonanide, nafamostat, remdesivir and favipiravir as well as chloroquine. These compounds were tested against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro, to assess the cytotoxicity, virus yield and infection rates. They found that chloroquine was effective at reducing viral yield in cell supernatant and additionally did so when the cells were treated 1 hour before infection as well as 2 hours post infection.22 Further investigation by this group focused on the antiviral effects of hydroxychloroquine, as this is a more widely utilised and better tolerated chloroquine derivative. They found that hydroxychloroquine was similarly effective at inhibiting viral infection both before and after viral entry.20 Yao et al found that both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine reduced viral replication of SARS-CoV-2 in a dose-dependent manner, but the EC50 values for hydroxychloroquine were lower than those for chloroquine, suggesting that hydroxychloroquine was more efficacious. In addition hydroxychloroquine was a more potent antiviral than chloroquine when the cells were pre-treated with the drug before viral infection.23 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32373993/ Results: For this study, we identified a total of 09 published articles: 03 clinical trials with sample size 150; 03 in vitro studies and 03 expert consensus reports. These studies were all suggestive that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can successfully treat COVID-19 infections. We found that COVID-19 infections are highly pandemic in countries where malaria is least pandemic and are least pandemic in nations where malaria is highly pandemic. Conclusions: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have antiviral characteristics in vitro. The findings support the hypothesis that these drugs have efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. People are currently using these drugs for malaria. It is reasonable, given the hypothetical benefit of these two drugs, that they are now being tested in clinical trials to assess their effectiveness to combat this global health crisis.
B-Man Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, BillStime said: What a perfect example of what a weak poster uses for an 'argument' I provide two sources earlier that prove that this new law doesn't even stop most Texas abortions, as a way of furthering any discussion. Billstime provides a ranting joker as "proof" Amazing.
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 8, 2021 Posted September 8, 2021 https://www.yahoo.com/news/straight-line-us-racial-segregation-101534714.html This article is pathetically bad. It finds information to support a forgone thought but ignores the two biggest facts: Planned Parenthood was built by Margaret Sanger to suppress the black community and the fact that eliminating abortion will increase drastically the number of black kids in our country. From 2009-2017 the number of black children aborted vs the number born was about even, if this law was nationwide those numbers would never be close again.
Recommended Posts