Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 121 to 135 of 135

Thread: Dumb Ass Trump and Hydroxychloroquine

  1. #121
    Dr. Fauci, Whitewashing AIDS History

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...bAOmNLQxlqsXrr
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  2. #122
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Here's Harvey A. Risch being interviewed last night by Mark Levin. Righties listen closely and lefties listen even more closely.

    At the 12:00 mark Risch explains how Fauci and the FDA killed 17,000 AIDS patients in 1987.

    This is one of the most interesting interviews I've seen in awhile.

    The guy seems a bit political when he rails against Fauci and doesn't just keep talking about the data like a proper scientist. He doesn't hurt his case beyond that. Digging through all this stuff is a multi-day job so hard to figure it all out and I don't begin to care enough.

    So one thing we could do it look at other countries that aren't particularly anti/pro-Trump and see what they decided to do. It is one thing to complain media doesn't want Trump to get credit for HCQ, but to suggest this would have a significant impact on the decisions of scientists outside of the US in SPITE OF TRUMP is a whole different thing. (and not just a little bit tinfoil hat) I'd like to know which countries are using it.
    C'mon, Risch was not "railing." He answered every question cooly and calmly. Countries with Malaria problems have been liberally using HCQ for decades. Never controversial. Always considered safe. That is, until American left wing politics got involved.

    Risch was invited by John Berman to do a CNN interview. Then Berman debated him, brow beat him, everything but interview him. Late in this video Risch names countries using HCQ and the good results they've had with it.

    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 08-24-2020 at 02:31 PM.
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  3. #123
    Here is the entire interview of Harvey A. Risch on CNN. John Berman gives him a hard time throughout the interview but Risch was able to get his points across. There are other pro-HCQ voices but this guy is really knocking a hole in the Fauci/FDA disinformation campaign.

    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  4. #124
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Here's Harvey A. Risch being interviewed last night by Mark Levin. Righties listen closely and lefties listen even more closely.

    At the 12:00 mark Risch explains how Fauci and the FDA killed 17,000 AIDS patients in 1987.

    This is one of the most interesting interviews I've seen in awhile.

    The guy seems a bit political when he rails against Fauci and doesn't just keep talking about the data like a proper scientist. He doesn't hurt his case beyond that. Digging through all this stuff is a multi-day job so hard to figure it all out and I don't begin to care enough.

    So one thing we could do it look at other countries that aren't particularly anti/pro-Trump and see what they decided to do. It is one thing to complain media doesn't want Trump to get credit for HCQ, but to suggest this would have a significant impact on the decisions of scientists outside of the US in SPITE OF TRUMP is a whole different thing. (and not just a little bit tinfoil hat) I'd like to know which countries are using it.
    C'mon, Risch was not "railing." He answered every question cooly and calmly. Countries with Malaria problems have been liberally using HCQ for decades. Never controversial. Always considered safe. That is, until American left wing politics got involved.

    Risch was invited by John Berman to do a CNN interview. Then Berman debated him, brow beat him, everything but interview him. Late in this video Risch names countries using HCQ and the good results they've had with it.

    I will say "railing" might be a bit too strong but he spends 2 minutes complaining about Fauci from years ago. He should be like "Look at this study, look at that study". He doesn't really EVER do that. He is not behaving in a way I'd expect scientist to respond.

    Someone claiming to have success in another country (with HCQ) is not the same as the country's medical establishment deciding that HCQ should be best practice/gold standard for early onset. Perhaps..

    I really think at this point, there is literally too much gained to be the guy who brings this to be known. The complacency by the vast majority of medical establishment speaks volumes and volumes. These people don't all have "TDS". To think they'd all go back on their hypocritical oath. Just doesn't make sense, but I'm still open to Risch being right. Risch would be more impressive if he did a meta-study.

    I just reread something on medpage today or whatever and it laid it out pretty succinctly. The guy hasn't responded to the actual studies that show no benefit. His analysis and studies are sketchy and when whittled down it isn't that much. Seems like he might be very smart but has some issues.

    I'm going to have to go with Redietz on this one and give up on the idea of HCQ. If you want to show me where HCQ is used as the gold standard for covid treatment in a first-world country I am happy to take that information and look further. Otherwise we're stamping this one CASE CLOSED
    God bless this forum. You people are precious.

  5. #125
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post

    The guy seems a bit political when he rails against Fauci and doesn't just keep talking about the data like a proper scientist. He doesn't hurt his case beyond that. Digging through all this stuff is a multi-day job so hard to figure it all out and I don't begin to care enough.

    So one thing we could do it look at other countries that aren't particularly anti/pro-Trump and see what they decided to do. It is one thing to complain media doesn't want Trump to get credit for HCQ, but to suggest this would have a significant impact on the decisions of scientists outside of the US in SPITE OF TRUMP is a whole different thing. (and not just a little bit tinfoil hat) I'd like to know which countries are using it.
    C'mon, Risch was not "railing." He answered every question cooly and calmly. Countries with Malaria problems have been liberally using HCQ for decades. Never controversial. Always considered safe. That is, until American left wing politics got involved.

    Risch was invited by John Berman to do a CNN interview. Then Berman debated him, brow beat him, everything but interview him. Late in this video Risch names countries using HCQ and the good results they've had with it.

    I will say "railing" might be a bit too strong but he spends 2 minutes complaining about Fauci from years ago. He should be like "Look at this study, look at that study". He doesn't really EVER do that. He is not behaving in a way I'd expect scientist to respond.

    Someone claiming to have success in another country (with HCQ) is not the same as the country's medical establishment deciding that HCQ should be best practice/gold standard for early onset. Perhaps..

    I really think at this point, there is literally too much gained to be the guy who brings this to be known. The complacency by the vast majority of medical establishment speaks volumes and volumes. These people don't all have "TDS". To think they'd all go back on their hypocritical oath. Just doesn't make sense, but I'm still open to Risch being right. Risch would be more impressive if he did a meta-study.

    I just reread something on medpage today or whatever and it laid it out pretty succinctly. The guy hasn't responded to the actual studies that show no benefit. His analysis and studies are sketchy and when whittled down it isn't that much. Seems like he might be very smart but has some issues.

    I'm going to have to go with Redietz on this one and give up on the idea of HCQ. If you want to show me where HCQ is used as the gold standard for covid treatment in a first-world country I am happy to take that information and look further. Otherwise we're stamping this one CASE CLOSED
    Damn, don't you have any reading comprehension? YES, he responded to studies that show no benefit. I really have to ask myself if you are really that stupid, or if you are just frivolously trolling.

    Risch explained the groups being studied. He pointed out that the two Minnesota studies that say neutral or negative results had used people in the low risk categories. These are young people with no pre-existing conditions. They have an extremely low hospitalization and mortality rate. There is literally no room for improvement on the hospitalization and mortality rates. So, of course, a study won't show any improvement. Duh!!!!!

    He pointed out that you don't take studies from low risk groups and then apply them to high risk groups. And that is exactly what the hard left and fake news has done. He explained the high risk groups, people of the age of 60 or older and/or with pre-existing health issues like obesity, diabetes, etc. He told of their rate of hospitalization and mortality in the 10% to 15% range. He explained that this is the target group for HCQ and where the drug has shown its most effectiveness.

    He explained that when the high risk group is given HCQ as an outpatient treatment, statistically they show a much lower rate of hospitalization and mortality than those in the high risk group that don't take the HCQ treatment. He pointed out that this evidence is coming from many doctors prescribing HCQ. In other words, the sample space is large enough that the results are highly credible.

    That gold standard you speak of? It didn't apply to many, many, many drugs on the market today. Risch pointed this out. Many very good drugs never met a "gold standard." These drugs were not submitted to a "randomized clinical trial" before approval. The "gold standard" phrase used in the media today is just smoke and mirrors. I think you picked up that phrase and threw it around just to try to make yourself look intelligent.

    There is a lot to learn from Risch. Unfortunately, it is all going right over yours and redietz' heads. CASE CLOSED.
    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 08-25-2020 at 12:48 AM.
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  6. #126
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post

    C'mon, Risch was not "railing." He answered every question cooly and calmly. Countries with Malaria problems have been liberally using HCQ for decades. Never controversial. Always considered safe. That is, until American left wing politics got involved.

    Risch was invited by John Berman to do a CNN interview. Then Berman debated him, brow beat him, everything but interview him. Late in this video Risch names countries using HCQ and the good results they've had with it.

    I will say "railing" might be a bit too strong but he spends 2 minutes complaining about Fauci from years ago. He should be like "Look at this study, look at that study". He doesn't really EVER do that. He is not behaving in a way I'd expect scientist to respond.

    Someone claiming to have success in another country (with HCQ) is not the same as the country's medical establishment deciding that HCQ should be best practice/gold standard for early onset. Perhaps..

    I really think at this point, there is literally too much gained to be the guy who brings this to be known. The complacency by the vast majority of medical establishment speaks volumes and volumes. These people don't all have "TDS". To think they'd all go back on their hypocritical oath. Just doesn't make sense, but I'm still open to Risch being right. Risch would be more impressive if he did a meta-study.

    I just reread something on medpage today or whatever and it laid it out pretty succinctly. The guy hasn't responded to the actual studies that show no benefit. His analysis and studies are sketchy and when whittled down it isn't that much. Seems like he might be very smart but has some issues.

    I'm going to have to go with Redietz on this one and give up on the idea of HCQ. If you want to show me where HCQ is used as the gold standard for covid treatment in a first-world country I am happy to take that information and look further. Otherwise we're stamping this one CASE CLOSED
    Damn, don't you have any reading comprehension? YES, he responded to studies that show no benefit. I really have to ask myself if you are really that stupid, or if you are just frivolously trolling.

    Risch explained the groups being studied. He pointed out that the two Minnesota studies that say neutral or negative results had used people in the low risk categories. These are young people with no pre-existing conditions. They have an extremely low hospitalization and mortality rate. There is literally no room for improvement on the hospitalization and mortality rates. So, of course, a study won't show any improvement. Duh!!!!!

    He pointed out that you don't take studies from low risk groups and then apply them to high risk groups. And that is exactly what the hard left and fake news has done. He explained the high risk groups, people of the age of 60 or older and/or with pre-existing health issues like obesity, diabetes, etc. He told of their rate of hospitalization and mortality in the 10% to 15% range. He explained that this is the target group for HCQ and where the drug has shown its most effectiveness.

    He explained that when the high risk group is given HCQ as an outpatient treatment, statistically they show a much lower rate of hospitalization and mortality than those in the high risk group that don't take the HCQ treatment. He pointed out that this evidence is coming from many doctors prescribing HCQ. In other words, the sample space is large enough that the results are highly credible.

    That gold standard you speak of? It didn't apply to many, many, many drugs on the market today. Risch pointed this out. Many very good drugs never met a "gold standard." These drugs were not submitted to a "randomized clinical trial" before approval. The "gold standard" phrase used in the media today is just smoke and mirrors. I think you picked up that phrase and threw it around just to try to make yourself look intelligent.

    There is a lot to learn from Risch. Unfortunately, it is all going right over yours and redietz' heads. CASE CLOSED.
    lmao. You put a lot of effort into this. The 'gold standard' thing is something I've likely recently picked up. At least it feels that way. I don't think it particularly conveys intelligence, but if you say so. Personally, I use the term 'best practices' to convey same idea.

    I read that Risch was cherry-picking his information. You make a valid sounding case though and it all sounds plausible. I was not referring to the videos. I went off and read stuff. He has done more then video interviews.

    I don't have time to map out every study and verify everyone's claims on both sides. If you guys want to pay me enough I could. I do look at experts. Even if you're saying medical establishment all have TDS so bad - then fine - lets look at other European countries. The idea that there human lives are being given up on by MD community (not medical - MDs specifically) is a bit of a stretch. But even if we assume that is true, then surely it can't be true in Europe or Japan/Korea. So I would look to see how other first world countries are handling this. English is the most universal language, these studies are international in bearing and source. They know as much as we do.
    God bless this forum. You people are precious.

  7. #127

  8. #128
    A cancer doctor, comrade dietz? You put up a cancer doctor to refute Risch? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

    Because of you lefty's hatred of Trump HCQ probably won't be given a break for a long time to come.. COVID LIVES DON'T MATTER. ONLY POWER MATTERS. You choose to place ideology over decency. That's to bad.
    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 08-25-2020 at 05:44 PM.
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  9. #129
    You know the old saying "Those that do not learn from history are condemned to repeat history." Back in 1987 there was a drug being used by some doctors to treat pneumonia in AIDS patients. It was called Bactrim. These doctors reported great success with the drug. According to them it was saving a lot of lives. And since the drug had been around for awhile it was a cheap treatment. They took the case for the drug to Fauci who refused to endorse the drug or make it known that the drug was showing good results. He even made a statement that there was no data to support the results of the drug and it could be dangerous.

    Two years later, after 17,000 AIDS patients had died of pneumonia, bactrim was finally given credit for saving lives. It's still used as a treatment today. When a situation is dire. When doctors are reporting good results. When thousands will die in the time span it will take for clinical studies. Then a drug showing good results should be allowed for use or at least make it known that the drug could be effective.

    It's 23 years later and instead of AIDS and Bactrim it's Covid and Hydroxychloroquine. And just like Bactrim, HCQ is a cheap treatment. And Dr. Fauci is standing in the way again. I don't know how many states have done it but in Nevada HCQ cannot be used as an outpatient treatment. You have to be hospitalized to get it. And as Dr. Risch says, by then its mostly to late. What, then, is the alternative to taking HCQ? Nothing. As an outpatient you take nothing and just wait around to see if you get sick enough to be hospitalized.

    Everyone in the industry knows that if you want a meeting with Dr. Fauci you don't call his secretary. You call his press agent. And history is repeating itself.
    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 08-26-2020 at 04:44 AM.
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  10. #130
    BUMP.

    HCQ is back in the news. Libtards like redietz and midwest player are now eating crow:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...OXv7OelfHGzpsA
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  11. #131
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Hydroxychloroquine could save up to 100,000 lives:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=..._gsgpH6KeLXzhV
    And made the EUA of the mRNA experimental vaccines impossible.

  12. #132
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    BUMP.

    HCQ is back in the news. Libtards like redietz and midwest player are now eating crow:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...OXv7OelfHGzpsA

    Right. Mickey, did you even read the article?

    Here's some takeaways from the article:

    1) It's not yet peer reviewed.
    2) Since published studies represent a small subset of studies presented for publishing, it is impossible to know how many studies demonstrating no effects were done and were not published. Due to the nature of variance and the definitions of significance, one would expect 1 in 20 studies to demonstrate something when in fact nothing is going on.
    3) The dosages in this study were weight related, which was not part of the protocol in previous studies touting hydroxychloroquine. As such, if the HCL does indeed have effects, the weight related dosing would appear to be critical. Because of this, following the protocols of previous studies touting HCL would not have been nearly as helpful as the results of this study.
    4) Obviously, this is one study with a small sample. Put it in context. We're talking about 255 patients. One should expect any number of studies to have results like these, given the vast numbers of studies involved.


    I'm frankly surprised that there haven't been dozens of studies with a couple hundred patients that report all kinds of relationships between treatments and results.

  13. #133
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Right. Mickey, did you even read the article?

    Here's some takeaways from the article:

    1) It's not yet peer reviewed.
    2) Since published studies represent a small subset of studies presented for publishing, it is impossible to know how many studies demonstrating no effects were done and were not published. Due to the nature of variance and the definitions of significance, one would expect 1 in 20 studies to demonstrate something when in fact nothing is going on.
    3) The dosages in this study were weight related, which was not part of the protocol in previous studies touting hydroxychloroquine. As such, if the HCL does indeed have effects, the weight related dosing would appear to be critical. Because of this, following the protocols of previous studies touting HCL would not have been nearly as helpful as the results of this study.
    4) Obviously, this is one study with a small sample. Put it in context. We're talking about 255 patients. One should expect any number of studies to have results like these, given the vast numbers of studies involved.


    I'm frankly surprised that there haven't been dozens of studies with a couple hundred patients that report all kinds of relationships between treatments and results.
    Stop contributing to this Hate Site and go slurp some noodles with your slant eyed lover.

  14. #134
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    BUMP.

    HCQ is back in the news. Libtards like redietz and midwest player are now eating crow:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...OXv7OelfHGzpsA

    Right. Mickey, did you even read the article?

    Here's some takeaways from the article:

    1) It's not yet peer reviewed.
    2) Since published studies represent a small subset of studies presented for publishing, it is impossible to know how many studies demonstrating no effects were done and were not published. Due to the nature of variance and the definitions of significance, one would expect 1 in 20 studies to demonstrate something when in fact nothing is going on.
    3) The dosages in this study were weight related, which was not part of the protocol in previous studies touting hydroxychloroquine. As such, if the HCL does indeed have effects, the weight related dosing would appear to be critical. Because of this, following the protocols of previous studies touting HCL would not have been nearly as helpful as the results of this study.
    4) Obviously, this is one study with a small sample. Put it in context. We're talking about 255 patients. One should expect any number of studies to have results like these, given the vast numbers of studies involved.


    I'm frankly surprised that there haven't been dozens of studies with a couple hundred patients that report all kinds of relationships between treatments and results.
    Your takeaways are exactly how Fauci killed thousands of gays by not recognizing the fantastic results doctors said they were having with a certain drug. That drug (the name escapes me at the moment) wound up being a treatment for AIDS in spite of Fauci. But it took years because of all the roadblocks you idiots that think you know everything threw up. Knock it the fuck off, asshole. You're killing people.
    maxpen is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  15. #135
    Fauci is Jesus to people who don't believe in Jesus.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Another dumb tweet by Scavenger who is an AP wannabe
    By Ex-AP in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-06-2020, 08:03 PM
  2. Dumb tweet(s) that I read
    By Ex-AP in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-31-2020, 11:03 PM
  3. Of Course Trump's Dumb Polices Are Responsible
    By Midwest Player in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-13-2019, 07:30 AM
  4. Dumb Ass Trump
    By Midwest Player in forum Whatever's On Your Mind
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-10-2019, 07:57 PM
  5. Being dumb during Hurricanes
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-27-2011, 08:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •