Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
two medical professionals gave hydroxy to their daughter and she died from covid.
She had a rare auto-immune disease, was obese, and was a cancer survivor. Sometimes there really is nothing the medical profession could have done differently that would have made a difference, this is probably one of those cases.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Eh I dunno. I think alot of people don't understand what "effective drug" means.
Does hydrox.. help some folks? Probably.
Does it do nothing for many folks? Probably.
Does it hurt some folks - or make it worse? Probably.
Is it used to treat OTHER diseases successfully? Certainly. Is that relevant? No.
People - do some math. Only about 1 in 500, maybe fewer, die from COVID. So you have to ask - does Hydrox. exasperate the situation in more than 1 in 500? What if it saved 2 from COVID...but killed 1 that was going to live? Might seem like "math" to you - but it definitely does not to that one poor guy.
It's not just black and white. It's not easy to discern. You have millions - literally - millions upon millions of cases, and we have hydrox data from just a handful - and short term at that. (The years of data showing the benefits outweigh the risks for A DIFFERENT DISEASE do not apply here.)
Ask yourself what data - and in what numbers - would make it PROOF for you that it works. Saying "Just one" doesn't get it - because "just one" somewhere else might have died. Be realistic - what are your numbers? Your criteria? You are probably under what's actually required by a huuuuuuuuge margin.
No one is saying that it doesn't help at least someone. The problem is that it ALSO hurts someone, however rare it is.
There is a known side-effect number - and THAT is from years of research. So what we need now is a known BENEFIT number that outweighs the side-effects...and since so few die anyway, that number is hard to come by.
They temporarily disabled features on don Jr's twitter be cause he sent out that crazy trash..
Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) Tweeted:
Twitter has temporarily limited account features on Don Jr’s account (no tweeting, RTing), apparently for tweeting the video of doctors falsely touting hydroxychloroquine as a “cure” and saying there’s no need for masks. https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status...606891008?s=20
Eh I dunno. I think alot of people don't understand what "effective drug" means.
Does hydrox.. help some folks? Probably.
Does it do nothing for many folks? Probably.
Does it hurt some folks - or make it worse? Probably.
Is it used to treat OTHER diseases successfully? Certainly. Is that relevant? No.
People - do some math. Only about 1 in 500, maybe fewer, die from COVID. So you have to ask - does Hydrox. exasperate the situation in more than 1 in 500? What if it saved 2 from COVID...but killed 1 that was going to live? Might seem like "math" to you - but it definitely does not to that one poor guy.
It's not just black and white. It's not easy to discern. You have millions - literally - millions upon millions of cases, and we have hydrox data from just a handful - and short term at that. (The years of data showing the benefits outweigh the risks for A DIFFERENT DISEASE do not apply here.)
Ask yourself what data - and in what numbers - would make it PROOF for you that it works. Saying "Just one" doesn't get it - because "just one" somewhere else might have died. Be realistic - what are your numbers? Your criteria? You are probably under what's actually required by a huuuuuuuuge margin.
No one is saying that it doesn't help at least someone. The problem is that it ALSO hurts someone, however rare it is.
There is a known side-effect number - and THAT is from years of research. So what we need now is a known BENEFIT number that outweighs the side-effects...and since so few die anyway, that number is hard to come by.
The bottom line IMO is that hydroxychloroquine is to COVID what Tamaflu is to flu.
But the reality is that if you get sick enough it isn't going to help you. Just about all the anecdotal evidence of hydroxy's success comes from people who weren't horribly sick.
Coronavirus (Covid-19) Update. FDA Revokes Emergency Use Authorization for Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine.
FDA cautions against use of hydrocychloroquine or chloroquine for for Covid-19 outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems.
I don't care how many fake paid experts say it works. That's for gullible rubes. The bottom line is Trump's FDA says it's a no go. Bottom line. End of story.
I don't understand this fascination with crack science. I don't get it. Why?
The following research was just published in the New England Journal of Medicine just days ago - it says Hydroxychloroquine has no benefits to sick patients. None. It is administered to patients early in the sickness just as those people said it should.
.
Did the NEJM study use zinc as well? That’s an important part of the treatment with hydroxychloroquine and the antibiotic. You need all three and all three early on.
Edit, I checked the study and no they did not. What a waste of time for them to leave that important component out of their study.
The dems are just politicizing everything. To the point of harming patients. Just because Trump said something does not make it right or wrong. Where do you think he got the idea? I doubt he came up with it himself, he likely heard doctors talking about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.