More evidence hydroxychloroquine works

If someone is hopelessly paranoid concerning science, medicine, academia, news media, etc., and is incapable of differentiating between credible and bogus sources, upon what does one derive one's views?

Denial of anthropogenic global warming, rejection of biological evolution, adherence to flat earth theory, etc. are all vestiges of ignorance that have largely succumbed to accrued information predicated upon observable phenomena.

Ideological dogma is not a viable refuge from knowledge, so where does one turn?

 

And we here from one of the sheep. LOL

 

Whitmer is one of the collection of dumber than most Gov's that don't mind killing grandparents.

NEARLY HALF THE CORONAVIRUS DEATHS IN AMERICA HAPPENED IN NURSING HOMES, WHICH DEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS LIKE WHITMER, CUOMO, AND WOLF DELIBERATELY SEEDED WITH INFECTED PATIENTS: Whitmer vetoes bill that would have prevented COVID-19 patients housed in nursing homes.

 

Your attempt at evasion is understandable, but the pertinent question remains.

If someone is incapable of accepting anthropogenic climate change, biological evolution, a heliocentric solar system, and other canons of knowledge of science, medicine, and academia, what reference does one have other than ideological dogma?

 

Easy answer . Common sense

 

Whose alleged "common sense", and what is the standard, if any, it must meet to supersede the body of knowledge accrued by experts in every field?

Does that mean that you are in denial of the preponderance of the most knowledgeable specialists in every discipline whenever your inclination and relatively limited knowledge leads you to reject their consensus?

 

Just stop. They have been using HCQ from the beginning and we have 150K dead.

The reason deaths have been less lately in spite of increasing infections is because of OTHER treatments...like O2 instead on intubation and rotating the patients to allow their lungs to clear..and remdesevir and other drugs

 

A consensus of paid shills under orders to reach a certain conclusion if they want funding to continue means nothing to me.

 

Science is predicated upon observable, verifiable, reproducible phenomena, a self-correcting structure in which anyone who diverges has the incentive of winning recognition and acclaim by demonstrating an alternate understanding that then become the accepted doctrine if and until similarly superseded. That is how progress is achieved.

Contriving conspiracy theories in which a vast number of experts collude to perpetrate an enormous, coordinated hoax is not common sense, as you would pretend.

It is quite daft, in fact.

 

Trump hyped a doctor who believes that gynecological problems come from sex with demons and witches, that alien DNA is used in some medical treatments, that vaccines can prevent people from being religious, and that reptilians and other aliens have infiltrated the US government. That doctor also thinks hydroxychloroquine works on COVID-19 patients, and that face masks are useless against COVID-19.

Crackpot ideas are not amenable to science or acceptable to rational people. Ignorance and delusion can be quite harmful, in fact.

 

Conspiracy theorists are a hoot but spreading conspiracy theories can prove to be dangerous.

 

Theirs is an emotional compulsion, not amendable to reason.

If they need to reject reality and assign blind faith to someone who tells them that gynecological problems come from sex with demons and witches, that alien DNA is used in some medical treatments, that vaccines can prevent people from being religious, that reptilians and other aliens have infiltrated the US government, that hydroxychloroquine works on COVID-19 patients, and that face masks are useless against COVID-19, that is the dogma to which they will tenaciously cling, no matter how sensible the logic offered to them may be.

 

A consensus of paid shills under orders to reach a certain conclusion if they want funding to continue means nothing to me.

Unfortunately science has become politicized and far to often political operatives disguised as scientists look for evidence to prove their politically motivated point of view and disregard all evidence to the contrary

 

So you have 'lost trust' in the very thing that gave you the device you typed this response into? You've 'lost trust' in the thing that will keep you alive if you or a loved one suffer a medical emergency, that lets you fly anywhere in the world you want to go, watch any TV program you want to watch, fills your house with every modern convenience and otherwise gives you a lifestyle and way of living your ancestors 100 years ago couldn't have dreamed of?

I assume then you'll be giving all of that away and moving into a log cabin somewhere?

 

The epidemiologist who exposed the Fake Science was responding to a health emergency.
Do you think Dr. Didier Raoult is an unethical quack?

"Yesterday, there was a study published on Medrxiv by Maganoli et al that claimed that more evidence now hints that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t help treat COVID-19. In the study, the authors said they found no evidence that the use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19.

Now, renowned French Dr. Didier Raoult is responding to the authors, citing biases in the conclusion of the study. “The study published in pre-print on 04/21 on Medrxiv by Maganoli et al has three major biases which invalidate its conclusions, in any case absurd and incompatible with the literature,” Dr. Raoult wrote.

In a post on Twitter, Dr. Raoult asked: “Regarding the Mahevas study in Medrxiv. Could the authors explain why 8 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine were counted in the control group? Moreover, could they inform the public about the clinical outcome of these patients?”
TECH STARTUPS, Renowned French Dr. Didier Raoult issued a response to biases in the study critical of hydroxychloroquine, By TechStartups Team, APRIL 22, 2020.
https://techstartups.com/2020/04/22...nse-biases-study-critical-hydroxychloroquine/

 

Good luck with that attitude. Next time you visit the doctor's office, tell them that you are suspicious of them being paid shills, and that you have to check with Breitbart first for a second opinion. Let us know how this works out for you.

 

Dr. Raoult may not be an unethical quack. He may believe in what he is promoting. However, he did not have controls. That invalidates his study.

 

A conspiracy in which the best-educated in their various disciplines all collude in a vast public deception is crackpot stuff, and festers wherever ideological dogma is contradicted by scientific data.

"Political operatives disguised as scientists"? Are you subject to hallucinations of Louie Gohmert in a white lab coat?

You conjure up, not the scientific community whose processes are inherently self-correcting, contingent upon consistent, demonstrable principles and ever-amenable to correction, but dogmatic, faith-based ideologues who kowtow to demagogic politicians who pander to their willful ignorance.

 

$Billions if not $Trillions are flowing into Big Pharma.
I think that explains all the Fake Science that has been used to discredit every cheap effective treatment.

“Politics in modern America has become a lucrative business, an industry that has less to do with policy and a lot more to do with accessing money and favors. … bills and regulations are often introduced not to affect policy change, but as vehicles for shaking down people for … money and favors. Indeed, the motive on both sides often has nothing to do with creating a “correct” policy but instead is often about maximizing profits.” EXTORTION, "How Politicians Extract Your money, Buy Votes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013, p. 4.

 

I assume you know that is irrelevant - especially during a health emergency.

Dr. Raoult, early on, had over a 90% recovery rate with over 1000 infected patients. Think that through.

 

Miracle elixirs hyped by former reality-tv performers and casino operators seem to elicit fanatical support from a hardcore ilk of believers. Go figure.

Trump hyped a doctor who believes that gynecological problems come from sex with demons and witches, that alien DNA is used in some medical treatments, that vaccines can prevent people from being religious, and that reptilians and other aliens have infiltrated the US government. That doctor also thinks hydroxychloroquine works on COVID-19 patients, and that face masks are useless against COVID-19.
​

There is no accounting for blind faith in irrational nostrums touted by charlatans. It is a perennial phenomenon.

Normal folks (i.e., most) grasp the obvious: That, globally, pharmaceutical corporations, in their research and development operations, would not be committing billions of dollars, and countless hours by the best and brightest, highly-motivated immunologists, to find an effective treatment for Covid-19 if one already existed. Nor would public health officials worldwide eschew such a readily-available remedy.

If someone is desperate enough to believe that gynecological problems come from sex with demons and witches, face masks are useless, and hydroxychloroquine works on Covid-19 patients, reasoning with him is probably futile.

 

Are you in the wrong thread? LOL

 

With no treatment the recovery rate is about 99% of inflected people

 

What is the recovery rate for patients who present at hospitals?

 

But but but.. how much money can you make from a (formerly) widely available and effective medicines? My gosh.. jsut think what could happen! Could mean the opening the economy... and and and Trump (and his supporters) might benefit! /sarc/