Jump to content

triplehorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    4441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by triplehorn

  1. 1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

    Look, everyone here would love for an easy, already-on-the-shelf therapy to be a miracle treatment, or even close to it.  But we've listened to relentlessly quackery, much of it politically motivated, for month after month.  There's a real fucking "boy who cried wolf" problem here, and you have nobody but yourself, and those like you, to blame.  It's all but impossible to separate the wheat from the mountain of chaff.  

    I hope the invermectin theory is right.  I really do.  But as for me, it's really hard to find the time to digest the avalanche of shit that's been poured on all of these possible therapies.  I really wish you hadn't fucking done that shit from the start.  I'll wait until it's presented by a credible source, not buried among the shit-smearing.

    Take a step back and look at the larger timeline.  Some poster(s) spiked the football at the 50 yard line back in March-May with baseless mocking and bad understanding.  The evidence in support of early home treatment using several agents was emerging early on confounded by a fraudulent study in Lancet, and a shitgibbon no one trusts.  But that evidence has more than quadrupled since the summer, particularly in the last 2-3 months.  Those who spiked at the 50 back then can't acknowledge they fumbled today.  This isn't a competition.  The evidence is clear and overwhelming.  I know you're not a science denier.  Prove the science wrong.  No one is doing that.  It's quack, clown, gif, blah blah without critical thinking showing a grasp of what's real or not. 

    To your reference about 'crying wolf', take what we had on HCQ in the spring vs today.  Today there are now over 100 peer reviewed published studies, both RCT and observational, that taken together show a 64% risk reduction for hospitalization and death when it's started in an early outpatient setting.  The odds HCQ doesn't benefit in that scenario is 1:17 billion.  If you just take RCT's for early home use of HCQ, the relative risk reduction is still 24%.  But as of the last 2-3 weeks, it's becoming rapidly clear that Ivermectin is just flat out superior across all phases of the illness and continuing to separate.  That's not crying wolf. 

  2. 4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    This.  When you convene a panel and tell me "this is a panel of serious people," and one of them proceeds to smear shit all over themselves, sing Reba songs at the top of their lungs, postulate that the letter O hypnotizes jews, and holler about how Kool-aid cures cancer......I'm going to assume our panel is NOT made up of serious people.  It's not hard.  That's how common sense works.

    Obviously that doesn't make the credible presenters wrong, it just leads the audience to ignore critical distinctions and form inaccurate conclusions.  I expect people probably earn a livable wage doing hit pieces for the right players.  Why? It works.  In this case, unfortunately more preventable death is the likely result.  It's hard to imagine anyone who benefits from doing such a thing, unless of course it involves a whole lot of money.

  3. 3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

    Someone referenced Ron Johnson the other day, but I don't remember who or what the reference was about.  Here's an article about Ron's anti-science behavior in his official role.  The mind boggles.  (It shouldn't at this point, but it does.)

    Oh, Ron

      Reveal hidden contents

    Elevating Fringe Theories, Ron Johnson Questions Virus Science
    The Wisconsin Republican has transformed his Senate panel into a forum for amplifying dubious theories and questionable treatments pushed by President Trump.


    Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has been willing to echo the most conspiracy-minded and anti-science impulses of President Trump.Credit...Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times
    Catie EdmondsonNicholas Fandos
    By Catie Edmondson and Nicholas Fandos
    Dec. 7, 2020
    WASHINGTON — In choosing a slate of doctors to testify about coronavirus treatments before his committee on Tuesday, Senator Ron Johnson has assembled a cast of witnesses who question much of the public health consensus about the virus.

    There is a prominent vaccine skeptic, an outspoken critic of masking and social distancing, and at least two doctors who have promoted the use of an anti-parasitic drug that government scientists have recommended against using to treat the coronavirus.

    It is the latest example of how Mr. Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican who has used his powerful investigative panel to amplify groundless accusations pushed by President Trump, has now embraced the role of the Senate’s leading Covid contrarian.

    Even as some of his Republican colleagues have sought to use their platforms to encourage Americans to take precautions against the spread of the virus and persuade the public that vaccines against it will be safe and vital, Mr. Johnson has suggested that the dangers of the coronavirus have been overblown and excessively regulated. And twice in the past three weeks, Mr. Johnson has used his gavel on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to elevate voices who public health experts say represent fringe beliefs.

    It has set off something of a quiet mutiny on the panel, enraging Democrats who plan to essentially boycott the traditional cross-examination of witnesses and unsettling some Republicans who are planning to skip Tuesday’s session lest their presence be seen as lending credence to the proceeding.

    The selections underscore the extent to which Mr. Johnson, a former plastics baron who has made little secret of his disdain for the Washington establishment, has eagerly echoed the most conspiracy-minded and anti-science impulses of Mr. Trump and waded headfirst into battles even the president’s usually reliable phalanx of congressional defenders have been unwilling to fight.

    Gift Subscriptions to The Times, Cooking and Games.
    Starting at $25.
    Mr. Johnson spent much of the year pursuing a corruption inquiry into President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son, Hunter, that he conceded was driven by Mr. Biden’s political campaign, and that ultimately found no wrongdoing by the elder Mr. Biden. Since the election, he has questioned whether Mr. Biden won fairly, saying last week that Attorney General William P. Barr should produce proof to back up his statement that the Justice Department had found no evidence of the kind of widespread voter fraud Mr. Trump has baselessly insisted cost him the election.

    Mr. Johnson is unfazed by the criticism he has attracted.

    In an interview on Monday, he said that while he supported widespread vaccination and masking, he believed that many of his colleagues had been too deferential to a public health establishment that, because of its obsession with finding a vaccine and lack of experience treating coronavirus patients, had undermined, neglected and even “censored” other potential treatments that he believes could help.

    “We have grossly overreacted to this,” Mr. Johnson said of the virus. “We have not been smart. We should have isolated the sick, protected the vulnerable and then the rest of us carry on with our lives as safely as possible.”

    Editors’ Picks

    ‘S.N.L.’ Parodies Rudy Giuliani and Melissa Carone’s Disastrous Hearing

    Rachel Maddow and Michael Yarvitz Tell the Full Sordid Story of Spiro Agnew

    The Long and Tortured History of Cancel Culture
    Mr. Johnson’s lead witness on Tuesday, Dr. Jane M. Orient, has cast doubts on coronavirus vaccines and has pushed for the use of hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug pushed by Mr. Trump, as a treatment. She helps run a group that believes government vaccine mandates violate human rights.

    Another, the Washington cardiologist Ramin Oskoui, said on Fox News last month that it was “settled science” that “social distancing doesn’t work, quarantining doesn’t work, masks don’t work.” On the contrary, it is settled science that all three are effective in limiting the spread of the virus.

    NICHOLAS KRISTOF: A behind-the-scenes look at Nicholas Kristof’s gritty journalism, as he travels around the world.
    Sign Up
    Two others promote the use of ivermectin, a drug often used to fight lice and pinworms, to treat coronavirus patients, despite the National Institutes of Health’s recommendation against its use outside clinical trials.

    Mr. Johnson said he felt that the public had a right to learn about early treatments they might not otherwise be aware of.

    “There’s a blackout on good information in social media and media,” he said. “So people are being denied information to make intelligent choices themselves.”

    Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, the top Democrat on the panel, fretted that the witnesses would “amplify theories that are at odds with the broader scientific community and, according to experts, could cause harm.”

    “These fringe views run counter to what the Senate should be doing — working on a bipartisan basis to protect the American people and tackle this deadly pandemic,” Mr. Peters said.


    ImageMr. Johnson is likely to seek a third term in 2022 and would benefit from Mr. Trump’s vocal support.
    Mr. Johnson is likely to seek a third term in 2022 and would benefit from Mr. Trump’s vocal support.Credit...Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times
    He pointedly declined to invite a witness to Tuesday’s hearing, and his aides said he did not plan to engage with the witnesses during the session. Instead, he is working with a group of a dozen prominent health experts to draft a letter to submit for the Congressional Record challenging their views.

    Mr. Johnson’s inflammatory public statements and his decision to give a platform to an assortment of contrarian doctors promoting alternative treatments have also irked some fellow Republicans, who have privately groused that he is acting irresponsibly. But in the clubby Senate, few are willing to criticize a colleague openly or challenge a chairman on how he runs his committee.

    Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, who had criticized the Hunter Biden inquiry as politicized, conspicuously skipped questioning witnesses at the earlier coronavirus hearing and does not plan to attend on Tuesday. Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, who is slated to take the top Republican slot on the panel in January after Mr. Johnson’s term as chairman ends, has gone out of his way to project trust for the scientific consensus on the coronavirus, publicly announcing last month that he had signed up for a vaccine trial in part to persuade Americans that it was safe.

    Dr. Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, who tangled with Mr. Johnson at a November hearing dedicated to hydroxychloroquine, called that event “a powerful reminder that not even Congress is immune to toxic conspiracy theories.”

    At the hearing, Mr. Johnson wondered aloud why medical professionals like Dr. Jha had scorned the drug, which has repeatedly been shown to be ineffective at treating coronavirus patients, and were supporting another drug, remdesivir, which has been shown to work but is more expensive.

    “I question the fact that because this cocktail costs about $20 and remdesivir costs $3,000, that maybe there’s a little bias, maybe there’s a little conflict, maybe there’s a little agenda,” he said.

    “He’s giving platforms to people who are way outside of the mainstream medical community,” Dr. Jha said in an interview.

    Mr. Johnson said his own coronavirus infection in early October — “I had two positive tests. I guess they’re valid,” he said — did not require treatment.

    Mr. Johnson’s interest in health issues is longstanding and consistent with his more recent statements. He was the lead sponsor, for example, of so-called right-to-try legislation that Congress overwhelmingly approved in 2018 to allow seriously ill patients to bypass the Food and Drug Administration and use unproven experimental treatments.

    “He has always been a contrarian person,” said Mark Becker, the former county chairman of the Wisconsin Republican Party, who recently wrote an op-ed for The Bulwark, a website with a bent toward “Never Trump” conservatism, about a recent call with Mr. Johnson.

    “But everything on the Republican side has turned to be a political argument, even a public health crisis,” Mr. Becker said. “And he still cares about not pissing off those Trumpers. He said that to me very clearly: ‘I’m not going to piss them off.’”

    The calculation is most likely a shrewd one as the senator looks toward running for a third term in 2022 in a competitive state where he has twice been elected by narrow margins. Though he initially pledged to serve only two terms, Mr. Johnson has since hinted that he may feel compelled to run again, arguing that times have changed. Mr. Trump’s vocal support could be key.

    Thomas Nelson, the Outagamie County executive and a Democrat challenging Mr. Johnson, predicted that voters would remember Mr. Johnson using a powerful perch in Washington to publicly explore “rabbit holes of bizarre conspiracies.”

    “What’s wrong with you? I mean, what is wrong with you?” Mr. Nelson said in an interview. “Do you not see the existential threat that communities like your hometown are facing, have been facing?”

     

    That article paints the panel with a broad brush without making distinctions.  There were different groups represented including one individual who just published the first US study on ivermectin (significantly positive outcomes treating the sickest ICU covid pts).  One group represented on the panel, FLCCC, has been a beacon for a long time. 

    A different group on the panel with a less stellar reputation had a panel rep that looks like the love child of HJ and Tiny Tim

    Spoiler

    7OlsyBk6?format=jpg&name=small

     

  4. 1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

    I am actually positive on ivermectin. 

    It is unfortunate that clowns like you have tainted the pool irreparably. 

    It's unfortunate someone with some neuronal friction generating a little heat has tainted their veil of sincerity beyond repair like you. 

    Stick to your Dossier secrets, troll.

  5. 48 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    Where are you in the quackery spectrum related to vaccination triple?

    fuck off.  I trust the science and the scientists behind the vaccine development.  It's the business face of big pharma I do not trust with managing the public good.  Look at what they've done with insulin pricing, all kinds of pricing.  They dgaf if you die or not, it's not their job, it's about the bottom line.  If they can apply pressure on career DC bureaucrats, medical academics and their research hospitals, the print and TV media, and the pundits they pay for to occupy public minds and kneecap outliers, and any manner of dirty tricks to undercut any threat to the fatness of their profit, it's been my general observation they will, and have been doing it, and will never let up.  If they could kick away a pillar of the pandemic response (4 pillars) to enlarge dependence on the 4th pillar, vaccines, they will.  Everything I can see points to that having been unfolding from before we even knew what hit us.  Nothing against the vaccines and the brilliant scientists who innovate, it's the business face of big pharma where the cockroaches live.  fuck'em.

    Ivermectin evidence has arrived.  Ignore it at your peril. The evidence shows it's a multi-tool to protect HCW's, elderly in LTCF's, and people over 50 with medical problems to take right away if they get sick. It's a clear path immediately available to save multiple tens of thousands of American lives.  We can't wait 3-6 more months for vaccines to scale up when we have this gift today.   I've got at least 3 months to see what happens before I even have a choice to get a vaccine.  By then it might still be necessary, but then it might not.  I know which option pharma wants.

  6. 6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    And FTR, I actually think that ivermectin deserves a fair shake.  But the people promoting it have a very poor track record that tarnishes it.  Triple included. 

    The research based evidence that's come out in recent weeks/months does the talking.  Better use of everyone's time for you respond to that.

    Dr. Kory pulls no punches in his observations of NIH, CDC, FDA complete failure to organize research in support of one of the 4 pillars of pandemic response: repurposing available and safe meds to treat a novel pathogen as early and rapidly as possible.  Instead, not only have they done virtually no research with re-purposed meds, they have completely failed to adapt to emerging evidence, ongoing, for months.  The playing field was gamed and western world kettled into vaccine development and mass deployment.  Because of this, NIH, CDC, FDA have contributed to a significant worsening of our American catastrophe.

    Covid killed almost 3000 Americans today.  Over 200,000 new US cases alone today, again.  We'll be at 10,000 newly dead Americans from Covid in the month of December likely by tomorrow.  10k newly dead Americans before the 10th day of the month.  Data on Ivermectin shows that if we started mass use this week, we're saving multiple tens of thousands of American lives long before enough vaccines can be manufactured and deployed.  

     

  7. 7 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

    Oh god, what snake oilery are you on about now?

    I can't force you to read or listen.  I can read and listen, so I'm open to hear how you arrived at your snake oil conclusion.  You're a rehabilitated drug rep right?  You may still need a bath.

  8. Just talked to a HOU based family member who is a flight attendant on a trip to Brazil. Another crew member developed ILI on the dreamliner flight down.  Test results are pending and they may end up being grounded there for at least 10 days. Family member walked around the corner from the hotel to a pharmacy and picked up a three month prophylaxis supply of ivermectin OTC for under $10. Chased first dose with a beautiful São Paulo filet.

  9. 1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

    The committee hearing repeatedly ranged into unfounded theories and scientifically dubious territory, such as when Orient speculated that COVID was largely being transmitted by fecal matter being spread through the air after toilet flushings.

    “Maybe instead of putting masks on everybody, we should be putting lids on the toilet or pouring Clorox into it before you flush it,” she said.

     

     

    Anything about what was presented about ivermectin?  No?  She’s serious.

  10. I appreciate the ceaseless effort and contributions of Dr. Peter McCullough in Dallas.  He's expertly fluent in science, research, and medicine and his personal contributions in medical research and literature are prolific.  His comments starting around the 30-31' mark on major pandemic bungles are so important to understand, learn from, and accept for future use to guide decision making for globally better outcomes the next time.  Heavy truth bombs in there throughout

     

     

  11. When it comes to transactions, Pharma is more cutthroat than Trump could ever dream to be.  It only underscores how worthless he is today.  I haven't read the NYT article about him passing on the purchase of additional Pfizer vaccines last summer, but there already had to be personal vindictiveness involved (reported or not).  Who knows what was going on back then that preceded the purchase snub.  I'd like to know more, but for the first time ever with something involving Trump, I'm not too quick to pick a side in this particular instance.  The scientists are brilliant, but the business face is ruthless and in many ways is too powerful for the public good.  They must have pushed it in on Trump way back in the Spring.  Maybe it was deserved, but maybe not entirely either.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. Senate hearing tomorrow: 

    Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution, Part II

    I expect Ivermectin will be prominently discussed.  Pierre Kory, M.D. was one of three docs who made a call to action using Ivermectin last week outside of UMMC in Houston.  Jean-Jacques Rajter, M.D. has been using ivermectin at his hospital in Broward FL since the summer with success, study publication pending.

    Ivermectin is a covid killer and its clear effectiveness has been clinically observed since last spring/summer.  This is a good interview with the lead investigator of ivermectin use in Argentina.  Additionally, they conducted an ivermectin prophylaxis study with hospital health care workers for a three month duration.  In the group of HCW's treated with once monthly ivermectin, they had ZERO cases of covid out of 788 pre-treated health care subjects.  The non-treated control group had 58% infection after 3 months.  On the face of it, that's better than vaccine numbers.  Plus it offers superior treatment of covid in every phase of the infection/illness.  It's available right now.  Today.  Safety and tolerance is fully established and unquestioned.  

     

    Quote

     

    It's notable in the interview what Dr. Carvallo says about resistance to ivermectin use - it started only after the promising results began to emerge.  He offers some illuminating insights about why, which should come as no surprise as the same phar out thing is happening here.  Just ask Dr. Ratjer in Broward, FL.

    Read the first paragraph of the Intro of this for an idea of how diverse the use of Ivermectin is:

    Quantitative proteomics reveals a broad‐spectrum antiviral property of ivermectin, benefiting for COVID‐19 treatment:

    Spoiler

    Ōmura discovered a unique and extraordinary microorganism that could produce ivermectin in 1973 (Burg et al., 1979). Ivermectin was subsequently commercialized because it showed great safety and effectivity in human health. The current status of ivermectin was continuing to surprise and excite scientists (Laing, Gillan, & Devaney, 2017). It was originally intended to be a broad‐spectrum antiparasitic agent, and treat onchocerciasis, strongyloidiasis, lymphatic filariasis, and scabies in veterinary and human medicine (Chabala et al., 1980). There was an outstanding advantage of ivermectin that no confirmed or increased drug resistance appears in parasites, even in those human populations who have been receiving ivermectin as a monotherapy for more than 30 years (van Wyk & Malan, 1988). In terms of mechanism, the primary target of ivermectin is glutamate‐gated chloride channels (Abdeltawab et al., 2020). However, it was increasingly believed that ivermectin was closely related to the immune defense mechanism and acted like immunomodulatory agents to help suppress the parasite's ability to evade the host's immune (Schaller et al., 2017). Today, the new use of ivermectin made it become a relatively unknown drug. Drug repurposing and repositioning has been shown to control a completely new range of diseases (Ashour, 2019). For example, orbital myiasis, trichinosis, malaria, leishmaniasis, African trypanosomiasis, asthma, epilepsy, neurological disease, antiviral (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus [HIV], dengue, encephalitis; Yang et al., 2020), antibacterial (tuberculosis and Buruli ulcer; Csóka et al., 2018), anticancer (breast cancer, leukemia, glioblastoma, cervical cancer, gastric cancer, ovarian cancer, colon cancer, melanoma, and lung cancer; Crump, 2017). Multifaceted ‘wonder’ ivermectin may become an even more exceptional drug in the future. An international patent ‘Use of ivermectin and derivatives thereof’ caught people's increasing attention to ivermectin those years. Ivermectin would be developed to use for metabolic‐related diseases (diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, insulin resistance, obesity, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperglycemia), Famesoid X receptor‐mediated diseases (atherosclerosis, nonalcohol fatty liver disease, cholestasia, and gallstones), inflammation, and cancer (Crump, 2017).

     

  13. 17 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

    Thank you.  

    Is this essentially correct: 

    • We have a substance that kills parasites but may also kill or slow the COVID virus.
    • That substance is a medication, already approved by the FDA for treatment of parasites. 
    • Time is of the essence in preventing greater illness/death from the virus as we wait for the widespread rollout of vaccines.

     

    Watch the physicians' call to action I linked just above.  They really cover it all. 

    But yes, that is essentially correct.  Ivermectin also is thought to have an immune modulating effect or effect on inflammation which may account for growing observations that it improves condition in patients with ongoing 'long covid'.  They mention this from the podium.

    Yes, ivermectin is 40 years FDA approved and was the basis for a Nobel Prize in medicine in 2015.  It's very well tolerated and very safe.  Drug to drug interactions are minimal though Dr. Marik above mentions graft rejection med cylosporin as one to watch in a small subset of people with an organ transplant.  It's very effective and commonly used against scabies without FDA approval for that application.  Standard stuff.  Same dose range of ivermectin is used in covid as is used for other conditions, with some variations in frequency and duration for covid.  The live conference above gives all the numbers including frequency and duration of dosing in different contexts.  Anyone who listens to what those physicians present can tell whether or not they speak the truth and are impassioned to immediately help divert from a tragically worse path of human suffering and death.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  14. 26 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

    Interesting.

    What is your nutshell version of why anti-parasite medication is effective against Covid? What is the mechanism in play when a person takes Ivermectin? Thanks.

    It's a common theme that medications often have multiple, often initially unknown, mechanisms of action leading to different applications (think everyday off-label use as seen for every 1 in 5 scripts written) , and perhaps equally as common that we can't explain or define the exact molecular pathways involved, particularly when a process is complex and dynamic like immune system function.  But you don't have to know the exact mechanism for it to warrant use as is commonly the case in medicine.  You need observable, measurable, and consistently reproducible beneficial results.  And when a treatment effect is greater than 50% effective, sound observational studies reflecting that size of a treatment effect are just as valid as RCT's, and are more ethical in this context. 

    The treatment effects of ivermectin on covid are much greater than 50% compared to treating with nothing (current NIH recommendation) and in several cases are an order of magnitude greater.  When you translate the size of these treatment effects to US numbers of cases, active hospitalizations, and deaths, we're talking about a treatment effect that could immediately relieve our bursting health care system by opening up hospital and ICU beds, and save literally tens of thousands of US lives in the next two months alone.

    EnviIbzXEAElFxc?format=jpg&name=small

    • Hook 'Em 1
  15. Ivermectin y'all. 

    A national call to action just wrapped outside of UMMC in Houston.  Fast forward to the presentation start at about 12 min in.  A mountain of overwhelming data has emerged since NIH last updated its covid recommendations at the end of August.  It works prophylactically (think use in any frontline person), it's works after exposure and in early phase, and helps in critical hospitalized patients.  There is also emerging evidence it significantly helps resolve prolonged symptoms of "long Covid".  It's a bridge to vaccines which won't be available and deliverable at meaningful amounts globally for months.  You're on the clock, Dr. Fauci, including anyone else in a position to effect change for patients or people who ignores this information.

    Quote

      

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  16. This is a nice study for ivermectin.  

    A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial designed at five hospitals measuring mortality in those treated after requiring hospitalization:

    EnnzDjYXYAE4GJg?format=jpg&name=small

    Tables in the article show there were 4 ivermectin treatment arms stratified by dosing regimen, two of which amounted to a single oral dose of ivermectin at either 0.2mg/Kg or 0.4mg/Kg.  No deaths recorded in either of those two groups either.  Other studies have shown additional benefits when ivermectin is taken in early flu stage of illness at very substantially reducing need for hospitalization, or death.  The 0.4mg/Kg arm also supports safety across a broad dose range.

    With 80,000 Americans hospitalized today with covid, and well over 100k new cases daily, the kind of benefit as seen above with a 'one and done' oral dose of a med that can be taken at any time or at any stage of the illness that is inexpensive and safe would be welcome right now.  A single dose that could be administered rapidly at the time of clinical presentation with a positive test, or presumptive positive with symptoms would simplify everything - minimize time to tx, improve compliance, improve outcomes etc. 

     Compendium of international ivermectin studies to date.

    I haven't heard any news that our national health officials have gotten around to studying it.  

     

  17. Worth a watch if you missed it before.  I caught it on amazon vid

     

    Guys ski trip this winter was heading to Jackson Hole for the first time but got scuttled.  No Utah either to be safe.  There is a decent chance we'll all converge by auto at a pad in NoCal, lay low and hit Sierra resorts for single days depending.  Kirkwood, for one.  But it's an easy plan to cancel if basic safety considerations are too high almost 3 months from now.  

  18. I'd rather stick a pencil in my eye than listen to Hannity and Sen. Johnson, but focus on listening to Baylor Med's Peter McCullough in this post-Senate testimony interview.  Strikingly, he goes right at medical academic fraud having been and continuing to be perpetrated and it has to with the total utter complete absence of early outpatient covid treatment in the US.  It's not about one med or another.  National health officials and medical academia should be prepared to start to answer:

    At 1.3 billion people, India has over a billion more people than the US largely living on top of each other.  They have championed early covid treatment with a variety of interventions:

     

  19. 1 minute ago, kevwun said:

    I mean it can't hurt, except for those studies where it did.

    Thanks for stating that.  It's a gross misconception that poisoned the well.  One or two (?) studies suggested increased risk starting HCQ only in patients who are late stage covid hospitalized in critical condition.  In over 170 studies worldwide where it's given in the first phase of illness (first week) there is no safety issue.  Zero. none.  The scaremongering is just that.  Instead the evidence is overwhelming, yes overwhelming, in support of early outpatient application.  Ivermectin is showing the same safety and early use efficacy, if not even better than hcq.  ~50% reduction in hospitalization and death.  This isn't based on one or two cherry picked studies, it's the consensus evidence provided by what is approaching 200 studies worldwide.  Safe and effective.

×
×
  • Create New...