How?Quote:
It will probably be proven that thousands died unnecessary due to draconian rule by some that actually blocked treatment to people for no reason what so ever except for power.
Another look at hydroxychloroquine but also at authoritarian science
7,296 Views |
48 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Picadillo
You seem to be using studies on late stage hypothermia to generalize about all hypothermia. Are there any studies that say that warming someone up with mild hypothermia doesn't help?I already have a dog said:Windy City Ag said:Quote:
Not sure if serious? You think I am talking about the average ER doctor.
Just pointing out that certain individuals tend to indulge in fantastical visions of conspiracy regarding nefarious actors actively working against their personal interests.
The more boring reality is that we rely on is a system of educated medical professionals who work through a code of ethics and have in many cases learned the hard way to do no harm. They have tools to determine efficacy of treatment and if something does not appear to do any good and has remote chances of doing harm, they do not prescribe.
The Double Blind Study process is what plagues the pro-HCQ crowd . . .not the Bilderbergs or the Globalists or Lizard People.
The pro HCQ crowd claimed that it needed to be taken early to be effective. The anti crowd ran high quality studies mostly using very sick patients to pretty conclusively show it doesn't help the very sick.
Then they used that data to say it was worthless as a treatment.
Did you know getting to a warm place when you first get cold is a very good way to avoid death by hypothermia?
Well actually we've done studies on people in late stage hypothermia and simply moving them to a warm space has no effect. If you think warmth helps against hypothermia you are a science denier.
For what it's worth, ever since my thyroid quit, I stay on the edge of hypothermia and am frequently in the mild hypothermia range. The strange part is that I no longer seem to shiver when cold. But getting into a warmer spot definitely helps warm me up.
eric76 said:You seem to be using studies on late stage hypothermia to generalize about all hypothermia. Are there any studies that say that warming someone up with mild hypothermia doesn't help?I already have a dog said:Windy City Ag said:Quote:
Not sure if serious? You think I am talking about the average ER doctor.
Just pointing out that certain individuals tend to indulge in fantastical visions of conspiracy regarding nefarious actors actively working against their personal interests.
The more boring reality is that we rely on is a system of educated medical professionals who work through a code of ethics and have in many cases learned the hard way to do no harm. They have tools to determine efficacy of treatment and if something does not appear to do any good and has remote chances of doing harm, they do not prescribe.
The Double Blind Study process is what plagues the pro-HCQ crowd . . .not the Bilderbergs or the Globalists or Lizard People.
The pro HCQ crowd claimed that it needed to be taken early to be effective. The anti crowd ran high quality studies mostly using very sick patients to pretty conclusively show it doesn't help the very sick.
Then they used that data to say it was worthless as a treatment.
Did you know getting to a warm place when you first get cold is a very good way to avoid death by hypothermia?
Well actually we've done studies on people in late stage hypothermia and simply moving them to a warm space has no effect. If you think warmth helps against hypothermia you are a science denier.
For what it's worth, ever since my thyroid quit, I stay on the edge of hypothermia and am frequently in the mild hypothermia range. The strange part is that I no longer seem to shiver when cold. But getting into a warmer spot definitely helps warm me up.
First, hope you're able to avoid hypnosis and get healthy. Second, you are exactly right that I inappropriately generalized regarding late stage hypothermia. It was intended to make a point about what was done with hcq studies.
Nobody is going to change anyone's mind here so I'll just try to explain why so many people don't believe the experts. They started off telling us there was no reason to worry, then that everything needs to be completely shut down for 2 weeks and then we'll start back, then to wear a single ply mask and that will keep you safe, then that won't keep you safe but do it anyway, then 2 weeks won't do we'll have to be shut down until we get a vaccine, then you know what it is okay to open up a little bit after all, then God no, shut back down, then let's open, then good news we have a vaccine we can open once the most vulnerable have it, then never mind we should still be closed, then everyone must get the vaccines, then you know these vaccines don't work that well and we'll need to stay shut but you must get one anyway, and so forth. Now that its politically expedient they're saying no real reason to wear masks or take any significant precautions.
I left put a whole lot of the dumb stuff "experts" have said just because it would require a book.
At some point most of the independent thinkers have realized the "experts" are either lying or don't know what the hell they are doing.
To be clear, I'm not talking about the doctors, nurses, etc who have done everything they can and had to make the choices they think best to help their patients, I'm talking about the bureaucrats, politicians, and talking heads who have proclaimed themselves unquestionable experts and been telling us all how we have to act since 2020 started.
I left put a whole lot of the dumb stuff "experts" have said just because it would require a book.
At some point most of the independent thinkers have realized the "experts" are either lying or don't know what the hell they are doing.
To be clear, I'm not talking about the doctors, nurses, etc who have done everything they can and had to make the choices they think best to help their patients, I'm talking about the bureaucrats, politicians, and talking heads who have proclaimed themselves unquestionable experts and been telling us all how we have to act since 2020 started.
Hallmarks of a biased study include:
- given to inpatients or those well along in the disease (no early treatment)
- given to patients with a number of co-morbidities
- given alone, without zinc or the typical multi-vitamin or drug as cited by a number of physician led organizations
All too common and designed to deceive
- given to inpatients or those well along in the disease (no early treatment)
- given to patients with a number of co-morbidities
- given alone, without zinc or the typical multi-vitamin or drug as cited by a number of physician led organizations
All too common and designed to deceive
I wondered about that.I already have a dog said:eric76 said:You seem to be using studies on late stage hypothermia to generalize about all hypothermia. Are there any studies that say that warming someone up with mild hypothermia doesn't help?I already have a dog said:Windy City Ag said:Quote:
Not sure if serious? You think I am talking about the average ER doctor.
Just pointing out that certain individuals tend to indulge in fantastical visions of conspiracy regarding nefarious actors actively working against their personal interests.
The more boring reality is that we rely on is a system of educated medical professionals who work through a code of ethics and have in many cases learned the hard way to do no harm. They have tools to determine efficacy of treatment and if something does not appear to do any good and has remote chances of doing harm, they do not prescribe.
The Double Blind Study process is what plagues the pro-HCQ crowd . . .not the Bilderbergs or the Globalists or Lizard People.
The pro HCQ crowd claimed that it needed to be taken early to be effective. The anti crowd ran high quality studies mostly using very sick patients to pretty conclusively show it doesn't help the very sick.
Then they used that data to say it was worthless as a treatment.
Did you know getting to a warm place when you first get cold is a very good way to avoid death by hypothermia?
Well actually we've done studies on people in late stage hypothermia and simply moving them to a warm space has no effect. If you think warmth helps against hypothermia you are a science denier.
For what it's worth, ever since my thyroid quit, I stay on the edge of hypothermia and am frequently in the mild hypothermia range. The strange part is that I no longer seem to shiver when cold. But getting into a warmer spot definitely helps warm me up.
First, hope you're able to avoid hypnosis and get healthy. Second, you are exactly right that I inappropriately generalized regarding late stage hypothermia. It was intended to make a point about what was done with hcq studies.
There are a number of studies and some do conflict with each other. It will take time to figure out which ones are the more accurate.
Not that it matters much, but they weren't trying to end the pandemic in two weeks. They wanted to level it out in order to try to avoid overwhelming the medical system. I thought it obvious that even for that it wasn't going to be for just two weeks.I already have a dog said:
Nobody is going to change anyone's mind here so I'll just try to explain why so many people don't believe the experts. They started off telling us there was no reason to worry, then that everything needs to be completely shut down for 2 weeks and then we'll start back, then to wear a single ply mask and that will keep you safe, then that won't keep you safe but do it anyway, then 2 weeks won't do we'll have to be shut down until we get a vaccine, then you know what it is okay to open up a little bit after all, then God no, shut back down, then let's open, then good news we have a vaccine we can open once the most vulnerable have it, then never mind we should still be closed, then everyone must get the vaccines, then you know these vaccines don't work that well and we'll need to stay shut but you must get one anyway, and so forth. Now that its politically expedient they're saying no real reason to wear masks or take any significant precautions.
I left put a whole lot of the dumb stuff "experts" have said just because it would require a book.
At some point most of the independent thinkers have realized the "experts" are either lying or don't know what the hell they are doing.
To be clear, I'm not talking about the doctors, nurses, etc who have done everything they can and had to make the choices they think best to help their patients, I'm talking about the bureaucrats, politicians, and talking heads who have proclaimed themselves unquestionable experts and been telling us all how we have to act since 2020 started.
One difference between you and me is that I never expected them to from the outset everything about a pandemic that they had never seen before. I don't expect them to use divination to come up with all the correct answers from the start.
Actually, they need to do all those studies. Nobody is going to have the perfect study that answers all the questions in one study. Arriving at the truth in any scientific endeavor takes a lot of time and a lot of hard work.Picadillo said:
Hallmarks of a biased study include:
- given to inpatients or those well along in the disease (no early treatment)
- given to patients with a number of co-morbidities
- given alone, without zinc or the typical multi-vitamin or drug as cited by a number of physician led organizations
All too common and designed to deceive
eric76 said:Not that it matters much, but they weren't trying to end the pandemic in two weeks. They wanted to level it out in order to try to avoid overwhelming the medical system. I thought it obvious that even for that it wasn't going to be for just two weeks.I already have a dog said:
Nobody is going to change anyone's mind here so I'll just try to explain why so many people don't believe the experts. They started off telling us there was no reason to worry, then that everything needs to be completely shut down for 2 weeks and then we'll start back, then to wear a single ply mask and that will keep you safe, then that won't keep you safe but do it anyway, then 2 weeks won't do we'll have to be shut down until we get a vaccine, then you know what it is okay to open up a little bit after all, then God no, shut back down, then let's open, then good news we have a vaccine we can open once the most vulnerable have it, then never mind we should still be closed, then everyone must get the vaccines, then you know these vaccines don't work that well and we'll need to stay shut but you must get one anyway, and so forth. Now that its politically expedient they're saying no real reason to wear masks or take any significant precautions.
I left put a whole lot of the dumb stuff "experts" have said just because it would require a book.
At some point most of the independent thinkers have realized the "experts" are either lying or don't know what the hell they are doing.
To be clear, I'm not talking about the doctors, nurses, etc who have done everything they can and had to make the choices they think best to help their patients, I'm talking about the bureaucrats, politicians, and talking heads who have proclaimed themselves unquestionable experts and been telling us all how we have to act since 2020 started.
One difference between you and me is that I never expected them to from the outset everything about a pandemic that they had never seen before. I don't expect them to use divination to come up with all the correct answers from the start.
No but they spoke with such certainty and immediately discounted others opinions even then. If they were wrong and confident then, why trust them now?
It seems to me that the people who usually speak with the most certainty about many fields of science generally have no background in that field and often little or none in any scientific field.I already have a dog said:
No but they spoke with such certainty and immediately discounted others opinions even then. If they were wrong and confident then, why trust them now?
There's also an element of being the 'wrong expert.' Being a skilled doctor doesn't speak at all to your ability to understand stats. Being a great researcher doesn't mean you understand human behavior. Being an expert statistician doesn't mean you know how to set good public policy. "Listen to the experts" sounds good superficially, but leads to the immediate follow up questions of "which experts?"eric76 said:It seems to me that the people who usually speak with the most certainty about many fields of science generally have no background in that field and often little or none in any scientific field.I already have a dog said:
No but they spoke with such certainty and immediately discounted others opinions even then. If they were wrong and confident then, why trust them now?
There are a few take-aways from the last 2 years.
One is that credentials can be overrated. But that doesn't mean that you turn to Joe Plumber. But if J.P. develops a very strong track record - then a wise person would recognize his earned credibility and give his message appropriate weight.
Get Off My Lawn said:There's also an element of being the 'wrong expert.' Being a skilled doctor doesn't speak at all to your ability to understand stats. Being a great researcher doesn't mean you understand human behavior. Being an expert statistician doesn't mean you know how to set good public policy. "Listen to the experts" sounds good superficially, but leads to the immediate follow up questions of "which experts?"eric76 said:It seems to me that the people who usually speak with the most certainty about many fields of science generally have no background in that field and often little or none in any scientific field.I already have a dog said:
No but they spoke with such certainty and immediately discounted others opinions even then. If they were wrong and confident then, why trust them now?
There are a few take-aways from the last 2 years.
One is that credentials can be overrated. But that doesn't mean that you turn to Joe Plumber. But if J.P. develops a very strong track record - then a wise person would recognize his earned credibility and give his message appropriate weight.
Spot on regarding credentials vs track record. As a society we've put blind faith in the credentialed even when they demonstrate that they are inept. The credentialed have also largely come to believe that they are above being questioned by or even listening to the unwashed masses. Leads a bunch of incompetent "experts" who make decisions based on sterilized data without having a clue of what is happening in the rule world or how their decisions impact it.
Picadillo said:
Hallmarks of a biased study include:
- given to inpatients or those well along in the disease (no early treatment)
- given to patients with a number of co-morbidities
- given alone, without zinc or the typical multi-vitamin or drug as cited by a number of physician led organizations
All too common and designed to deceive
Very much this. I've yet to see a study that didn't appear to be juked to produce the result they were hoping for. Maybe I missed it, so maybe one of our esteemed covid board experts can show me the study that focused on early treatment ivermectin with the vitamin cocktail. Would love to see a study of ivermectin administered within 2 days of symptoms with Vitamin C, D, zinc
Hallmarks of these fake studies include (using HCQ as example):
- administering HCQ alone without the cocktail array it's intended to work with (zinc plus various vitamins)
- administering late in the infection process, such as inpatients
- administering to a patient group with comorbidities well above that of a typical population
- administering HCQ alone without the cocktail array it's intended to work with (zinc plus various vitamins)
- administering late in the infection process, such as inpatients
- administering to a patient group with comorbidities well above that of a typical population
Featured Stories
See All
2026 Lakewood (CA) tight end Caleb Tafua commits to Texas A&M
by Jason Howell
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Battle At Reed' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
22:08
2d ago
5.1k
Hefner scores 19 as No. 12 A&M overpowers HCU in Friday matinee
by Olin Buchanan
Ar'maj Reed-Adams announces his return to Texas A&M for 2025
by Richard Zane