• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hydroxychloroquine. It’s over.

Jack Hays said:
Hmmm.
Click to expand...

it's better to study one variable at a time, when possible. They didn't "ignore zinc." They were studying HCQ.

If zinc is what really helps, then study will show that as well.
 
Deuce said:
it's better to study one variable at a time, when possible. They didn't "ignore zinc." They were studying HCQ.

If zinc is what really helps, then study will show that as well.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
Jack Hays said:
I believe all are.
Click to expand...

You believe... based on what? Be honest with yourself. You haven't heard any of their names before. You didn't google them. You just... want them to be "experts."
 
Deuce said:
You believe... based on what? Be honest with yourself. You haven't heard any of their names before. You didn't google them. You just... want them to be "experts."
Click to expand...

Not having a dog in this fight, I'm relaxed about that (although I did google them). Two self-identify as physicians, the comment section in which they appeared was headed "Health Care Professionals" and the website from which I made the post referred to them as doctors. For purposes of this discussion that's enough.
 
Greenbeard said:
Unfortunately, Trump's tendency to kill people is a political issue, since his political office is what provides him the platform to **** up so royally.
Click to expand...

Trump screwed nothing up. The Democrats were hawking the idea concern over the virus was racist into March

All of the congressional briefings on coronavirus in China were ignored by democratic leadership as they were busy banning adults from buying cigarettes and impeaching Trump
 
Jack Hays said:
Not having a dog in this fight, I'm relaxed about that (although I did google them). Two self-identify as physicians, the comment section in which they appeared was headed "Health Care Professionals" and the website from which I made the post referred to them as doctors. For purposes of this discussion that's enough.
Click to expand...

One of them self-identified as a doctor while simultaneously self-identifying their bias. They complained that studies were done with later-stage coronavirus patients and that this somehow is evidence of bias. That's absurd. Just because the scope of a study isn't exactly what you want it to be doesn't mean the study is biased. What he's really mad about is what the data actually shows. He is biased for HCQ. Probably because he's a Trump fan. It's sad that professionals let their political bias cloud their judgement in such a fashion.
 
Jack Hays said:
I believe all are.
Click to expand...

Well, if you look up the first one, he’s an orthopedic surgeon.

Not exactly known as the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to drug therapy, especially antiviral treatments.

And there’s a whole lotta whining about the study being a political hit job and designed to hurt Trump, which is laughable as this is a scientific study done in a UK journal.
 
Deuce said:
One of them self-identified as a doctor while simultaneously self-identifying their bias. They complained that studies were done with later-stage coronavirus patients and that this somehow is evidence of bias. That's absurd. Just because the scope of a study isn't exactly what you want it to be doesn't mean the study is biased. What he's really mad about is what the data actually shows. He is biased for HCQ. Probably because he's a Trump fan. It's sad that professionals let their political bias cloud their judgement in such a fashion.
Click to expand...

I really don't care. As I said, I have no dog in this fight, and the best solutions usually emerge from the clash of contrary viewpoints.
 
Threegoofs said:
Well, if you look up the first one, he’s an orthopedic surgeon.

Not exactly known as the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to drug therapy, especially antiviral treatments.

And there’s a whole lotta whining about the study being a political hit job and designed to hurt Trump, which is laughable as this is a scientific study done in a UK journal.
Click to expand...

I really don't care. As I said, I have no dog in this fight, and the best solutions usually emerge from the clash of contrary viewpoints.
 
Jack Hays said:
I really don't care. As I said, I have no dog in this fight, and the best solutions usually emerge from the clash of contrary viewpoints.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Internet comment sections really are a great source of credible info...

[emoji849]
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm more interested in the diversity of questions and comments than I am in defensively deriding the medium.
Click to expand...

And you've already agreed the primary objection brought up in those comments is invalid.
You would have figured that out on your own eventually, right?
 
Grim17 said:
Look, what I'm saying is not to insult or to attack the man. Joe Biden has reached the point where old age is getting the best of him. It's nothing to be ashamed of, it's simply a fact.

I'm really not looking forward to the presidential debates at all. They are going to be packed with cringe moments courtesy of Mr. Biden diminished mental capacity, and very tough for me to watch. He's going to embarrass himself and his family on national television and that's not something I'd wish on anyone.

.
Click to expand...

There is a term for men like Biden. Stumble bums. And he has not shown he has regained any composure when he insulted black voters of America.
 
Threegoofs said:
You didnt read it, or even skim it. And if you did, you wouldnt understand it.

But you dont understand observational, retrospective studies, you dont understand how these real world data analyses are done, and you dont understand what acceptance to the Lancet entails. You cant even grasp why the start date is late Dec 2019.

But you think its suspicious and sketchy.

You literally have no idea what you’re talking about.
Click to expand...

With that ration of taunts and insults you delivered on said poster, you did not inspire me to regard you at all.
 
Linc said:
Not for the South American science illiterate Bolsonaro — Brazil’s Trump. Brazil is home to mass graves and the worst spike in the world.

Once again, since they’re the poor, like our Native Americans and Meat-Packer Essentials, they’re underreported, not reported, and deemed throwaway deaths.
Click to expand...

I had my fingers crossed for Brazil early on, but given the favelas in their urban centers and the cavalier attitude of Bolsonaro, I knew I was hoping against hope. It's been the typical crap show where local officials are trying to sound sane when their country's leader is telling everyone to not worry about it. Now they're second to the US in number of infections.
 
ElChupacabra said:
I had my fingers crossed for Brazil early on, but given the favelas in their urban centers and the cavalier attitude of Bolsonaro, I knew I was hoping against hope. It's been the typical crap show where local officials are trying to sound sane when their country's leader is telling everyone to not worry about it. Now they're second to the US in number of infections.
Click to expand...
But behind the USA in per capita covidiotic talent. Fareed Z. on CNN atm.
 
Jack Hays said:
Hmmm.

Hydroxychloroquine Lancet study of 96,000 Covid patients ignores Zinc, wasn’t randomized, has 12% death rate

A new study came out last night in the Lancet which is being used to call for the end of doctors using Choloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid patients without them being enrolled in a clinical trial. Some of the claims about “no chance of any benefit” seem a bit premature given the limits of this kind of study: . . .

Doctors seem unimpressed
Click to expand...

I feel like I missed a development when it was only touted as useful very early on, before people were admitted to the hospital with symptoms, which is when the vast majority are tested and discovered to have COVID 19.

Has it always been only suggested as a treatment BEFORE someone has serious symptoms? I don't recall that because I'm pretty sure that never happened. That's the "Doctors" main complaint and it smacks of moving goal posts to me.
 
JasperL said:
I feel like I missed a development when it was only touted as useful very early on, before people were admitted to the hospital with symptoms, which is when the vast majority are tested and discovered to have COVID 19.

Has it always been only suggested as a treatment BEFORE someone has serious symptoms? I don't recall that because I'm pretty sure that never happened. That's the "Doctors" main complaint and it smacks of moving goal posts to me.
Click to expand...

There have been different views from the beginning. No one was working from an abundance of data.
 
Jack Hays said:
There have been different views from the beginning. No one was working from an abundance of data.
Click to expand...

Well, the point is HCL was touted as an effective treatment, not just as a preventative, or only for mild, early cases. That it's worthless as a treatment for people presenting with symptoms in the hospital is a brand new standard that appears to have arisen only after the early evidence of its use in hospitals has shown if anything it's harmful, not helpful.

I'm just a little fascinated at watching the goal posts move so quickly on the right wing. The "Doctors" in the comments seem to all have accepted that HCL isn't worth a damn for sick people. That's new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom