• 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!

The MSM and the hydroxychloroquine pack treatment

TU Curmudgeon said:
I did not say that the data was fraudulent. What I did say was that there were (at least) two indicia that would suggest that the data was "less than accurate".

The only way that we will ever know whether or not the data used in the "study" was "less than accurate" would be for the people who "constructed" the "study" to release the data that they did use. The people who "constructed" the "study" are adamant that they will not do so.

IF the data that was used in the "study" WAS NOT "less than accurate", THEN the people who "constructed" the "study" would be doing a great deal to SALVAGE their professional reputations by releasing it.

IF the data that was used in the "study" WAS "less than accurate", THEN the people who "constructed" the "study" would be doing a great deal to HARM their professional reputations by releasing it.

Draw your own conclusion from the fact that the people who "constructed" the "study" refuse to release the data that they used.

If this were a civil case, I'd hate to be in the position of the people who "constructed" the "study" were I to be being sued over it and had to surmount the "balance of probability" test.
Click to expand...

I didn’t say you said that.

I was talking to termin8or
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Termn8or said:
I have watched and read the accounts of doctors who have actually used it extensively.

Their advice is to listen to doctors who actually used it to treat patients until the conflicting research is sorted out.

And many if not most of them endorse it.
Click to expand...

Do you know the difference between "anecdotal evidence" and "clinical studies"?

I suspect that you don't.
Click to expand...

Of course I do.

Do you understand that 20% of medicines prescribed are "off label" meaning that there is no formal proof that they work?

Yet doctors prescribe and peopled take them because evidence shows they work.

Just like evidence is strong that HCQ works.

There is no other treatment, so it's just freaking stupid to keep trashing a promising treatment as liberals have done for months.
 
Termn8or said:
Of course I do.

Do you understand that 20% of medicines prescribed are "off label" meaning that there is no formal proof that they work?

Yet doctors prescribe and peopled take them because evidence shows they work.

Just like evidence is strong that HCQ works.

There is no other treatment, so it's just freaking stupid to keep trashing a promising treatment as liberals have done for months.
Click to expand...

But... evidence is not strong.

We have two large randomized controlled trials, one early, one late, that shows it doesnt work at all. Not even a hint of efficacy.
 
Threegoofs said:
Termn8or said:
Of course I do.

Do you understand that 20% of medicines prescribed are "off label" meaning that there is no formal proof that they work?

Yet doctors prescribe and peopled take them because evidence shows they work.

Just like evidence is strong that HCQ works.

There is no other treatment, so it's just freaking stupid to keep trashing a promising treatment as liberals have done for months.
Click to expand...

But... evidence is not strong.

We have two large randomized controlled trials, one early, one late, that shows it doesnt work at all. Not even a hint of efficacy.
Click to expand...

Well gosh, who should we believe, you and cherry picked studies?

Or the many doctors who have used and and the studies that support them?

But you of course miss the point.

If a drug is very promising, only a fool would trash it for months or refuse to take it.

How do liberals bungle such easy issues?:shock:
 
Termn8or said:
Well gosh, who should we believe, you and cherry picked studies?

Or the many doctors who have used and and the studies that support them?

But you of course miss the point.

If a drug is very promising, only a fool would trash it for months or refuse to take it.

How do liberals bungle such easy issues?:shock:
Click to expand...

It’s not promising. And it was never that promising to begin with.


Reminds me of a certain poster.
 
Termn8or said:
Of course I do.

Do you understand that 20% of medicines prescribed are "off label" meaning that there is no formal proof that they work?

Yet doctors prescribe and peopled take them because evidence shows they work.

Just like evidence is strong that HCQ works.

There is no other treatment, so it's just freaking stupid to keep trashing a promising treatment as liberals have done for months.
Click to expand...

Did you know that there have been drug studies done in which the BEST results were achieved in the "Placebo Group"? Do you know why that is? (And it's NOT because the study was incorrectly done from the pharmaceutical standpoint.)
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Did you know that there have been drug studies done in which the BEST results were achieved in the "Placebo Group"? Do you know why that is? (And it's NOT because the study was incorrectly done from the pharmaceutical standpoint.)
Click to expand...

I don’t think he is capable of responding.

On several levels!
 
Looks like another goose egg.

Large prospective Spanish post exposure prophylaxis shoes no benefit with HCQ.

These are early results- no pub yet.


Three big studies dim hopes that hydroxychloroquine can treat or prevent COVID-19 | Science | AAAS

A second large PEP trial has come up empty as well, its leader tells Science. Carried out in Barcelona, Spain, that study randomized more than 2300 people exposed to the virus to either hydroxychloroquine or the usual care. There was no significant difference between the number of people in each group who developed COVID-19, says Oriol Mitjà of the Germans Trias i Pujol University Hospital. Mitjà says he has submitted the results for publication.

————————————-
If you, your spouse, your mother gets admitted to hospital and is offered hydroxychloroquine, don’t take it.
Martin Landray, University of Oxford
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom