Alladino Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 3 hours ago, Amy3 said: One failed clinical trial does not prove that the drug is unsafe or ineffective. Drug studies fail all the time for varieties of reasons. There are several of these types of studies under way. I’m curious to know why the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is sponsoring a trial comparing hydroxychloroquine and placebo, but instead of using an inert placebo, they are using Vitamin C, which has a know benefit to patients with flu symptoms. This study appears to be designed to fail. I’m not a huge conspiracy person, but I’m curious to know why they would use Vitamin C instead of an actual placebo. That is the problem with self-appointed experts raising unfounded hopes in press convergences. The whole thing becomes a question of faith instead of a scientific approach. If hydroxychloroquine can not produce better results than Vitamin C, it would have failed as a medication for Covid-19. Now, it is time to wait for further study results, but that would have been a good idea also for Trump before he started to make drug recommendation. NIH recommends against combining hydroxychloroquine with Z-Pak to THEHILL.COM A panel of doctors and experts convened by the National Institutes of Health advised against combining two drugs that have been floated as possible... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 2 hours ago, moos54 said: You know what, the best is that you test for us, just to see if you're right or not making fun of them We will talk about it later, or not depending on the result For information, knowing that we learn from the virus every day, this allows us to establish better statistics too But hey you seem to always know better than the others while they are in the middle of the cyclone Could you in this case find us the remedy, that people who try to do it can stop breaking their ass for nothing Who is making fun? I'm just stating facts. The fact is the models were way wrong. So why should we believe future models of those people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 4 hours ago, Ridgerunner said: And you are such a nice person, right? And, once again you miss the point. I made no claims to be a nice person. I merely pointed the finger at the hypocrite in the room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 11 minutes ago, letsdothis said: And, once again you miss the point. I made no claims to be a nice person. I merely pointed the finger at the hypocrite in the room. Who? You? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Alladino said: That is the problem with self-appointed experts raising unfounded hopes in press convergences. The whole thing becomes a question of faith instead of a scientific approach. If hydroxychloroquine can not produce better results than Vitamin C, it would have failed as a medication for Covid-19. Now, it is time to wait for further study results, but that would have been a good idea also for Trump before he started to make drug recommendation. NIH recommends against combining hydroxychloroquine with Z-Pak to THEHILL.COM A panel of doctors and experts convened by the National Institutes of Health advised against combining two drugs that have been floated as possible... I thought we weren't suppose to talk politics here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moos54 Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 45 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said: Who is making fun? I'm just stating facts. The fact is the models were way wrong. So why should we believe future models of those people? So try your luck and we will see the result since you do not believe in all this, and seeing your comments I have the impression that you think it is not so dangerous since they review their figures on the drop In fact you only have a one in two chance of having the virus and a one in three chances of dying of it On the other hand if I am not mistaken, I believe that you are the ideal candidate that this virus likes so much I'm not as strong in math as you seem but even me I know when it's time to be reasonable 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyone Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 2 hours ago, moos54 said: We are talking about people who die because of covid19 but nothing says that they would die this year either without this virus, so because they are old and in good health a little precarious then they would be sacrificable for you? For example, my grandmother is not in superb health, but that does not prevent her from being able to live for another hopefully several years, on the other hand if she becomes ill due to the virus, then it is almost certain that she won't be spending the week All I know at the moment is that we have regions that are in excess of mortality compared to last year and that we are only in the first quarter of the year, so yes at the end of the year, this year 2020 will surely be the most deadly because of this pandemic And I remain convinced that it could have been worse if we had continued to live normally I never stated that old people should be sacrificed--and I do not appreciate the fact that you misquoted me or even made that assumption. You were talking statics and I provided other possible scenarios. Since you/we are discussing France, it is a possibility that almost the entire population was infected by Covid19 (but we would have to do a serology test for all of France to know the number). If that were true, then it would logically be true that selective measures to protect the vulnerable ,which we know through observations, would have been far better and allow the majority of the population to continue living as normal. Taking precautions did not mean that we had to shut down the entire world- However, as with any pandemic or large illnesses, there will be those who pass--and that cannot be avoided. In the beginning, measures were taken to not over whelm the health systems--that has been accomplished for the most part. Since there is no way that we can eliminate all death due to this pandemic and others--it now seems that is what the governments and "professionals" want to try and accomplish and insist the only way is to continue to isolate, social distance, and be patient. IMO, I disagree with that position and I think that it is time to return the world to a more normal existence, but still use some measure of protections again for those most a risk. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, moos54 said: So try your luck and we will see the result since you do not believe in all this, and seeing your comments I have the impression that you think it is not so dangerous since they review their figures on the drop In fact you only have a one in two chance of having the virus and a one in three chances of dying of it On the other hand if I am not mistaken, I believe that you are the ideal candidate that this virus likes so much I'm not as strong in math as you seem but even me I know when it's time to be reasonable What I am saying is that major medical and economic decisions were made in the U.S. based upon computer models that were grossly inaccurate. With more accurate models maybe we could have taken more appropriate actions that would not have caused so much panic and not done so much damage to our economy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alladino Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 36 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said: What I am saying is that major medical and economic decisions were made in the U.S. based upon computer models that were grossly inaccurate. With more accurate models maybe we could have taken more appropriate actions that would not have caused so much panic and not done so much damage to our economy. What makes you think that the models were the primary basis for the decisions? What makes you think the measures were not appropriate? It seems to me that you completely ignore the problems we have seen in many European countries. The measures were or are necessary to prevent an exponential trend. Without these measures, the problem would already be many times more extreme. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 3 minutes ago, Alladino said: What makes you think that the models were the primary basis for the decisions? What makes you think the measures were not appropriate? It seems to me that you completely ignore the problems we have seen in many European countries. The measures were or are necessary to prevent an exponential trend. Without these measures, the problem would already be many times more extreme. I wasn't talking about Europe. I was talking about the U.S. Both Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx cited those models numerous times when setting government policy to combat the coronavirus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 4 hours ago, Ridgerunner said: The same statisticians who said with the lock down 240,000 people in the U.S. would die from the first wave of the coronavirius, and without the lock down 2.2 million would die ? 1projections were ridiculous. When you say something is ridiculous... 4 hours ago, moos54 said: You know what, the best is that you test for us, just to see if you're right or not making fun of them We will talk about it later, or not depending on the result For information, knowing that we learn from the virus every day, this allows us to establish better statistics too But hey you seem to always know better than the others while they are in the middle of the cyclone Could you in this case find us the remedy, that people who try to do it can stop breaking their ass for nothing 1 hour ago, Ridgerunner said: Who is making fun? I'm just stating facts. The fact is the models were way wrong. So why should we believe future models of those people? That's called making fun of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted April 22, 2020 Share Posted April 22, 2020 4 minutes ago, letsdothis said: When you say something is ridiculous... That's called making fun of it. No. That's what you call it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts