Quote from Bob#2

That is part of the frustration.... with the vast majority not greatly effected it is hard to get everyone to agree or get behind a strategy.

I disagree with that. I think that most people realize they are likely to get COVID-19 if there is no vaccine and the pandemic continues long enough. It is a slow-motion epidemic compared to previous ones such as the 1918 influenza, but it will reach most of the population eventually. I think people realize that.

Quote from Bob#2

Just like starvation, which literally kills millions more than Covid will each year, does not get a second mention on this site.....

I discuss it often.

Here is the thing many people do not realize about starvation and extreme poverty (defined as less than $1.90 per day per person). These have been greatly reduced since 1960, and especially since 1990.

1981: 44% of the world population lived in extreme poverty

1990: 37%

2020: 10%

The World Bank, the UN, the Gates Foundation and most of all, the poor people themselves have greatly reduced it. In another 10 years it may be eliminated, except in places at war. For the first time in history, everyone will get enough to eat. That is assuming global warming and other environmental catastrophes can be avoided. In other words, not only do we talk about these things, we are fixing them. Just as we are eliminating many terrible diseases with vaccines. See:

Ending Extreme Poverty

https://www.worldbank.org/en/n…08/ending-extreme-poverty

https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/poverty/

Quote from THHuxleynew

do when we have a proven effective vaccine, which reduces infection rates everywhere

what do you do when you find that countries that allow HCQ have much lower death rates than those that disallow it?

Quote from oldguy

what do you do when you find that countries that allow HCQ have much lower death rates than those that disallow it?

You have to accept that some posters here have a killer mentality. Discussing something unreal as a solution (CoV-19 vaccine) is a mental disturbance...when the same people deny the efficiency of well tested drugs.

Quote from Bob#2

This definitely can be a bad virus! That is part of the frustration....

You must teach the people the early symptoms. There is no time to waste for a treatment. And highly vulnerable should get the rescue dose of ivermectin ready! For a heavy weight person almost one horse (800kg) dose as you should take at least twice a double dose..

Quote from Wyttenbach

You have to accept that some posters here have a killer mentality. Discussing something unreal as a solution (CoV-19 vaccine) is a mental disturbance...when the same people deny the efficiency of well tested drugs.

You must teach the people the early symptoms. There is no time to waste for a treatment. And highly vulnerable should get the rescue dose of ivermectin ready! For a heavy weight person almost one horse (800kg) dose as you should take at least twice a double dose..

She was not given Ivermectin nor was it even offered as an option. Like HCQ, it has been unofficially banned in most parts of the US. (Where as HCQ has officially been banned for Covid in some US states). The "standard care" treatment certainly did not work for her!

Quite sad. If it ever turns out that HCQ or Ivermectin is absolutely proven to be effective, one can bet that there will be no penalties to pay by those who have banned it or pushed for the ban. Do you think the Ohio Democrat politician who argued for crimes against humanity for Trump for "asking that HCQ" be looked into will have any ramifications? I doubt it.

But then, the potential backlash may be so bad that no definitive study will ever allowed to be completed if it would show such a political bias caused potentially thousands and thousands of deaths. Who knows?

Quote from Bob#2

Quite sad. If it ever turns out that HCQ or Ivermectin is absolutely proven to be effective, one can bet that there will be no penalties to pay by those who have banned it or pushed for the ban. Do you think the Ohio Democrat politician who argued for crimes against humanity for Trump for "asking that HCQ" be looked into will have any ramifications? I doubt it.

As said some week ago: Most western countries are run my the FR (free masons rotary) mafia. Yeas these organizations are mafia as they invented the mafia code.

Unluckily for the US both parties are formed by mafia members. So no difference what ever you elect. Same for Switzerland Germany,Italy....

Medicine, Hospital, drugs are mostly run by rotary people - the harmless ones.... - . You have to know how to deal with them. You have to attack all member personally. First sue her primary doctor then the hospital but just one doctor you know that treated her.

All people must do so until they get bored and start to behave human again. Important is to imply a first action that suspends the doctor from working. On this forum enough papers are linked that prove which drugs work. Just not even mentioning one drug that works makes a doctor guilty!

Best practice treatment! No law can ban a doctor from best practice treatment as he has sworn an oath to do so. If he does not follow the oath he is guilty even if he had had to break law to do so! A doctor that does not follow the oath is no longer a doctor --> ask the court for a ban.

Quote from Wyttenbach

No law can ban a doctor from best practice treatment as he has sworn an oath to do so.

No law in the U.S. bans any drug that has been found safe and effective. Any doctor can use the drug "off-label," meaning for some purpose it has not been approved for. The FDA does not like that, but it cannot prevent it. So all the blather here about government mafias "banning" the use of HCQ is . . . empty blather.

https://www.fda.gov/patients/l…-use-approved-drugs-label

Quote from JedRothwell

No law in the U.S. bans any drug that has been found safe and effective.

You live in Nirwana country... How many US states did ban HCQ and threatened doctors when using it ????????????????????????????????????????????????

Quote from JedRothwell

No law in the U.S. bans any drug that has been found safe and effective. Any doctor can use the drug "off-label," meaning for some purpose it has not been approved for. The FDA does not like that, but it cannot prevent it. So all the blather here about government mafias "banning" the use of HCQ is . . . empty blather.

https://www.fda.gov/patients/l…-use-approved-drugs-label

Jed is correct in that HCQ is safe, it has more than 5 million prescriptions per year!

He is not correct about it not being banned or that it cannot be banned. It indeed is!

"Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Revokes Emergency Use Authorization for Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine

https://www.fda.gov/news-event…orization-chloroquine-and

Ohio bans HCQ

https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-…st-days-new-cases-1521646

Oregon bans HCQ

https://www.oregon.gov/osbn/Do…BP_TempPharmRuleCovid.pdf

and there are more.

Quote from Wyttenbach

You live in Nirwana country... How many US states did ban HCQ and threatened doctors when using it ????????????????????????????????????????????????

Zero. None. You cannot ban an approved drug for off-label use. The government can only recommend against using it.

Quote from Bob#2

Oregon bans HCQ

https://www.oregon.gov/osbn/Do…BP_TempPharmRuleCovid.pdf

No, it does not. Did you read the document? It says:

"FILING CAPTION: Prohibits dispensing of certain drugs for COVID19 prevention; limits treatment to
COVID19 hospitalized patients . . .

JUSTIFICATION OF TEMPORARY FILING:
Use of these agents for the presumptive treatment or prevention of COVID-19 infection threatens the
supply for patients who depend on its availability"

That is not a ban. It is a restriction to patients in hospitals, mainly to preserve supplies.

Quote from oldguy

what do you do when you find that countries that allow HCQ have much lower death rates than those that disallow it?

Well, firstly I note that countries that have historically used HCQ (for malaria) are bound to have a lower death rate (generally) because they have much younger populations. And they are more likely to use HCQ now because of familiarity

Secondly i note that such general per country comparisons don't wash - for the specific reason above but also many other differences that make countries incomparable and may correlate with HCQ use.

Thirdly, if it turns out proven that HCQ reduces overall death rates (which can only be done with RCT) I'm not sure how that would be used in the west where doctors are very reluctant to provide prophylaxis for things like infections that only affect 5% of the population, and only badly effect 0.1% of population. I'd guess it would be used for subsets of people at specific risk, older health care workers etc.

Let me ask you: if you were in charge and pushed through wide use of HCQ against consensus medical advice, what would you do when, eventually, it was established that overall that increased death rates by 10% (not because HCQ is dangerous, but because HCQ + severe COVID is more dangerous than severe COVID)?

these decisions are just not easy to make; it is uncertain and people do the best they can.

Quote from THHuxleynew

HCQ against consensus medical advice

I didn't know there was a consensus.

Association of American Physicians & Surgeons

https://arizonadailyindependen…uine-in-new-court-filing/

https://justthenews.com/politi…ne-key-defeating-covid-19

and so on.

3 senators send letter to FDA Hahn re HCQ

"

Tuesday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) co-authored a letter to Commissioner Stephen Hahn of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

calling out the agency and requesting more information regarding its revocation of the Emergency Use Authorization (EAU)

for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in treating COVID-19.

U.S. Sens. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Mike Lee (R-UT) also signed the letter.

https://thetexan.news/ted-cruz…e-directly-costing-lives/

Doctor suggests cheap, readily available anti-virals, HCQ and others, are effective

and vaccines may not be necessary, but bureaucratic and media impediments

prolong the Covid shutdowns and exacerbate the economic damage --

What They're Not Telling You | COVID-19

A disturbing look at how compliance to vaccine mandates may be enforced, and

extended to curtail other unrelated personal freedoms --

As COVID-1984 Accelerates, Bill Gates Blames ‘Freedom’ For Spread of the Virus

Google creates fake headlines to raise Covid concerns?

Quote from oldguy

I didn't know there was a consensus.

Association of American Physicians & Surgeons

https://arizonadailyindependen…uine-in-new-court-filing/

https://justthenews.com/politi…ne-key-defeating-covid-19

and so on.

Display More

I don't know either, I have not looked at it closely, in the US. But AAPS supporting something different does not prevent a consensus. AAPS are small and have weird politically fringe ideas, and have held minority controversial positions on a number of topics:

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association founded in 1944. The group was reported to have about 5,000 members in 2014. The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. It is opposed to the Affordable Care Act and other forms of universal health insurance.

The internet can be surfed as a whole collection of disparate echo chambers, where everyone sees good professional support for any idea they care to advocate, simply because you will get 5% of the population (scientists as well) advocating it.

To be fair, the HCQ decision is not black and white. HCQ makes a good on paper case as a possibly useful antiviral, the evidence to say it does not work if given very early is not there - but then giving it very early is quite difficult, and the evidence for it working given early is not there. Doctors like things they can use for dying patients in their hospitals and don't like healthy patients taking powerful drugs.

The people who make these decisions are less influenced by good-sounding observational studies and more by RCTs than most people, including us here. I've tried to indicate why that should be. I think in the US the shame is this medical decision has got caught up in politics.

THH

You might try to gauge consensus or lack of it in the US by looking at professional associations, filtering for large non-political ones, filtering again for those you think have most direct info:

https://www.meditec.com/resour…sional-associations-list/

Unfortunately I think some might claim in teh US that the whole medical establishment is politically biassed?

THH

Interesting strand of comment in UK today. Idea that Trump was popular because he was left wing - in terms of his campaign promises - but then he did not follow through on these. Same strand however claims that the US is an inherently quite left wing country which has been in hoc to a right-wing biassed corrrupt political system.

Can't quite see it, but it exposes some of the contradictions around current US politics. Money <===> right wing is not a stupid connection to make, and Trump promising policies no longer in hoc to interest groups does make him a plausible left wing challenger.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/ar…more-left-wing-than-biden

THH

Duncan/Dardik [Jr.] COVID-19 efforts

https://www.depts.ttu.edu/phas…k/InstructionalVideos.php

Spitting may help turn the tide.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health…rect-covid-test-1.5693375

Vaccines to follow.

https://www.nationalgeographic…-latest-developments-cvd/

DR Zelenko remedy study Saudi Arabia.

https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…08.16.20175752v1.full.pdf