By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
I'm quite surprised nobody has picked up on this, especially the more educated posters, quite a lot of posts about a vaccine, In the beginning of this I was in the frame of mind, we are all going to die.
But when you look at the figures, it's nothing of the sort, compared to previous epidemics throughout the years.
If i were to say to you in 2018, that how do you think it would go that if we shut the hospitals and doctors surgery's down for say 5-6 months. Basically the ill, left at home to die.
I'm quite surprised nobody has picked up on this, especially the more educated posters, quite a lot of posts about a vaccine, In the beginning of this I was in the frame of mind, we are all going to die.
But when you look at the figures, it's nothing of the sort, compared to previous epidemics throughout the years.
If i were to say to you in 2018, that how do you think it would go that if we shut the hospitals and doctors surgery's down for say 5-6 months. Basically the ill, left at home to die.
[Post edited 22 May 2020 23:49]
As we traverse this crisis the very real problem is not the deaths, it is the life shortening impact of Covid-19 that is the more pressing issue. The deaths occupy our minds as they are an existential threat...however the life changing debilitations are a greater threat to our society and have a vastley greater range of affect (and eventual effect) upon our existence and psyche.
A vaccine is still not a likely thing as most trials end in "failure" but we still hope that this can be achieved ... even more so with the unprecedented money and effort being thrown in this direction.
STAY HOME, STAY SAFE!
The economy is a distraction - if we are dying we ain't buying... so the very same businesses will go to the wall whether or not we open up or not. Do not be fooled by the free market capitalists as they do not care if you die they just want your money...so remember if we are dying we ain't buying therefore
STAY HOME, STAY SAFE!
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
I suggest that you actually read the study if that is what you think. There are headlines all over the world proclaiming 100,000 patient study. In fact it is a retrospective study of about 20,000, 10,000 with treatments and 10,000 patients chosen from the other 81144 ptients. Get that first of all "chosen" by the study group. Then you need to read the conclusion which states that those medicines could not be recommended for use with COVID-19. Except for this rider "Our study has several limitations. The association of decreased survival with hydroxychloroquine or chloro-quine treatment regimens should be interpreted cautiously. Due to the observational study design, we cannot exclude the possibility of unmeasured con-founding factors, although we have reassuringly noted consistency between the primary analysis and the propensity score matched analyses. Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Get that last last part, despite the headlines "Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Did you think that I had not already read the actual study document. It looks like for Chloroquine they may even have included patients from that very bad Brazilian study where they used twice the recommended dose.
Because it wasn't a real time study, they had to "estimate" how ill the patients were and everybody already knows that they give those medicines when the patients are already very ill as a last resort. Note also that no Zinc was used which is what actually controls the virus spread in the the body. HCQ and CQ only facilitate the Zinc uptake. In the study I quoted last week it was the Zinc which brought about a 50% improvement in all aspects of the patients condition. The other study I quoted where the cases per million population of 65,000 was 90% less than the country's average was of course all those people with Lupus and Arthritis taking HCQ. Which acted as a prophyllactic.
So another study paid for by the big pharmaceutical companies that supposedly disproves HCQ + Azithromycin + Zinc Sulphate works coming shortly after President Trump said he was taking it. Did you know that Senator Amy Klobuchar and her husband both took HCQ and it saved her husbands life?
I suggest that you actually read the study if that is what you think. There are headlines all over the world proclaiming 100,000 patient study. In fact it is a retrospective study of about 20,000, 10,000 with treatments and 10,000 patients chosen from the other 81144 ptients. Get that first of all "chosen" by the study group. Then you need to read the conclusion which states that those medicines could not be recommended for use with COVID-19. Except for this rider "Our study has several limitations. The association of decreased survival with hydroxychloroquine or chloro-quine treatment regimens should be interpreted cautiously. Due to the observational study design, we cannot exclude the possibility of unmeasured con-founding factors, although we have reassuringly noted consistency between the primary analysis and the propensity score matched analyses. Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Get that last last part, despite the headlines "Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Did you think that I had not already read the actual study document. It looks like for Chloroquine they may even have included patients from that very bad Brazilian study where they used twice the recommended dose.
Because it wasn't a real time study, they had to "estimate" how ill the patients were and everybody already knows that they give those medicines when the patients are already very ill as a last resort. Note also that no Zinc was used which is what actually controls the virus spread in the the body. HCQ and CQ only facilitate the Zinc uptake. In the study I quoted last week it was the Zinc which brought about a 50% improvement in all aspects of the patients condition. The other study I quoted where the cases per million population of 65,000 was 90% less than the country's average was of course all those people with Lupus and Arthritis taking HCQ. Which acted as a prophyllactic.
So another study paid for by the big pharmaceutical companies that supposedly disproves HCQ + Azithromycin + Zinc Sulphate works coming shortly after President Trump said he was taking it. Did you know that Senator Amy Klobuchar and her husband both took HCQ and it saved her husbands life?
I suggest that you actually read the study if that is what you think. There are headlines all over the world proclaiming 100,000 patient study. In fact it is a retrospective study of about 20,000, 10,000 with treatments and 10,000 patients chosen from the other 81144 ptients. Get that first of all "chosen" by the study group. Then you need to read the conclusion which states that those medicines could not be recommended for use with COVID-19. Except for this rider "Our study has several limitations. The association of decreased survival with hydroxychloroquine or chloro-quine treatment regimens should be interpreted cautiously. Due to the observational study design, we cannot exclude the possibility of unmeasured con-founding factors, although we have reassuringly noted consistency between the primary analysis and the propensity score matched analyses. Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Get that last last part, despite the headlines "Nevertheless, a cause-and-effect relationship between drug therapy and survival should not be inferred."
Did you think that I had not already read the actual study document. It looks like for Chloroquine they may even have included patients from that very bad Brazilian study where they used twice the recommended dose.
Because it wasn't a real time study, they had to "estimate" how ill the patients were and everybody already knows that they give those medicines when the patients are already very ill as a last resort. Note also that no Zinc was used which is what actually controls the virus spread in the the body. HCQ and CQ only facilitate the Zinc uptake. In the study I quoted last week it was the Zinc which brought about a 50% improvement in all aspects of the patients condition. The other study I quoted where the cases per million population of 65,000 was 90% less than the country's average was of course all those people with Lupus and Arthritis taking HCQ. Which acted as a prophyllactic.
So another study paid for by the big pharmaceutical companies that supposedly disproves HCQ + Azithromycin + Zinc Sulphate works coming shortly after President Trump said he was taking it. Did you know that Senator Amy Klobuchar and her husband both took HCQ and it saved her husbands life?
... yes they are aware of the limitations and it is curious that you use a an included Brazilian study to undermine this yet you were VERY supportive of the most ridiculed HCQ "report" by that mad frenchman. I will also point out that even though I know nothing of the Brazilian study they state that this study was a double-blind study - which are the gold standard type of study.
As to the addition of zinc, vitamin C, etc at what point will you give up moving from one miraculous additive to Azithromycin in the attempt to promote this unsuitable "cure" for Covid 19?.
Additionally we both know that anecdotal "evidence" is seriously flawed and possibly worthless - doubly so if it comes from a politician.
Fod for though from the document...
"Implications of all the available evidence We found no evidence of benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine when used either alone or with a macrolide. Previous evidence was derived from either small anecdotal studies or inconclusive small randomised trials. Our study included a large number of patients across multiple geographic regions and provides the most robust real-world evidence to date on the usefulness of these treatment regimens. Although observational studies cannot fully account for unmeasured confounding factors, our findings suggest not only an absence of therapeutic benefit but also potential harm with the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine drug regimens (with or without a macrolide) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19."
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
Did you read that one as well? Take a look at the last line of Table 1 number 7.
No mate, this one I skimmed after reading an article pointing out the slightly poistive results. The papers are usually heavy going... at least for a dullard such as myself. So on this occasion I skimmed to save my head from aching trying to assimilate it all - I read the methods, results, conclusions, figure 2 and skimmed discussions section.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
No mate, this one I skimmed after reading an article pointing out the slightly poistive results. The papers are usually heavy going... at least for a dullard such as myself. So on this occasion I skimmed to save my head from aching trying to assimilate it all - I read the methods, results, conclusions, figure 2 and skimmed discussions section.
Item 7 in table 1 is the Baseline Clinical Characteristic of patients hospitalised with Invasive Mechanical Ventilation. As we all know the survival rate for ventilated patients is very poor 30% - 40%. So the Remdesivir sample had 125 ventilated patients and the control group had 147. As the control group only received a placebo treatment what do you think of the chances of the extra 22 ventilated patients in the control group surviving? The study was pe-biased towards a good outcome for Remdesivir by patient selection.
Item 7 in table 1 is the Baseline Clinical Characteristic of patients hospitalised with Invasive Mechanical Ventilation. As we all know the survival rate for ventilated patients is very poor 30% - 40%. So the Remdesivir sample had 125 ventilated patients and the control group had 147. As the control group only received a placebo treatment what do you think of the chances of the extra 22 ventilated patients in the control group surviving? The study was pe-biased towards a good outcome for Remdesivir by patient selection.
Surely your not suggesting that medical professionals manipulated a medical study? What could they possibly have to gain?
No mate, this one I skimmed after reading an article pointing out the slightly poistive results. The papers are usually heavy going... at least for a dullard such as myself. So on this occasion I skimmed to save my head from aching trying to assimilate it all - I read the methods, results, conclusions, figure 2 and skimmed discussions section.
Did you bother to check out the sponsors and Doctors running this study? NIH, the people who wrote the crap HCQ VA study are sponsoring this study. 8 Doctors are being paid by Gilead the creator & manufacturer of Remdesivir and one is being paid other big pharmaceuticals including Smith Kline. Of course we can expect a completely unbiased study from these people can't we?
Did you bother to check out the sponsors and Doctors running this study? NIH, the people who wrote the crap HCQ VA study are sponsoring this study. 8 Doctors are being paid by Gilead the creator & manufacturer of Remdesivir and one is being paid other big pharmaceuticals including Smith Kline. Of course we can expect a completely unbiased study from these people can't we?
People are looking for positives mate, you've spent 2 mths trawling the internet looking for every negative angle you can find. We all know what a disaster the government have made of this, if people want to look at things with a glimmer of positivity, good for them I say.
People are looking for positives mate, you've spent 2 mths trawling the internet looking for every negative angle you can find. We all know what a disaster the government have made of this, if people want to look at things with a glimmer of positivity, good for them I say.
You obviously haven't been reading my posts if you think that. I posted on the success of HCQ +Zinc over a month ago before Trump mentioned it. I posted on the success of Invermectin + Doxycycline, which the Professor rubished and called the Doctor a liar. I posted on the success of HCQ + Azithromycin, HCQ + Azithromycin + Zinc Sulphate and Chloroquin & Zinc.
I posted on how well Czechia have done using home made masks.
What I was also posting about was the resistance to using all of them here.
Item 7 in table 1 is the Baseline Clinical Characteristic of patients hospitalised with Invasive Mechanical Ventilation. As we all know the survival rate for ventilated patients is very poor 30% - 40%. So the Remdesivir sample had 125 ventilated patients and the control group had 147. As the control group only received a placebo treatment what do you think of the chances of the extra 22 ventilated patients in the control group surviving? The study was pe-biased towards a good outcome for Remdesivir by patient selection.
Whoa ther you are cherry picking data. Figure 2 highlights your fact (graph E) and states that for ECMO the placebo scored best...in all other areas (graphs A - D) inluding the overall figure the drug provided a better outcome. These figures are proportional outcomes.
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
You obviously haven't been reading my posts if you think that. I posted on the success of HCQ +Zinc over a month ago before Trump mentioned it. I posted on the success of Invermectin + Doxycycline, which the Professor rubished and called the Doctor a liar. I posted on the success of HCQ + Azithromycin, HCQ + Azithromycin + Zinc Sulphate and Chloroquin & Zinc.
I posted on how well Czechia have done using home made masks.
What I was also posting about was the resistance to using all of them here.
You are quite correct, I gave up reading your posts quite a while ago due to the extreme negativity contained therein.
You are quite correct, I gave up reading your posts quite a while ago due to the extreme negativity contained therein.
I also posted on the apparent success of Remdesivir quite a while ago, but now I am not quite so sure. It is being pushed by the MSM at the expense of the very cheap drugs that doctors are saying are working and that worries me. The pharmaceutical companies want exensive anti-virals and Vaccines, but in the mean time it looks like people are dying needlessly.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
