Myself as well Jason. The pharmacy board appeared to be a political response 
here, rather than medical. If Hydro doesn't help it doesn't, and if it does it 
does. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Aug 1, 2020 5:36 pm
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate

I agree it is unfortunate that what should purely be a medical/risk management 
decision has become politicized.

Fortunately the Ohio's governor intervened to make the pharmacy board reversed 
their ban. Whether any particular treatment is effective or not, the decision 
must remain one made by the patient and their doctor, in my opinion.
Jason

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:52 PM <spudboy...@aol.com> wrote:

Yeah Jason, it's shouldn't be about ideology, but results. However, human 
nature is what it is, and often "faith" overwhelms facts. If someone hates 
Orange Man enough, and see Covid as something secondary or tertiary, they won't 
care. Even Scott Adams (Dilbert) was vehemently contemptuous of 
Hydroxychloroquine as useless or damaging, and spoke against it as of three 
weeks ago. Adams, changed his opinion based on new studies. Adams is not a 
physician or a scientist but always uses their papers and voices in his 
analysis. 12 min video follows. Adams is big league in math and science, but 
was an investment banker as first background. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCRGYtMgn4c


-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>
To: Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2020 7:12 pm
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate

There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at giving it 
early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was beneficial. This 
site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where it is 
given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from the viral 
replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase (see page 2)). Even 
then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even when it is given late.
Given the well-established safety record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:

|  | HCQ works | HCQ doesn't work |
| HCQ widely dispensed | 10,000s of thousands of lives saved | $20 wasted per 
patient |
| HCQ use restricted | 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths | $0 wasted per 
patient |


Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the decision is 
clear.
Jason


On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 5:52 PM PGC <multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote:



On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 3:58:02 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 30 Jul 2020, at 22:59, PGC <multipl...@gmail.com> wrote:


On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 10:52:09 PM UTC+2 Brent wrote:

 
 
 On 7/30/2020 1:02 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
  
 Refute this Telmo- 
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study 
  https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext 
  One viewer here indicated this was not a study-but it is a study indeed 
concluding the benefits of Hydro.  
  Now what do I think? If it works it works, and if it doesn't it doesn't.   
 
 That's just false.  Some things work on some infections in some people using 
some protocols of care.  


Agreed. Ongoing large scale international clinical trials are what they are. 
Nobody claims that they or the papers in their wake are perfect, but to pretend 
that a few tiny studies are "in need of refutation" or that the world's 
epidemiological community is orchestrating conspiracies without evidence like 
some on Twitter and on social media tend to peddle, is naive or evidence of the 
effectivity of disinformation, not evidence of effectivity of medication. 

OK in principle. But we can also look at the map of the evolution of the virus 
in country using it and not using it. My own country has used it, France has 
used it, then change its mind, a number of time.We can also take into account 
that the US FDA has lied about “not evidence of effectivity of cannabis” since 
about a century. It is only very recently that it has admit its effectivity for 
some disease in some public way (it accepted it more discreetly for some rich 
patients since long though).



But if Telmo and/or Mitch need, they can always get in touch with their closest 
epidemiologists/docs and ask for the data and emails, and inform the 
coordinating committee of their findings and worries, citing who they wish. 
While data of the majority of ongoing trials and appropriate epidemiological 
discourse may not be accessible on the net or published ("ongoing" being 
somewhat relevant...), it isn't classified or anything. PGC


I have done that a little bit, but it is hard to interpret. A biologist friend 
of mine seems to believe that the Canadian studies showing that 
Hydroxychoroquine is better than Remdesevir is rather serious. The amount of 
money hidden in the pharmaceutical debate is so big that the misinformation is 
perpetual. But you are right: it is not classified, and even just googling on 
the net shows that hydroxychloroquine, when used convenably, *might* be better 
than some other medication, and perhaps cannabis is still better (as more and 
more studies seem to show).

If you, Mitch, Telmo, your biologist friend, or Trump have data concerning 
effectiveness of HCQ with significant sample sizes in randomized 
placebo-controlled trials, and can demonstrate that said trials are free of 
epidemiologists' long lists of possible issues/bias, then the only thing 
stopping you guys from stepping forward and making world history as 
non-professionals is your own minds. PGC


  -- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/84ac1e66-92eb-4cf8-85e7-0f9e74f1c3ceo%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhR3999FBr5sf25kFAbGmFrR-zm71NyJs8yXac9jFb%3D4Q%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1637435077.265066.1596328190577%40mail.yahoo.com.

Reply via email to