Democrats Refuse To Follow The "Science" on COVID-19

[jc456]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I am still waiting for just one person to provide a link where HCL was used properly and it did not reduce the problems with COVID-19.. The Democrats are lying and not following the science.

I can’t think of a more idiotic question. If it was used properly then it would be effective in treating the symptoms it was designed to treat. Who do you think you are fooling with that kind of question?!

It’s a lazy mental crutch used to justify ignoring information counter to his beliefs.

Any negative study wasn’t done properly. Any positive study was. Doesn’t matter how the study was actually done.

I wont repeat myself for an idiot ----> Democrats Refuse To Follow The "Science" on COVID-19

Like I said, this is a lot of text to fancy up a confirmation bias. You only consider data that confirms your belief and ignore everything else.

You make up excuses for why you can ignore contradictory information, like you made up characteristics of the studies I showed you. When asked to substantiate your allegation, you ignored me. You’ve been caught making things up before, citing studies that directly contradict you and failing to substantiate your claims.

You’ve also claimed to be a scientist but have shown very few traits that a scientist would actually have.

Try again Moron...

Look into when the drug was used in the trial. Look at PT conditions and disease progression at the time of use. You obviously havent a clue about medical trials and how to interpret them.

Funny how you make wild ass accusations and yet fail to back up any of it...

Okay. Tell me. What was “PT” conditions and disease progression at time of use?

Bet you a nickel you won’t because you are just making this up.

LOL... You dont even know what these mean... Priceless..

PT= Patient
What was the condition of the patient? Was the PT already in a cytokine storm (IE; inflammation of lung and heart tissues, active secondary infections, etc) or was the disease in its early stages (IE; elevated temp and little or no inflammation of the tissues, no secondary infections, etc)?

This why trying to explain things to untrained people is almost pointless... You do not have a medical frame of reference to draw from. These conditions are important in the treatment of the disease and what you use to treat it with.

You’re sprinkling in random abbreviations without context. You’ve already used the wrong abbreviation for hydroxychloroquine.

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

I was under the impression you knew these things but you were actually asking me because you didn’t know. This proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about, just making shit up.

For the record, a drug that only works in the extreme early states is dramatically limited efficacy and the fact that you’d have to exclude anyone with anything but minimal symptoms is probably why you can claim efficacy, because you aren’t giving it to sick people who would actually have an adverse outcome. All patients in these studies were randomized at time of diagnosis and less than 24-48 of hospitalization. You can’t give a drug until they present.

WOOSH.... Right over your damn head.... Good Luck.. I'm not wasting further time explaining the basics to you..

 

[Billy_Bob]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

 

[colfax_m]

I am still waiting for just one person to provide a link where HCL was used properly and it did not reduce the problems with COVID-19.. The Democrats are lying and not following the science.

I can’t think of a more idiotic question. If it was used properly then it would be effective in treating the symptoms it was designed to treat. Who do you think you are fooling with that kind of question?!

It’s a lazy mental crutch used to justify ignoring information counter to his beliefs.

Any negative study wasn’t done properly. Any positive study was. Doesn’t matter how the study was actually done.

I wont repeat myself for an idiot ----> Democrats Refuse To Follow The "Science" on COVID-19

Like I said, this is a lot of text to fancy up a confirmation bias. You only consider data that confirms your belief and ignore everything else.

You make up excuses for why you can ignore contradictory information, like you made up characteristics of the studies I showed you. When asked to substantiate your allegation, you ignored me. You’ve been caught making things up before, citing studies that directly contradict you and failing to substantiate your claims.

You’ve also claimed to be a scientist but have shown very few traits that a scientist would actually have.

Try again Moron...

Look into when the drug was used in the trial. Look at PT conditions and disease progression at the time of use. You obviously havent a clue about medical trials and how to interpret them.

Funny how you make wild ass accusations and yet fail to back up any of it...

Okay. Tell me. What was “PT” conditions and disease progression at time of use?

Bet you a nickel you won’t because you are just making this up.

LOL... You dont even know what these mean... Priceless..

PT= Patient
What was the condition of the patient? Was the PT already in a cytokine storm (IE; inflammation of lung and heart tissues, active secondary infections, etc) or was the disease in its early stages (IE; elevated temp and little or no inflammation of the tissues, no secondary infections, etc)?

This why trying to explain things to untrained people is almost pointless... You do not have a medical frame of reference to draw from. These conditions are important in the treatment of the disease and what you use to treat it with.

You’re sprinkling in random abbreviations without context. You’ve already used the wrong abbreviation for hydroxychloroquine.

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

I was under the impression you knew these things but you were actually asking me because you didn’t know. This proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about, just making shit up.

For the record, a drug that only works in the extreme early states is dramatically limited efficacy and the fact that you’d have to exclude anyone with anything but minimal symptoms is probably why you can claim efficacy, because you aren’t giving it to sick people who would actually have an adverse outcome. All patients in these studies were randomized at time of diagnosis and less than 24-48 of hospitalization. You can’t give a drug until they present.

WOOSH.... Right over your damn head.... Good Luck.. I'm not wasting further time explaining the basics to you..

You can’t explain your position because it’s meritless.

If you had a rational case to make, this would be trivial. You don’t, so you can’t.

Your answer is that HCQ is effective in people with mild disease is a serious weakness. People with mild disease are unlikely to adverse outcomes so your obscuring the effectiveness if any exists.

Let me ask you something, you don’t actually provide any medical care, so you?

 

[colfax_m]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

When all else fails... Deflect your own ignorance......

Democrats own this type of crap.... Simply becasue they deny the science....

 

[Billy_Bob]

I am still waiting for just one person to provide a link where HCL was used properly and it did not reduce the problems with COVID-19.. The Democrats are lying and not following the science.

I can’t think of a more idiotic question. If it was used properly then it would be effective in treating the symptoms it was designed to treat. Who do you think you are fooling with that kind of question?!

It’s a lazy mental crutch used to justify ignoring information counter to his beliefs.

Any negative study wasn’t done properly. Any positive study was. Doesn’t matter how the study was actually done.

I wont repeat myself for an idiot ----> Democrats Refuse To Follow The "Science" on COVID-19

Like I said, this is a lot of text to fancy up a confirmation bias. You only consider data that confirms your belief and ignore everything else.

You make up excuses for why you can ignore contradictory information, like you made up characteristics of the studies I showed you. When asked to substantiate your allegation, you ignored me. You’ve been caught making things up before, citing studies that directly contradict you and failing to substantiate your claims.

You’ve also claimed to be a scientist but have shown very few traits that a scientist would actually have.

Try again Moron...

Look into when the drug was used in the trial. Look at PT conditions and disease progression at the time of use. You obviously havent a clue about medical trials and how to interpret them.

Funny how you make wild ass accusations and yet fail to back up any of it...

Okay. Tell me. What was “PT” conditions and disease progression at time of use?

Bet you a nickel you won’t because you are just making this up.

LOL... You dont even know what these mean... Priceless..

PT= Patient
What was the condition of the patient? Was the PT already in a cytokine storm (IE; inflammation of lung and heart tissues, active secondary infections, etc) or was the disease in its early stages (IE; elevated temp and little or no inflammation of the tissues, no secondary infections, etc)?

This why trying to explain things to untrained people is almost pointless... You do not have a medical frame of reference to draw from. These conditions are important in the treatment of the disease and what you use to treat it with.

You’re sprinkling in random abbreviations without context. You’ve already used the wrong abbreviation for hydroxychloroquine.

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

I was under the impression you knew these things but you were actually asking me because you didn’t know. This proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about, just making shit up.

For the record, a drug that only works in the extreme early states is dramatically limited efficacy and the fact that you’d have to exclude anyone with anything but minimal symptoms is probably why you can claim efficacy, because you aren’t giving it to sick people who would actually have an adverse outcome. All patients in these studies were randomized at time of diagnosis and less than 24-48 of hospitalization. You can’t give a drug until they present.

WOOSH.... Right over your damn head.... Good Luck.. I'm not wasting further time explaining the basics to you..

You can’t explain your position because it’s meritless.

If you had a rational case to make, this would be trivial. You don’t, so you can’t.

Your answer is that HCQ is effective in people with mild disease is a serious weakness. People with mild disease are unlikely to adverse outcomes so your obscuring the effectiveness if any exists.

Let me ask you something, you don’t actually provide any medical care, so you?

"You can’t explain your position because it’s meritless."


Only in your febal mind.... Because you fail to understand it, its meritless.... Love that circular firing squad logic...

 

[colfax_m]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

When all else fails... Deflect your own ignorance......

Democrats own this type of crap.... Simply becasue they deny the science....

You haven’t provided any evidence to support your contention. Where’s the RCT for hydroxychloroquine for mild disease?

 

[colfax_m]

I am still waiting for just one person to provide a link where HCL was used properly and it did not reduce the problems with COVID-19.. The Democrats are lying and not following the science.

I can’t think of a more idiotic question. If it was used properly then it would be effective in treating the symptoms it was designed to treat. Who do you think you are fooling with that kind of question?!

It’s a lazy mental crutch used to justify ignoring information counter to his beliefs.

Any negative study wasn’t done properly. Any positive study was. Doesn’t matter how the study was actually done.

I wont repeat myself for an idiot ----> Democrats Refuse To Follow The "Science" on COVID-19

Like I said, this is a lot of text to fancy up a confirmation bias. You only consider data that confirms your belief and ignore everything else.

You make up excuses for why you can ignore contradictory information, like you made up characteristics of the studies I showed you. When asked to substantiate your allegation, you ignored me. You’ve been caught making things up before, citing studies that directly contradict you and failing to substantiate your claims.

You’ve also claimed to be a scientist but have shown very few traits that a scientist would actually have.

Try again Moron...

Look into when the drug was used in the trial. Look at PT conditions and disease progression at the time of use. You obviously havent a clue about medical trials and how to interpret them.

Funny how you make wild ass accusations and yet fail to back up any of it...

Okay. Tell me. What was “PT” conditions and disease progression at time of use?

Bet you a nickel you won’t because you are just making this up.

LOL... You dont even know what these mean... Priceless..

PT= Patient
What was the condition of the patient? Was the PT already in a cytokine storm (IE; inflammation of lung and heart tissues, active secondary infections, etc) or was the disease in its early stages (IE; elevated temp and little or no inflammation of the tissues, no secondary infections, etc)?

This why trying to explain things to untrained people is almost pointless... You do not have a medical frame of reference to draw from. These conditions are important in the treatment of the disease and what you use to treat it with.

You’re sprinkling in random abbreviations without context. You’ve already used the wrong abbreviation for hydroxychloroquine.

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

I was under the impression you knew these things but you were actually asking me because you didn’t know. This proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about, just making shit up.

For the record, a drug that only works in the extreme early states is dramatically limited efficacy and the fact that you’d have to exclude anyone with anything but minimal symptoms is probably why you can claim efficacy, because you aren’t giving it to sick people who would actually have an adverse outcome. All patients in these studies were randomized at time of diagnosis and less than 24-48 of hospitalization. You can’t give a drug until they present.

WOOSH.... Right over your damn head.... Good Luck.. I'm not wasting further time explaining the basics to you..

You can’t explain your position because it’s meritless.

If you had a rational case to make, this would be trivial. You don’t, so you can’t.

Your answer is that HCQ is effective in people with mild disease is a serious weakness. People with mild disease are unlikely to adverse outcomes so your obscuring the effectiveness if any exists.

Let me ask you something, you don’t actually provide any medical care, so you?

"You can’t explain your position because it’s meritless."


Only in your febal mind.... Because you fail to understand it, its meritless.... Love that circular firing squad logic...

Do you actually provide medical care to anyone?

 

[Billy_Bob]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

When all else fails... Deflect your own ignorance......

Democrats own this type of crap.... Simply becasue they deny the science....

You haven’t provided any evidence to support your contention. Where’s the RCT for hydroxychloroquine for mild disease?

Obviously you did not read the 53 papers cited in the video.... Get back to me when you do...

 

[colfax_m]

I have far more training in this than you. Far more. You’re little weekend course isn’t much compared to my years of experience.

ahhhh the internet profession of made up degrees yet again.

Yep.... He doesn't have a damn clue and I just buried him with basic things! Feeling like I need to buy a new box of crayons to try and communicate with him....

You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

When all else fails... Deflect your own ignorance......

Democrats own this type of crap.... Simply becasue they deny the science....

You haven’t provided any evidence to support your contention. Where’s the RCT for hydroxychloroquine for mild disease?

Obviously you did not read the 53 papers cited in the video.... Get back to me when you do...

I probably read most of them but the video doesn’t actually cite any of them, they just say they exist. No authors, dates, publication locations.

Do you get your medical literature from Fox News or from legitimate resources?

I’ve never seen a RCT in early outpatients with hydroxuchlorquine. Have you?

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

"Science" is not a consensus industry- no matter who the players are.

Science predicted that 2.2 million Americans would die.

Boy was science wrong.

The leftist have been about as accurate with covid as they have with global warming.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

I am still waiting for just one person to provide a link where HCL was used properly and it did not reduce the problems with COVID-19.. The Democrats are lying and not following the science.

I can’t think of a more idiotic question. If it was used properly then it would be effective in treating the symptoms it was designed to treat. Who do you think you are fooling with that kind of question?!

It’s a lazy mental crutch used to justify ignoring information counter to his beliefs.

Any negative study wasn’t done properly. Any positive study was. Doesn’t matter how the study was actually done.

Sounds a lot like the leftist and global warming doesn't it?

 

[colfax_m]

"Science" is not a consensus industry- no matter who the players are.

Science predicted that 2.2 million Americans would die.

Boy was science wrong.

The leftist have been about as accurate with covid as they have with global warming.

Ha! Y’all called global warming a hoax too.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

"Science" is not a consensus industry- no matter who the players are.

Science predicted that 2.2 million Americans would die.

Boy was science wrong.

The leftist have been about as accurate with covid as they have with global warming.

Ha! Y’all called global warming a hoax too.

Let's see if you will answer the question every leftist ignores:

Why did Michael Manns team at Penn State manipulate the temperature data to show a spike in the now infamous hockey stick graph?

 

[colfax_m]

"Science" is not a consensus industry- no matter who the players are.

Science predicted that 2.2 million Americans would die.

Boy was science wrong.

The leftist have been about as accurate with covid as they have with global warming.

Ha! Y’all called global warming a hoax too.

Let's see if you will answer the question every leftist ignores:

Why did Michael Manns team at Penn State manipulate the temperature data to show a spike in the now infamous hockey stick graph?

He didn’t.

 

[Ken Mac]

Interestingly low dose HCL is keeping doctors and nurses from getting this full blown disease.

I keep a shiny rock in my pocket and I’ve never gotten COVID.

Interestingly my rock is as effective as hydroxychloroquine.

Id warn people away from taking HCL. That’s a strong acid.

HCL is hydrochloric acid. Don't be an asshole. Don't spread disinformation.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Interestingly low dose HCL is keeping doctors and nurses from getting this full blown disease.

I keep a shiny rock in my pocket and I’ve never gotten COVID.

Interestingly my rock is as effective as hydroxychloroquine.

Id warn people away from taking HCL. That’s a strong acid.

HCL is hydrochloric acid. Don't be an asshole. Don't spread disinformation.

It is also the acronym for HydroxiCLoriquine.

 

[colfax_m]

Interestingly low dose HCL is keeping doctors and nurses from getting this full blown disease.

I keep a shiny rock in my pocket and I’ve never gotten COVID.

Interestingly my rock is as effective as hydroxychloroquine.

Id warn people away from taking HCL. That’s a strong acid.

HCL is hydrochloric acid. Don't be an asshole. Don't spread disinformation.

It is also the acronym for HydroxiCLoriquine.

Nope. It’s an acronym for hydrochloric acid. You would know that acronyms are very specific in medicine because confusing them can be extremely dangerous. Committees determine acceptable acronyms. HCL is not the acronym for hydroxychloroquine. HCQ is. You don’t want to confuse hydroxychloroquine with hydrochloric acid.

This is basic patient safety, you’d know this if you had any medical experience.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Interestingly low dose HCL is keeping doctors and nurses from getting this full blown disease.

I keep a shiny rock in my pocket and I’ve never gotten COVID.

Interestingly my rock is as effective as hydroxychloroquine.

Id warn people away from taking HCL. That’s a strong acid.

HCL is hydrochloric acid. Don't be an asshole. Don't spread disinformation.

It is also the acronym for HydroxiCLoriquine.

Nope. It’s an acronym for hydrochloric acid. You would know that acronyms are very specific in medicine because confusing them can be extremely dangerous. Committees determine acceptable acronyms. HCL is not the acronym for hydroxychloroquine. HCQ is. You don’t want to confuse hydroxychloroquine with hydrochloric acid.

This is basic patient safety, you’d know this if you had any medical experience.

Again, There are competing acronyms in medicine and this is why using the drugs name is important and why doctors use the specific name and dosages, not the acronym.. Epic fail again...

Why do you insist on lying?