Curious...are any of you that were touting Hydroxycholorouquine back in the spring, still believing that it is a drug to treat Covid-19?
All the videos and links of "Doctors" that said it was successful in treating Covid-19, that you posted. Do you still think those people were correct, or otherwise?
- - - Updated - - -
Yup, there is a certain element of grade school name calling that some like to lead with.Originally Posted by Hawkman
I'm not a Dr. so, I have no idea. I don't recall touting any treatment as a cure or doing any good. But, if a Dr. said it was helpful or possibly of some use against this virus, why would I or anyone else question him/her?
If I recall correctly, many people that took it reported feeling much better afterward. Why are you asking.... and what point are you trying to make?
So, just because a Dr. says something is helpful, or useful on a Youtube video, is not a sole reason to believe it. First you should find out what kind of Dr. that person is and next you should find out if that Dr. has published any studies, been credible or have license suspended, etc. A General Practitioner Dr. is not the same knowledge level on virus as an Epidemiologist, Intensivists, etc. There were posts in the spring from some GP in Houston and others touting HCL, while many trials, epidemiologists, etc. said it showed no significant benefit with COVID.
If Hydroxychloroquine was so good, as per these GP's, forensic Psychologistss, etc. then why would there be this need for a vaccine to be produced? Why would the President and Guliani be treated with Remdesivir and Regeneron Cocktail and not Hydroxy, if it was so beneficial?
I just want to see if those who touted Hydroxy, can now recognize that it wasn't any type of wonder drug or beneficial and that those videos and sources they so believed in were incorrect?
I also wonder where and who told you that many people who took it reported feeling better afterwards? I dont recall any of that from any impartial trials that I read about.
I hear Andrew Yang is running for NYC mayor, I'll be following that. Out of all the candidates I've seen recently he's the only one who's addressing the real problems in America (politicial division and automation putting masses of people out of work, and it'll be only getting worse). Of course the DNC blackballed him for telling the truth.
Politics aside, if you could see what AI is already capable of, not only blue collar workers will be out of the job, but machines can put white collar jobs like doctors and lawyers out of work. AI has been able to detect cancers and diseases with higher accuracy than our best doctors can. At the rate technology is advancing, in another 10 years no jobs will be safe if machines can do it better.
Well, I just remember in the beginning of this thing that it was a drug that gained some acclaim as being productive in alleviating symptoms. I honestly don't know as I am not in the medical field.
After 10 months of this virus, it seems that no one still knows much... or is willing to be honest and up front with the general public about it.
Again, I don't recall Hydroxy being touted as a cure or wonder drug for CV19... just a drug that may help with symptoms. Is that a bad thing?
That begs the question: what becomes of us? Are we just going to be taken care of from cradle to grave? How? I see a "Logan's Run" scenario in the near future.
I thought I would share this with all of you. I'm on a bourbon forum and there is a scientist that has been keeping us informed of things. He works in the veterinary biology/ disease field. This is a few posts between us.
Someone posted that the Pfizer COVID vaccine is not being produced in the U. S. That is not true. It is being produced in the old Upjohn Building 41 manufacturing site in Portage, Michigan. I actually called a friend of mine that works at that facillity and it was confirmed. In fact, the first shipments will leave tomorrow morning. We had the CBS national news in town earlier this week to do a story on the vaccine production at this site. Pfizer will own multiple other vaccine production site around the globe so the vaccine is likely being produced elsewhere.
Albert Bourla did a good job as a CEO pushing his team to get this done ASAP. But then again, he is a veterinarian and knew that a vaccine was quickly doable based on that experience. Everyone that gets the vaccine should thank veterinary Medicine for the fundamental knowledge about corona viruses that allowed for this vaccine to be developed so quickly. They deserve as much credit as the medical profession. This vaccine is a true example of the what the One Health process can do.
It's good to hear from you. Your posts are always very informative.
Question: How concerned should we be about taking any of these vaccines? I know I will be on the very end of getting one of them, but should I be concerned about health issues/side effects afterward?
Quote
StarSurfer55
Enthusiast
StarSurfer55
Veteran Member
So I sat through the entire FDA advisory board meeting on Thursday. This was my fourth advisory board meeting to attend ( I have participated in one and sat in on two others prior to this). IT was a typical Advisory board meeting. The initial presentation by FDA always tells you which way the wind is blowing and theirs indicate that they were likely to approve. There overall consensus was that the vaccine was safe and effective in the target Study group of 18-55 year olds. The final vote was 17–4-1 with the four dissenting votes from person concerned that the was an insuffiicient number of 16-17 year olds included in the trial. Keep in mind that that study trial desigis done in collaboration with the FDA and is legally binding on both the sponsor and agency. Pfizer did expand the study to try to include the younger group as well as HIV, HCB and HCA positive individuals. There were concerns expressed about the adverse events in the two UK patients. It appers that one of them had an extreme food allergy but the link between that those types of allergies and the vaccine has not been determined. The other UK patient did not have these type of allergies. This was information that was stated as available at the time of the meeting. The sponsor indicated that the follow up studies would include individuals with these types of severe allergies.
At hit point in time, I would be careful if I had a previous anaphylactic type of allergic reaction. I woudl probably delay a vaccination until additional study data was available and after consultation with my physician.
One thing to keep in mind that the reporting of adverse events is driven by law. As an employee of an animal health company I am required to report any AEs within 24 hours. For example, I was sitting around the campfire with friends a few years ago when one casually mentioned that their 14 y/o cat had received one of our antibiotics and died a month later. Event thought the two events were likely not related, I am required to report the AE within 24 h. SO we spend the next 30 minutes with me getting all her information including her veterinarian’s name and contact info, as well as the specifics of the case. I then had to call our pharmacovigilance group to provide the information. Keep in mind that it is a criminal offense for me not to report the AE. This is the same model used in human medicine and is rigorously enforced by the agency. So I can tell you that everyone will be on point regarding any AEs associated with the vaccine and many will be reported that are not associated with the vaccine. The FDA takes its responsibility regarding efficacy and safety very seriously. As always, talk to your physician about any concerns but I personally consider the vaccine to be safe.
One other point that I will make to an otherwise lengthy response. Until the vaccine is available, make sure to wear your mask and practice social distancing. NO let downs. You do not want to be the person that stops practicing the precautions and get sick just before they could be vaccinated.
I'm curious as to where or how you developed the notion that "nobody knows much or is willing to be honest and up front with the general public"?
From the spring, it has been known that Sars-COV-2 enters in the nose and throat to the lungs and then the experiences were it attacks many parts of the body including heart, kidney, muscle and joints. It was also determined that the pathway to all those different areas of the body was by attaching to ACE-2 receptors in the bloodstream. So, best way to keep the virus from getting to your nose and throat is to keep it off your hands(because we touch our faces often) and keep airborne droplets from infected people's breath, away from an area where you could inhale them (hence masks reduce risk).
It has also been known that the anti-malaria drug showed no statistical significant improvement in Sars-COV-2 patients. The drug Remdesivir was shown to accelerate recovery back in April of this year as well. The Reproduction rate of Sars-COV-2 was also shown to be around 2.4-2.6, when left unchecked by distancing measures and other protections.
There has been a lot of accurate info available about the virus.
It s like Farming. in 1900, approximately 40% of the US workforce worked on farms. Then as machinery improved, the jobs shifted to where 4% of the US in 1970 were in Agriculture and 1.9% by 2000.
The trucking industry will lose jobs due to autonomous vehicles, but still will have to have some drivers in the workforce. Similar with assembly line jobs, etc. Medical stenographers have been replaced with dictation software. Breast cancer screening software reads mammograms incredibly accurately, but still needs a Radiologist to confirm the findings, so fewer such jobs. The workforce will shift to design, manufacture, maintenance and repair of automation and other things. People just need to be willing to look at new jobs as theirs become depleted.
Trump will take care of you. And when he dies, hopefully sooner rather than later, Ivanka will be your mommy.
I really don't know to be honest. It's an interesting thing to ponder, but also unpredictable because it's not something that is unique to the US, other countries, namely, China and Russia, are putting a lot of effort into the field of AI.
One thing we do know, is especially if history repeats itself, computers / machines will become better at anything humans can do. We have our limitations while theirs limits will just keep increasing on an exponential level. Humans won't be able to compete against something that does their jobs better than them and is cheaper (needs no rest, food, insurance, etc).
The country that develops a super-intelligent AI will become the new superpower. Most likely the US or China. We'll see job displacements on a mass level and the economy as we know it will be forever changed. Tech companies will of course dominate the landscape and hit all time high profits. Even programmers might work themselves out of a job, since they have an AI that can write its own code. Check this out, pretty cool actually but scary at the same time:
Thanks for sharing. Some really good points in there.
So, I am curious. Do you believe the opinions of the video in post #1 of this thread, or the opinions of this guy on the Bourbon forum (appears to be some kind of Veterinary Medical Research Scientist)? They seem to be quite different.
Amen.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
My wife is a Veterinarian and I value her opinion about this virus more than just about anything I read online.
Sigh. I will explain it like I am talking to a grade-schooler, since that seems to be about the level of maturity we are dealing with here.
Pharmacologically, hydroxychloroquine has side effects that are beneficial in treating vascular diseases. This was never in dispute.
COVID-19, in some cases, has effects that mirror vascular diseases.
It therefore follows that in certain cases, there is a coincidental benefit. It is the same way that aspirin is not "for" treating heart disease, but has coincidental side effects that help in some cases.
That does not mean hydroxychloroquine is "for" treating COVID-19, or that it will be successful all of the time, or that it is a primary treatment. But simply dismissing it out of hand only indicates willful ignorance of the scientific evidence, out of what I assume is a religion-like political fervor.
But that is the left for you. They are the party that ignores science in favor of religion. They have simply managed to disguise that to a large degree because their religion is the state.
See you Space Cowboy ...
I didn't watch the vid. I pay attention to the guy on the bourbon forum. He is always straight forward and non political.
Nobody could be this full of shit. It has to be an act.
You try so hard, but it all starts with insults of what you dont understand, then comes down to left and right for you. I'm not a liberal, not politically motivated in my thinking and actually more conservative politically. I'm talking about science and medicine that a segment of the population want to deny is evidence based.
COVID-19 doesnt "mirror vascular diseases" in some cases like you say. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread....COVID-19 's gateway into the bloodstream is ACE-2 receptors and from there can attack any area of the body that there is blood flow.
I was first made aware of this when I was told by physicians that Covid patients were experiencing endocarditis. The initial experience was respiratory ailments and fluid buildup in the lungs required draining, but then the endocarditis resulted in fluid buildup in the pericardium. From there the connection with ACE-2 was made. Different demographics have differing levels of ACE-2 receptors, but I'm sure you already know that info.
Hydroxychloroquiine was shown in multiple studies to not be effective in treating Covid-19 and even to the point where health authorities warned against its use and deemed it off label use. It was politicized as beneficial, but wasnt even used in the treatment plan of President Trump while at Walter Reed, when positive with COVID-19.
Good choice. All of what he said is true from what I know of and have read. Right down to where the Pfizer vaccine is produced in Michigan. The UK and Canada supplies of the Pfizer vaccine is manufactured by Pfizer in Puurs, Belgium and that site will also serve to be a backup to the manufacturing capacity in Michigan.
One thing that I dont see him mentioning is that 4 cases of Bells Palsy were experienced in the Pfizer trial of more than 21,000 people. All of them resolved, but it has been noted and disclosed.
Must you always be such a cantankerous idiot? I bet your a fucking hoot at parties.
As usual, you miss the point entirely while trying to look smart.
COVID-19 doesnt "mirror vascular diseases" in some cases like you say. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread....COVID-19 's gateway into the bloodstream is ACE-2 receptors and from there can attack any area of the body that there is blood flow.
I was first made aware of this when I was told by physicians that Covid patients were experiencing endocarditis. The initial experience was respiratory ailments and fluid buildup in the lungs required draining, but then the endocarditis resulted in fluid buildup in the pericardium. From there the connection with ACE-2 was made. Different demographics have differing levels of ACE-2 receptors, but I'm sure you already know that info.
Hydroxychloroquiine was shown in multiple studies to not be effective in treating Covid-19 and even to the point where health authorities warned against its use and deemed it off label use. It was politicized as beneficial, but wasnt even used in the treatment plan of President Trump while at Walter Reed, when positive with COVID-19.
Hydroxychloroquine has side effects that include reducing endothelial inflammation, and some auxiliary effects preventing blood clots. It has nothing to do with treating the infection, it has to do with treating the symptoms. I suppose I could repeat the same thing again about how it is not some miraculous cure-all and is not going to do any good in many cases - but clearly you are too stupid to understand that, or else choose to remain willfully ignorant in your religious zeal.
Typically for you, once again your argument is not even on the map, yet you are extremely proud of the contortions that led you there. But what else would you expect from the far-left science deniers.
See you Space Cowboy ...
That's all well and good, but what do you do with people like me that are 5 years from retirement? How are we supposed to learn a new field that pays a living wage in the short time we have left to work? Are we just deemed disposable and left to die on the vine?
I didnt realize this Logan's Run scenario you posted about was going to be within 5 years. I expect that somebody like yourself who has been in the workforce for so long that he is near retirement, has transferrable skills. I recall you were in some form of the Trade Show and Exposition Industry, something like design and construction...is that correct? If so, I would think you would not be replaced by automation in 5 years or less, or otherwise have some really valuable skills you can market elsewhere.
Life is like football. Players and Coaches have a choice to just let things happen to them or take action. A friend of mine worked in the energy sector and when he lost his job he shifted to become successful in Real Estate sales. Another owned a franchised pharmacy, but when it didnt work out, they went into pharmaceutical sales. Colonel Sanders retired and didnt like his paltry retirement check, so he came up with the idea for Kentucky Fried Chicken. People only die on the vine if they choose to let themselves do so.
Kenny Pickett is who I though he was .. Eagles didn't value him either , now he is a Stain at the Mistake by the Lake 3 teams in 4 years more of a shooting star than a superstar
For peoples' jobs that are replaced by automation, it's not that simple. Yes, there will have opportunities in new fields that weren't there before, but not as many. The goal of automation is to increase efficiency, which is basically increasing productivity while driving costs down.
For example: 1000 factory workers lose their jobs, replaced by machines and 50 or so people that are machine operators, and a team of software engineers. The factory's output is improved, the business cuts its workforce by 90% which boosts their profits. The factory creates 70-100 extra job opportunities, while cutting 1000 jobs for other people who are all of a sudden unemployed and are no longer useful in their field of expertise (which has been replaced).
Things can get really bad if nothing is done to address this before it starts happening, IMO.
Again, you lead with insults due to your insecurity. Its pretty transparent for all to see.
Please educate me and all the others on this forum with your vast knowledge of vascular thrombosis and fibrinolysis and how physicians look for drugs indicated for other use that happen to have side effects, in order to treat an acute condition. Its like a physician prescribing an RA (rheumatoid arthritis) drug for constipation, because it has a side effect of diarrhea.
Physicians can treat endothelial disfunction with statins, RAS inhibitors, ACE inhibitors, etc. And they do. The ethical physicians that practice evidence based medicine do not prescribe therapies for conditions, where there is a specific warning not to use it in that medical condition/indication. But of course you know this already.
I get it. Lots of truckers going to lose jobs due to autonomous vehicles. Its starting to happen. People that used to make frozen pizza, replaced by a pizza making machine.
This is the part where I believe that everybody is responsible and accountable for their own success and have to take initiative to have the foresight to see this happening and prepare for it. The notion that somebody else has to do something to address this before it starts happening, seems to imply that its the government's duty to do this. To me that is left leaning policy and thinking where the government should have to do something for people with their hand out and want something, just because they didnt take action themselves.
Job lose to AI and automation is structurally the same as job lose due to lower wages overseas. Just replace the human worker who is willing to do it for less pay with a robot or whatever. In theory, one can transfer the same "solutions" (most of which are shitty and based on politicians lying to you) from the traditional wage based job flow overseas to an AI based job loss.
The bottom line is that the history of capitalism is that $$$ chase cheaper labor. It has been going on for several hundred years. Ownership will always be looking for locations, methods, and technologies to decrease their manufacturing/labor cost(s).
For any caught in that cycle, it is awful and gut wrenching as you desperately attempt to find a stable pivot to a reliable income source as jobs in your original field shrink or go away entirely.
The difficulty we all have to face is that everyone (myself and most reading this) want to pay the least possible for the most. That leads to job loss in places where labor is expensive like the US. Bridging the gap between consumption and production has basically been the history of economics for like 300 years. No one has had a good answer and I haven't heard of any clever ones coming down the horizon.
The best and most stable answer has been education. If an individual worker is educated (and this doesn't have to be university degrees, as learned skills are typically just as transferable); usually they have a better chance transitioning from say driving the truck to planning the routes the robot drivers will take.
- - - Updated - - -
There you go again with your fancy science and medical quackery. Why bother with all that liberal clap-trap when you can just go to YouTube University and figure it all out yourself?Again, you lead with insults due to your insecurity. Its pretty transparent for all to see.
Please educate me and all the others on this forum with your vast knowledge of vascular thrombosis and fibrinolysis and how physicians look for drugs indicated for other use that happen to have side effects, in order to treat an acute condition. Its like a physician prescribing an RA (rheumatoid arthritis) drug for constipation, because it has a side effect of diarrhea.
Physicians can treat endothelial disfunction with statins, RAS inhibitors, ACE inhibitors, etc. And they do. The ethical physicians that practice evidence based medicine do not prescribe therapies for conditions, where there is a specific warning not to use it in that medical condition/indication. But of course you know this already.
Ever notice how once the conversation strays off the pre-loaded talking points and rant scripts of the far right of the internet, some have nothing to say? It is almost like they don't actually know anything....
See, this is why you two are in the 101 IQ Club. The answer is so simple that it's almost painful - yet you are so determined to prove that you are smarter than everyone else that you cannot resist going on a long, condescending, meticulously researched but completely meaningless discourse. Then end it with "but that's probably too much for you to comprehend" or "but I'm sure you already knew that." All while ultimately failing to address the very simple premise, or just taking the long amd smug way to getting it wrong.
It reminds me of another exchange I had with you about vaccines, which went something like this:
SR: "Hmm, I wonder why the only talk is about mRNA vaccines, which seem to be a lot more challenging to make successfully. It seems like there's no reason why making a vaccine the normal way wouldn't work for this."
101: "Well maybe if you took a minute to educate yourself so that you even understood the FIRST THING about how vaccine research worked, then you wouldn't have stupid questions like this. These people have advanced degrees and spend years researching it, but I'm sure steelreserve has new and incredible information that shows he's so much smarter than them! Maybe try doing research so you'll know what you're talking about like me! It's all very easy to look up on a search engine, it's just a few clicks away!"
Outcome: A normal vaccine worked after all and they are making them also.
The issue is that you think you are trying to win some pissing contest about who is smarter than whom, and that whoever cites the most sources wins. Unfortunately, your issue is that you will be wrong more often than not, often laughably wrong, because you don't even know how to begin taking the right approach.
That is what leftists do - start with an answer they want, and then get their poor little minds all pretzeled up trying to make reality match it, and searching for sources that support them. Whereas for many of these subjects, there is a very straightforward question and a very straightforward answer that covers 90% of it, but you just don't want to believe something so simple could undercut your elaborately constructed bullshit. This problem has become exponentially worse in the last few years, when the reason underlying the predetermined answer that you want is "Orange Man Bad."
This is why I rarely frame my arguments in a way that implies "My explanation is better because I am smarter than you. You need to be smarter to understand what I am talking about." It is always, "Anyone can see this, it's not nearly as difficult as you are making it." You think you are outsmarting us all, but you are just outsmarting yourself while sucking each other's dicks about it. Hence, the 101 IQ Club. Typical liberals, nothing special about it.
See you Space Cowboy ...
Another withering reply.
The attenuated virus candidates are not being developed in the US. One is being researched in Brazil and two in China. Both are far from gaining approval. But another win for whatever nonsense your spewing and whatever incoherent point you believe you've made.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote