O
otjm
Guest
This addresses what may be the moral response to the vaccine by individuals. Father Tad is also with the NCBC.
- Status
J
Joegrane
Guest
" On April 17, 2020, the chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops sent an open letter to Dr. Stephen Hahn, Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, urging the FDA to ensure that vaccines for COVID-19 be developed ethically and free from any connection to the exploitation of abortion victim"
There are other issues with the Moderna vaccine due to the unusual nature of it.
Good luck getting good information about the vaccines. Will the NIH spin the truth to their $ benefit?
New Docs: NIH Owns Half of Moderna Vaccine
“Two Moderna executives cashed in $25 million when stock prices rose immediately following the announcement that its COVID-19 phase 1 trial showed promising results
Stock dropped within days, as critics pointed out the results were likely misrepresented and actually quite alarming”
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/06/23/moderna-vaccine-coronavirus.aspx
Are we really hearing the full story. This is a report about one of the people who had an adverse reaction.
“Moderna plugs a small piece of coronavirus genetic code into human cells, altering DNA throughout the human body and reprogramming our cells to produce antibodies to fight the virus. mRNA vaccines are a form of genetic engineering called “germ line gene editing”. Moderna’s genetic alterations are passed down to future generations.”
I wish we could trust health authorities and medical reporters in corporate medicine. I just don’t currently see a good reason to do so.
As the scripture warns, we are being sent as sheep among wolves. Mt 10.16
There are other issues with the Moderna vaccine due to the unusual nature of it.
Good luck getting good information about the vaccines. Will the NIH spin the truth to their $ benefit?
New Docs: NIH Owns Half of Moderna Vaccine
“Two Moderna executives cashed in $25 million when stock prices rose immediately following the announcement that its COVID-19 phase 1 trial showed promising results
Stock dropped within days, as critics pointed out the results were likely misrepresented and actually quite alarming”
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/06/23/moderna-vaccine-coronavirus.aspx
Are we really hearing the full story. This is a report about one of the people who had an adverse reaction.
“Moderna plugs a small piece of coronavirus genetic code into human cells, altering DNA throughout the human body and reprogramming our cells to produce antibodies to fight the virus. mRNA vaccines are a form of genetic engineering called “germ line gene editing”. Moderna’s genetic alterations are passed down to future generations.”
I wish we could trust health authorities and medical reporters in corporate medicine. I just don’t currently see a good reason to do so.
As the scripture warns, we are being sent as sheep among wolves. Mt 10.16
Last edited:
C
catholicray
Guest
A board certified doctor just spoke at Washington. She testified that hydroxychloroquine was successful for treating 350+ patients without a single death. 
R
RuthAnne
Guest
We won’t be taking the vaccine. Not until we have absolutely no other options.
R
RuthAnne
Guest
Could very well be tied to RFID chipping where without such a chip, you are very limited on your options to buy or sell. So I could see it.
J
Joegrane
Guest
The pro-hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) data is much stronger than just that. I suppose that was the Carlucci study of zinc with HCQ and AZT at NYU.
Also check out the much larger studies at the Henry Ford health system in Michigan and the >3000 people in the study by Dr Raoult in France.
With over 4000 people studied there were no sudden cardiac deaths.
HCQ+ when given early in the progression of Covid resulted in roughly half the deaths!
There is also some interesting data out of Brazil about HCQ used early with telemedicine.
I presented links to details in this discussion.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
Bottom line - start it early and outcomes are fantastic.
Last edited:
C
catholicray
Guest
That sounds right with the added benefit of no end times chipping vaccine.
P
puer.dei
Guest
Dr. Stella Immanuel? You need to check her out. Not someone to whom I’d entrust my health.
T
TK421
Guest
I volunteered to be part of a vaccination trial but there are none available nearby 
C
catholicray
Guest
I don’t have to trust the person. She shared data not opinion concerning hydroxychloroquine. Given what I read above, her data correlates with quite a bit more samples globally.
The question is what do you think about the data as an independent thinker. Is there data available that contradicts and outweighs the use of hydroxychloroquine?
The question is what do you think about the data as an independent thinker. Is there data available that contradicts and outweighs the use of hydroxychloroquine?
R
Rau
Guest
I don’t know anything about that person. But in principle, if a person is untrustworthy, you do need to be especially cautious about data they provide.
J
Joegrane
Guest
While that seems generous of you, we also have to care for our gift of life. Are you confident you are putting yourself in the hands of godly people, not godless, greedy Pharma execs?
I can provide plenty of links to more on the subject if requested.
P
puer.dei
Guest
C
ColoradoCatholic
Guest
https://banned.video/watch?id=5f1fc7a468370e02f29f34cf
These doctors seem to think Hydroxychloroquine is the answer… I think I believe them.
These doctors seem to think Hydroxychloroquine is the answer… I think I believe them.
Last edited:
Z
ZemD
Guest
All of those studies involve patients that were already moderately to severely ill and hospitalized. And one of them used a dosage that was much higher than what people normally take when taking hydrochloroquine. Taking too much Tylenol can kill you. Dosage matters.
The doctors advocating for it’s use are advocating to give it to patients prophylactically or very early in the illness.
Tamaflu is a great treatment for the flu, when you take it early. If you are hospitalized with the flu and very ill, its too late, it won’t work. Just because Tamaflu doesn’t work once you are very ill doesn’t mean we should discount its prophylactic use. I’d argue hydrochloroquine should be treated this way as well.
The doctors advocating for it’s use are advocating to give it to patients prophylactically or very early in the illness.
Tamaflu is a great treatment for the flu, when you take it early. If you are hospitalized with the flu and very ill, its too late, it won’t work. Just because Tamaflu doesn’t work once you are very ill doesn’t mean we should discount its prophylactic use. I’d argue hydrochloroquine should be treated this way as well.
C
catholicray
Guest
I am cautious with all data I think about whether I trust someone or not. But I won’t grade data by the character of the one giving it that’s nonsense. Of course I can’t research the data further now because it’s been censored so I can’t think for myself. So given a good understanding of business and economy I’m pretty sure the information was accurate.
O
otjm
Guest
It would be nice if we could get an analysis of the use of this drug (and for that matter, all of the others which have been used in fighting this virus) sans all the political chin chatter on both sides of the issue.
J
Joegrane
Guest
The list of junk-studies posted by our member Puer.dei have been exposed. They were likely designed to fail. For example
I read the recent Brazilian study of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) that Puer.dei listed. The key point is below, basically the only thing you need to know.
“Our trial has several limitations. … although the median time from symptom onset to randomization was 7 days, we included patients up to 14 days after the beginning of symptoms; it is conceivable that interventions that may limit viral replication (e.g., hydroxychloroquine) may be more effective earlier in the course of the disease.”
So basically they knowingly designed a fake study.
Two proponents of HCQ that I trust think that after a week or so after onset of Covid19 HCQ has little if any value. HCQ is primarily an “antiviral” used to slow down the replication of the virus. That occurs mostly in the first week.
Dr P. Marik, Chief of Critical Care Medicine at E. Virginia Med School explains the two phases of Covid 19 here.
Marik likes HCQ when given early in the virus replication phase. He explains some of the unusual phamacokineticis as a reason.
Marik says he has some HCQ at home and will use it with zinc if he gets sick. However he does not use it in hospital patients because they are in the second, immune system dysregulation phase. He uses his successful MATH+ protocol for hospitalized patients. His hospital death rate is around 6% in contrast to 18% in the Philly hospitals according to a local PBS report.
All of the negative studies of HCQ were including people in the latter stage of the illness. A rare exception is the Boulware internet survey/study where they did not meet with patients to test them and confirm their stories. That study is junk science for a number of reasons. Also reportedly the author has a history of a relationship with HCQ competitor Giliad, the maker of Remdesivir.
continued below
Notice the mention of Trump early in the article raising suspicions about political motivation.
I read the recent Brazilian study of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) that Puer.dei listed. The key point is below, basically the only thing you need to know.
“Our trial has several limitations. … although the median time from symptom onset to randomization was 7 days, we included patients up to 14 days after the beginning of symptoms; it is conceivable that interventions that may limit viral replication (e.g., hydroxychloroquine) may be more effective earlier in the course of the disease.”
So basically they knowingly designed a fake study.
Two proponents of HCQ that I trust think that after a week or so after onset of Covid19 HCQ has little if any value. HCQ is primarily an “antiviral” used to slow down the replication of the virus. That occurs mostly in the first week.
Dr P. Marik, Chief of Critical Care Medicine at E. Virginia Med School explains the two phases of Covid 19 here.
Marik likes HCQ when given early in the virus replication phase. He explains some of the unusual phamacokineticis as a reason.
Marik says he has some HCQ at home and will use it with zinc if he gets sick. However he does not use it in hospital patients because they are in the second, immune system dysregulation phase. He uses his successful MATH+ protocol for hospitalized patients. His hospital death rate is around 6% in contrast to 18% in the Philly hospitals according to a local PBS report.
All of the negative studies of HCQ were including people in the latter stage of the illness. A rare exception is the Boulware internet survey/study where they did not meet with patients to test them and confirm their stories. That study is junk science for a number of reasons. Also reportedly the author has a history of a relationship with HCQ competitor Giliad, the maker of Remdesivir.
continued below
Last edited:
J
Joegrane
Guest
continued from above
All of the encouraging studies of HCQ that I’ve seen, including at least two reporting half the deaths, were giving HCQ in the EARLY phase of Covid19
Dr Martenson explains that almost all of the patients in the encouraging Henry Ford study started receiving doses of HCQ in the first day or 2 at the hospital. Martenson expresses criticism and sadness about of studies seemingly designed to fail!
The paper from the Henry Ford study in Detroit points out that they have many high-risk patients. They used roughly half the dose of HCQ used in the Brazilian study and roughly 1/4 of the crazy-high dose used in the UK study. The US NIH study that concluded HCQ treatment did no harm was using a dose similar to the Henry Ford study, lower than studies reporting safety problems.
“In the Henry Ford study, researchers found that hydroxychloroquine combined with the antibiotic drug azithromycin resulted in a 50 percent reduction in deaths among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After day one of the treatment, a whopping 82 percent of patients began to recover. And after day two, that figure jumped to 91 percent.”
A different Brazilian study of very early administration of HCQ was greatly reducing the number of people who had to be admitted to the hospital.
I know of only one study that included zinc, the Carlucci study at NYU. People in both arms of that study received HCQ + AZT but one group received zinc as well. Those receiving zinc had half the deaths and intubations!
There is data going back 10-15 years suggesting that HCQ moves zinc into cells (an ionophore). Zinc is thought to inhibit virus replication. Martenson explains this briefly along with the sad ethical implications in this clip.
There is study data reporting greater risk of zinc deficiency in the elderly and diabetics, two groups at high risk for a bad virus outcome–references available.
Dr Mercola: How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created. Dr M. goes into more detail than I did above. He also mentions quercetin that according to study data may be an alternative to HCQ if governors continue to block doctors from prescribing HCQ. This activity by some US governors was mentioned by an internationally known Catholic doctor, Dr Fitzgibbons and discussed here.
All of the encouraging studies of HCQ that I’ve seen, including at least two reporting half the deaths, were giving HCQ in the EARLY phase of Covid19
Dr Martenson explains that almost all of the patients in the encouraging Henry Ford study started receiving doses of HCQ in the first day or 2 at the hospital. Martenson expresses criticism and sadness about of studies seemingly designed to fail!
The paper from the Henry Ford study in Detroit points out that they have many high-risk patients. They used roughly half the dose of HCQ used in the Brazilian study and roughly 1/4 of the crazy-high dose used in the UK study. The US NIH study that concluded HCQ treatment did no harm was using a dose similar to the Henry Ford study, lower than studies reporting safety problems.
“In the Henry Ford study, researchers found that hydroxychloroquine combined with the antibiotic drug azithromycin resulted in a 50 percent reduction in deaths among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After day one of the treatment, a whopping 82 percent of patients began to recover. And after day two, that figure jumped to 91 percent.”
A different Brazilian study of very early administration of HCQ was greatly reducing the number of people who had to be admitted to the hospital.
I know of only one study that included zinc, the Carlucci study at NYU. People in both arms of that study received HCQ + AZT but one group received zinc as well. Those receiving zinc had half the deaths and intubations!
There is data going back 10-15 years suggesting that HCQ moves zinc into cells (an ionophore). Zinc is thought to inhibit virus replication. Martenson explains this briefly along with the sad ethical implications in this clip.
There is study data reporting greater risk of zinc deficiency in the elderly and diabetics, two groups at high risk for a bad virus outcome–references available.
Dr Mercola: How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created. Dr M. goes into more detail than I did above. He also mentions quercetin that according to study data may be an alternative to HCQ if governors continue to block doctors from prescribing HCQ. This activity by some US governors was mentioned by an internationally known Catholic doctor, Dr Fitzgibbons and discussed here.
Last edited:
- Status