Renowned epidemiologist sees 'massive disinformation campaign' against hydroxychloroquine

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Motherwit . . .
I’ve given evidence of the money trail
Click to expand...
You have given no “evidence”.

The Daily Beast (and others) speculating about a cash cow from a GENERIC drug (wat!!??) that Sanofi happens to be one of the manufacturers of
and because Trump has a mutual fund
that happens to have Sanofi stock in the mutual fund’s portfolio is NOT “evidence”.

The Daily Beast et. al. argument is about as convincing as saying . . .
. . . Sanofi kind a rhymes with okee ka do kee
and that is what that doggone Trump says to Big Pharma - okee ka do kee - so there we have it! Absolute proof!

It is just not a convincing argument Trump was attempting to profiteer off of hydroxychloroquine.

(The Daily Beast making “arguments” like this just detracts from the media and makes it more likely people will merely shrug their shoulders if Trump was ever involved in REAL impropriety from the White House and the media reports it).

The other arguments are not persuasive either and if I feel like doing the work, I may deal with those points later (i.e. the NEJM article not treating but prophylaxing and even then, although they called it insignificant, the HCT patients did 20% better (!) even for prophylaxis (I read the NEJM paper you cited) - not to mention the NEJM and The Lancet’s “issues” regarding their FAKE HCQ articles that they printed several months ago (but fortunately later retracted).

But those are the wrong cohorts for a study like this.
 
Renowned?

Most Renowned people have a wiki page created about them.

Can’t seem to find one for this Doctor.

Can’t be that Renowned.
 
Cathoholic said:
Why not attack what he says
instead of rejecting the person?
Click to expand...
I think it’s fair that if a doctor is giving his opinion on a drug…one that is controversial even if not deserved…that one has a duty to look into the doctors CV, his history and if anything else, causes someone to question his motives. I agree we shouldn’t outright reject his opinion without looking into it but everyone has a trust level that needs to be met before accepting his opinion. You do it, too. I’m sure there is someone’s opinion you would question I’d you didn’t consider him worthy.

We can’t help having biases and it’s legitimate to question an authority that while a medical doctor at Yale, isn’t an epidemiologist. We can’t help accepting opinions we agree with and being distrustful of those opinions we don’t agree with. Questioning how renowned someone is, is fair to ask.
 
Cathoholic said:
Why not attack what he says
instead of rejecting the person?
Click to expand...
I am attacking the falseness of the headline:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Now if FoxNews had used the term “Expert” instead, then I might have listen to it. Otherwise meh.

Never heard of this person until now. And I’ve read many reports concerning hdc. Most are bad.

Foxnews is doing it’s best to justify Trump’s claims, so they went out and found someone who would back it up. That is all that it looks like on the surface. And I really don’t have time or energy to delve into Fox’s silliness. They have been weighed, measured and found to be wanton when it comes to fact checking.
 
Last edited:
PattyIt . . .
I think it’s fair that if a doctor is giving his opinion on a drug…one that is controversial even if not deserved…that one has a duty to look into the doctors CV . . .
Click to expand...
I think it is fair too.

But not to the exclusion of something like “wikipedia”.

I would also say he should be addressing what this Yale Scientist SAYS too. At least deal with SOME of the substance of the arguments (I am not saying “you” don’t. I am just making a generalization).
 
RidgeSprinter . . .
And I’ve read many reports concerning hdc. Most are bad.
Click to expand...
Would you mind sharing a couple here with me that you think are “bad”?

RidgeSprinter on FoxNews and hydroxychloroquine. . . .
Foxnews is doing it’s best to justify Trump’s claims, so they went out and found someone who would back it up.
Click to expand...
How do you know?

This sounds like yet another conspiracy theory. It’s not as bad as the Russian Collusion hoax, but it still sounds like a conspiracy theory.

WHY are many other countries using hydroxychloroquine?

Do you think they are playing-up to “Trump”?
Do you see buck$ there?
Are the Trumpsters tying U.S. funds to their foreign usage of the generic drug hydroxychloroquine?

What do you think is going on there?
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Why not attack what he says
instead of rejecting the person?
Click to expand...
Because when the value of what a person says depends on the qualifications of who is saying it, then it is entirely proper to reject what he says on the basis of those qualifications. And if the value of what he says does not depend on his qualifications, then why is it featured in the thread title as “Renowned Epidemiologist”? If the words speak for themselves, then Catholohic could just say those words himself without reference to the Dr.
 
LeafByNiggle . . .
Because when the value of what a person says depends on the qualifications of who is saying it, then it is entirely proper to reject what he says . .
Click to expand...
Let me see if I got you correctly here Leaf.

So you are counting a Yale scientist out as irrelevant because he has no WIKIPEDIA page!!??

Really?
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
WHY are many other countries using hydroxychloroquine?
Click to expand...
The only way you can get to “many countries using HCQ” is if you relax the definition of “using HCQ”. But if you ask the more restrictive question, “How many countries are using HCQ as a standard treatment for covid-19”, the answer is “not many.”
 
@Motherwit . . . .
Can you cite say 3 countries currently using hydroxychloroquine? I’ve searched but can’t seem to find them.
Click to expand...
Well Motherwit. Hopefully I am not wasting my time but here goes . . . .

To the readers here. I am posting this for your information.
For the naysayers, it won’t matter.
Motherwit. I am not classifying you in either camp here (yet).

Covid treatment guidelines from South Korea . . .
40.png
Twitter Facebook Lock Breitbart Accounts over Viral Videos of Doctors’ Capitol Hill Coronavirus Presser(hydroxychloroquine) World News
For all others . . . . COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from South Korea via Dr. James Todaro’s research paper FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. [COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from South Korea1 via Dr. James Todaro's research paper] [COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from South Korea2 via Dr. James Todaro's research paper]
Click to expand...
Covid treatment guidelines from China . . .
40.png
Twitter Facebook Lock Breitbart Accounts over Viral Videos of Doctors’ Capitol Hill Coronavirus Presser(hydroxychloroquine) World News
COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from China via Dr. James Todaro’s research paper also FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. [COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from China1 via Dr. James Todaro's research paper] [COVID-19 Treatment guidelines from China2 via Dr. James Todaro's research paper]
Click to expand...
From the Times of India . . . .
“Till the time, we only recommend hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as prophylaxis of COVID in selected individuals. It includes asymptomatic healthcare workers involved in the care of suspected or confirmed cases of COVID, asymptomatic household contacts of laboratory-confirmed cases, a combination of HCQ with Azithromycin on patients with severe disease and requiring ICU management,” said the official, adding that HCQ has to be given only on the prescription of a registered medical practitioner as per government guidelines. . . .
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle shifting his criticism of this Yale scientist from no wikipedia page (remember. That was the big objection) to this . . . .
because he is saying something outside of this area of expertise, and which is contrary to what more qualified scientists are saying.
Click to expand...
Good grief.

Just a few weeks ago you were appealing to a breast surgeon to tell me how wrong hydroxychloroquine was.

A breast surgeon that seemed to have some of the basic science mechanisms lacking from his physiologic repertoire of knowledge that even President Trump (a business guy) knew no less!

To the readers. You can see that fiasco here.
 
Cathoholic said:
@Motherwit . . . .
Can you cite say 3 countries currently using hydroxychloroquine? I’ve searched but can’t seem to find them.
Click to expand...
Having done my due diligence, I’ve found that both Sth Korea and China have rejected HCQ. The links you used were to previous posts of yours that only included screenshots without citing links. However a bit of searching revealed that the information was drawn from a paper from March which addressed research from February in the very early days of Covid 19.

An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19)_

docs.google.com docs.google.com

Today both Sth Korea and China have abandoned use of HCQ.

South Korea as of June.

Clinical trials of chloroquine for COVID-19 treatment halted in S. Korea

China as of August.

China rejects Trump-touted drug hydroxychloroquine

continued…
Click to expand...
 
Cathoholic said:
From the Times of India . . . .
“Till the time, we only recommend hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as prophylaxis of COVID in selected individuals. It includes asymptomatic healthcare workers involved in the care of suspected or confirmed cases of COVID, asymptomatic household contacts of laboratory-confirmed cases, a combination of HCQ with Azithromycin on patients with severe disease and requiring ICU management,” said the official, adding that HCQ has to be given only on the prescription of a registered medical practitioner as per government guidelines. . . .
Click to expand...
Again, you linked to an article from May but as of this month in India…

New Protocol Ivermectin to replace HCQ in treatment of Covid patients

All three countries have abandoned HCQ.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Just because the Indians think ivermectin is working better, does not make hydroxychloroquine without a place in corona virus treatment.

By the way. You will not see ivermectin in broad usage in America for part of the same reason.

I am actually quite good with physicians using ivermectin for treatment against corona virus where THEY see that indicated for off-label use, just as hydroxychloroquine is reasonable for off-label usage in select patients too.

Do you know WHY hydroxychloroquine at least makes sense in select individuals according to the physiology?

Do you know the physiologic mechanism as to WHY ivermectin has shown benefit (that too makes sense but for different reasons) on a BROADER patient base than hydroxychloroquine?
All three countries have abandoned HCQ.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that statement. I think you are wrong.

They may be using other medications more frequently, but I do not believe three countries have “abandoned” hydroxychloroquine.

Please back up that assertion.

From one if your own articles (here) . . . .
However, it has recommended the use of a similar malaria drug called chloroquine, foreign media reported.
Click to expand...
Are you even reading your own articles you cite?

I am still waiting for you to explain how “Trump” was supposed to get rich off of one generic drug in one of his mutual funds too.
 
Last edited:
RidgeSprinter . . .
And Leaf just provided 2 more up above.
Click to expand...
No he didn’t.

He gave two examples of studies that were shut down.

Do you know the WHO shut down its hydroxychloroquine studt about the same time?

Did you know that was partly based upon FAKE science in the NEJM and The Lancet.

FAKE studies that the NEJM and The Lancet had to retract? You were aware of this were you not?

Were you aware of any of this? And if ao, why did you neglect to mention it?

Did you know the WHO has since resumed its hydroxychloroquine study? (Now that they have been tainted in my opinion by stopping a study that should never have been stopped.)

If you think articles telling you that studies were shut down are the same as studies, please describe the cohorts to me from those “studies”.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top