Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,264 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,547 Posts
Personally...

I don't get it. I mean I do, if a drug company wants to sell a more expensive drug, then it makes perfect sense to try to demean medications that may be effective, but aren't the drugs they want to sell. In the days of social media and big data it is easy to accomplish if that is what you want to do.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU


I said in another post, I have a couple of acquaintances that contracted covid-19, and were treated with HCQ, Zinc, and Azythromycin, and were sent home within 2 days, fully recovered within ten days, and tested negative twice since. I know in the video I posted: "Another Doctor Speaks Out" he stated unequivocally that he had been treating patients who had covid-19 using the same HCQ/Zinc/Zpack cocktail with great success. I also know that we have had numerous people all over the world speak out on how this combo saved their lives.

Then there is the definite component of TDS. There are those that would truly rather have people die than Trump actually be right about something.

Then there are all of the doctors that answered a survey a few weeks back about the most effective treatment options, of which HCQ cocktail was the top of the heap, and there are still a lot of papers that give guidance on how to administer the drug for the treatment of Covid-19.

So honestly man, I can't answer your question, I just know the discrediting of this drug makes no sense when we see how many people are alive that may not have been had they not used it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,424 Posts
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
HCQ/ Zpack is serious impediment to the Branch Covidians and the Vaxistas narrative. Looking at the detractors tells you everything you need to know.
 

·
Truth always sounds like lies to a sinner
Joined
·
14,544 Posts
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
and wait until the FDA gets fully involved......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,954 Posts
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
In a situation where there is evidence that drug combinations that include HQC may help the patients in some cases, may hurt them in other cases, and may do nothing in many cases, it is up to the doctor and patient. One size does NOT fit all, and all doctors do not have the same experiences and levels of skill.

It is too bad this issue has become politicized and I can only blame Trump, his team and the media for that.

My advice is for the doctor to become informed on all sides of the issue, make his own judgment based on each of his patient’s situation, make sure that whatever treatment he decides on is accompanied by full disclosure to each patient on the risks and benefits and if treated with one of the drug cocktails is closely monitored for side effects.

In the end it needs to be a doctor/patient decision. I will say that in my opinion I would not decide to be treated with one of these drug cocktails as a profilaxis if I am non symptomatic because of the known side effects and my particular health situation. And, being non symptomatic, I still choose to wear a mask in public in the chance that I am infected but asymptomatic and that I will give some level of protection From me to those with whom I come into contact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,117 Posts
I think I said it before but if so it bears repeating: anyone who let's "agenda" drive their research findings when lives are at stake (greed, hate of Trump, love of Trump, or anything else) - deserves a special place in hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,264 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·

·
I don't even know....what I'm doing here....
Joined
·
9,055 Posts
I think I said it before but if so it bears repeating: anyone who let's "agenda" drive their research findings when lives are at stake (greed, hate of Trump, love of Trump, or anything else) - deserves a special place in hell.
Indeed.

And anyone that has the belief that just because Trump is doing a certain treatment means that they should do the same is a damned fool that deserves every consequence dealt to them.

Darwinism is a thing.
 

·
DEPLORABLE ME!
Joined
·
11,924 Posts
For some strange reason we hear of the lack of progress with HQC treatments. We never hear of HQC/OC + zinc trials, just crickets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,955 Posts
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
I hope someone finds the true answer. My own doctor said it's bad. A lot of "experts" say it's bad. Yet there are testimonials everywhere about how great it works, and no one can deny it has been safely used for many years for other things.

I've decided that if I should get the virus and I have a choice, I will use it.
 

·
NRA Life Member
Joined
·
66,434 Posts
Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work.
There is certainly a leftist agenda to discredit it, hence the "risk of death" headline for a drug that CDC seems to think is safer than Tylenol. That doesn't mean it does work for coronavirus, but it means your 2 choices are "HCQ doesn't work + conspiracy" or "HCQ does work + conspiracy."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,227 Posts
HCQ has serious side effects but might help someone who has pneumonia from Covid 19. The main concerning issue seems to be arrhythmia. It would be wise to have a baseline electrocardiogram if someone was to take it prophylactically like Mr. Trump. ICU patients are closely monitored for possible HCG symptoms.

I'm working from home screening ER psych patients via televideo; and younger clinicians call me at night to staff their cases. There is more anxiety and suicidal ideation it seems, and patients (especially millennials) tell me they see no end to lockdown. Most all patients are becoming overwhelmed about their finances and keeping food on the table. Family violence and mental issues related to that and substance abuse are also on the rise.

As a psychiatric social worker I find myself also attempting to address their psychosocial needs with info on food banks, housing vouchers, church and fraternal organizations assistance programs. Some people need to be coached on how to talk to landlords and creditors. I get the sense that as the economy opens up that many people will take a long time to get back on their feet. The smart ones that weather this Covid 19 relatively unscathed will most likely have a new appreciation for saving money just in case another layoff comes along.
 

·
PSO Survivor. currently in NW Georgia
Joined
·
10,880 Posts
On my daily medical news feed today the headline was “HCQ linked to increased risk of death”. However this is the same news feed that had the headline, “Trump self medicates with HCQ”.


Here’s the point, the news source showed their bias with the bogus headline, but should it taint future news? Or is it that I want HCQ to work so I have a confirmation bias? When we are told time and again that HCQ doesn’t work so many times, at what point do we give it up. The “experts” seem to be wrong more than they are right. The “experts” rely on literature reviews on the virus we are dealing with because there hasn’t been enough time to design, recruit sufficient test subjects, and apply a proper double blinded studies which are the gold standard. Then the studies have to be replicated to be scientifically validated.


Is there a conspiracy of dunces to discredit HCQ, for whatever reason, or does it simply not work. Antidotal evidence, the lowest form of evidence for multiple reasons, is dismissed automatically by “experts” but seem to be mounting, depending what your source is, msm or blogs.


I don’t want to harm my patients with an ineffective medication or keep pushing a bad position.
I think the short answer is; [They] don't know what they don't know...that is why the testing protocols you expounded are vital and ongoing...and the Exact reason why so many are frustrated by the seemingly endless contradictory statements made daily by these "experts"...whom do we believe?...very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff here
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top