more evidence hydroxychloroquine does not prevent getting covid

and trump didn't have covid so why was he taking it?? he was taking it to prevent covid

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: research100

Dude, no one said taking it prevents Covid. Taken early during the infectious stage, it can stop people from going full blown sick. Re research your information, go back further than a dang decade so y'all can see the difference between politically biased Propaganda and old fashioned news.

Seriously, stop already...the movie Idiocracy wasn't supposed to be a damned Prophecy.

a reply to: Phage

It serves me right for listen to someone else and not looking myself. I couldn't find a recent count easily 40 was in May...I did find an article talking about up to 2 mutations a month. The article also spoke of it being slow to mutate and that actually hampering virologist as they have less to study...didn't make sense to me but meh. Mutations however may save our ads depending on which way they trend...or it could kill us all...what can you do? vOv

Article Referenced

a reply to: RickyD

what can you do?

You can wear a mask and avoid crowds, for now.

ok I don't remember trump saying he took anything but the drug... but thanks for pointing out in my article and bringing it to my attention...I make a mistake occasionally! mea culpa.......article says he took the drug zinc and the other thing

originally posted by: JourneyAbout

originally posted by: research100
how about YOU get a clue the president took the drug for 2 weeks ( so he says) to prevent getting the covid 19 he said NOTHING about taking it with zinc or anything else...........so that is what the comparison they did

This is a quote from your own article.

Trump took a two-week course of hydroxychloroquine, along with zinc and Vitamin D, after two staffers tested positive for COVID-19, and had no ill effects, according to results of his latest physical released by his physician.

a reply to: Phage

I'd rather nature take its course yea. If it weren't for nature we wouldn't be here...

a reply to: Phage

Even if that means it takes me or ones I love...I won't like it...but it is better that way nature has the one up in experience

a reply to: RickyD

I'd rather nature take its course yea. If it weren't for nature we wouldn't be here...

Yeah. Smallpox, polio, bubonic plague. Nature, taking its course. We're human, we try to reduce suffering and death because we care about our families and stuff. Our bad.

Reaching herd immunity naturally will likely result in very many more lives lost, even if it can be accomplished. It is not at all clear that it can be, even with a vaccine. It really is one of the greatest unknowns involved with the disease.

The study found that, despite the high impact of COVID-19 in Spain, estimates of the prevalence of antibodies remain low and are “clearly insufficient” to provide herd immunity. “This cannot be achieved without accepting the collateral damage of many deaths in the susceptible population and overburdening of health systems,” the researchers wrote. “In this situation, social distance measures and efforts to identify and isolate new cases and their contacts are imperative for future epidemic control.”

www.foxnews.com...

Too many people getting sick at once has an impact on economies.
Too many people getting sick at once has an impact on health care "systems."
Stressing our health care "system" with too many hospitalizations at once can result in more deaths. And not just deaths from COVID-19.


For now, wear a mask and avoid crowds.

Even if that means it takes me or ones I love...I won't like it...but it is better that way nature has the one up in experience

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

a reply to: research100

Mistakes are human and admitting them makes you a better human. No hard feelings from me.

thanks rickyD you are being very gracious........to all I will try to check my links a little better!

a reply to: RickyD

a reply to: Phage

This article disagrees about immunity...will just leave here for you to read while I read yours.
Article

As for economies...we have done more damage in lockdown than this virus would ever do and I am surprised you'd suggest it to be the opposite.

a reply to: RickyD

This article disagrees about immunity.

The article I linked is not talking about length of immunity. That is an issue separate (though related) from herd immunity.

As for economies...we have done more damage in lockdown than this virus would ever do

No way to determine that. Sort of like there is no way to determine if HCQ works, in lieu of valid studies.

a reply to: Phage

Your article talked about length of immunity hampering herd immunity...mine was saying the length of immunity was holding for longer which increases the chance for heard immunity.

a reply to: RickyD

Your article talked about length of immunity hampering herd immunity

I don't suppose you can provide a quote from the article?

a reply to: Phage

Ya know I may have gotten my articles mixed up...you are correct your short article didn't give much so I went to the study they cited to learn more...come to find out the lab that ran their tests was...you guessed it...in China! So the least trusted country on this whole thing is where they chose to send off the lab work. The paper for the study is long and I havent read it all yet but the fact the lab work is done in china doesn't lend much faith in it.

The point-of-care test (Orient Gene Biotech COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette; Zhejiang Orient Gene Biotech, Zhejiang, China

source study

originally posted by: research100
www.dailymail.co.uk...

trump who has NO medical background said he was taking this to prevent getting the covid 19 well here you go www.dailymail.co.uk...

these people with lupus and or RA (rheumatoid arthritis) who have been on this medication for years .. They looked at the records of 4 MILLION of these people and 34.6% contracted the covid 19 roughly the same 31.4% did not get covid 19........soooooooo if what trump said was true the people who had been on it for a while that number should have been MUCH lower it should have prevented them from getting it

it worked in the lab in a test tube but as in many many things did not work on humans

what blows my mind is people like research 100 post things against this drug and dont see what they are posting is DESTROYING their argument/crediblity with THEIR OWN "FACTS"

lets look at his one comment using statistics .

quote "34.6% contracted the covid 19 roughly the same 31.4% did not get covid 19."

at face value the total percentage is 66%. so what is the other 34% of the people taking the drug?
they dont exist?

so just on that your giving incomplete numbers and calling it facts

now lets put LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE into this statistical claim

if one claims 34.6 contracted XX while taking a drug, then that means the other 55.4 percent DIDNT because of taking same drug..

so on either level your ignoring facts or trying to distort them to match your cause.

this is the SAME FAILED TACTIC that was used to quote two flawed (at best) studies that claimed this drug was deadly.

with BS like this how can you be expected to be taken seriously?

scrounger

a reply to: RickyD



If my personal family doctor isn't prescribing it then I'm not foolish enough to take it.

But yeah don't worry big pharma trump and the internet says it's safe. So go get you some and swallow it down.
I'm not telling you what to do.

I trust my doctor. she's been my family doctor since before I was born.
I don't trust medical advise from the internet and especial not from a non doctor.

originally posted by: NorthOfStuff

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: RickyD

even though many actual doctors disagree with that.

What are the majority of doctors saying?

I don't want to just pick a choose doctors that only say what I want to hear.

Very good point.
There are over a million doctors in the US alone.

Granted, some of them aren’t qualified to comment on antivirals.

Even so I highly doubt that 10% of those that are qualified have voiced their opinion publicly.

Probably because way more testing is needed before anyone can be sure how or if it even works.

originally posted by: scrounger
what blows my mind is people like research 100 post things against this drug and dont see what they are posting is DESTROYING their argument/crediblity with THEIR OWN "FACTS"

lets look at his one comment using statistics .

quote "34.6% contracted the covid 19 roughly the same 31.4% did not get covid 19."

at face value the total percentage is 66%. so what is the other 34% of the people taking the drug?
they dont exist?

Guess you didn't read the actual study, they address this statistic.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Maybe it's not safe for you...I don't know your medical history. I do know its been safely used for a long time so its not a case of the drug being dangerous...at least no more so than its been ever. If you have heart conditions or allergies to any of the meds its best not to try...but of many others there is no issues taking it correctly.

Why would you think it's so dangerous anyway?

I have taken it for several years for arthritis in my hands. It works so well that I'm able to hold my title (boxing). No pain, no swelling, no side effects to speak of. I have no idea if it works for Covid or not but like I say to my clients that ask if supplements and meds work, I'm not a doctor so don't take my advice but If you think they work, they'll work. It should just be left up to the person and their doctor. In the end the only thing that will work according to our leaders will be the vaccine. Everything else will be shot down.