It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: 111DPKING111
Seems early treatment with HCQ and zinc is effective and very cheap. With schools starting back up, its a shame this never got the attention it is due. Looks like we are going to put politics before the health of our children.
How a false narrative was created
Treatment cut death rate significantly
Oxford - early outpatient treatment
"These medications need to be widely available and promoted immediately for physicians to prescribe."
originally posted by: themove1904
Can you show me some trials that dispute the early use of the protocol i mentioned not being helpful ? Jelly may be good for the fever lol a reply to: FishBait
It's astounding the same people who say masks are dangerous claim HQ is a great idea when there is no dispute it has deadly side effects.
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: FishBait
It's astounding the same people who say masks are dangerous claim HQ is a great idea when there is no dispute it has deadly side effects.
So a member here asks you to post some information to actually back up your claims with some sort of factual evidence and you can't be bothered?
I would like to see some of your "studies" that show how a drug that's been around for 70 years and used worldwide is so deadly.
originally posted by: FishBait
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: FishBait
It's astounding the same people who say masks are dangerous claim HQ is a great idea when there is no dispute it has deadly side effects.
So a member here asks you to post some information to actually back up your claims with some sort of factual evidence and you can't be bothered?
I would like to see some of your "studies" that show how a drug that's been around for 70 years and used worldwide is so deadly.
ROTFL!!!!!!!!!!! It's on the listed side effects dude. The drug manufacture itself tells you this. Just because it's deadly doesn't mean it can't be used when absolutely needed in a controlled environment. Hell, opioids are deadly and they give those out all the time. There are tons of drugs and treatments that have very serious side effect which is why you don't blanket use anything for everything. Hell, radiation treatment might kill COVD but they aren't even going to try that. They only use it for something like cancer when you are absolutely going to die so there really are no bad side effects (which are still awful) when they are just trying to keep you alive. But they still use it as a last resort. Are you going to deny radiation has bad side effects to because it "cures" cancer?
chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.
Trump sees crazy doctor spouting piss and wind that he likes on the TV.
And then goes on to regurgitate mince out his puss in praise of someone he then goes on to claims he knows nothing about!
How can Trump think this doctor's "voice is so important" and yet claim to also "know nothing about her"???
The mind boggles!!!
If that's not an indication of severe mental incompetence, nevermind cognitive deterioration, and/or senility in spades, i don't know what is.
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
originally posted by: FishBait
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: FishBait
It's astounding the same people who say masks are dangerous claim HQ is a great idea when there is no dispute it has deadly side effects.
So a member here asks you to post some information to actually back up your claims with some sort of factual evidence and you can't be bothered?
I would like to see some of your "studies" that show how a drug that's been around for 70 years and used worldwide is so deadly.
ROTFL!!!!!!!!!!! It's on the listed side effects dude. The drug manufacture itself tells you this. Just because it's deadly doesn't mean it can't be used when absolutely needed in a controlled environment. Hell, opioids are deadly and they give those out all the time. There are tons of drugs and treatments that have very serious side effect which is why you don't blanket use anything for everything. Hell, radiation treatment might kill COVD but they aren't even going to try that. They only use it for something like cancer when you are absolutely going to die so there really are no bad side effects (which are still awful) when they are just trying to keep you alive. But they still use it as a last resort. Are you going to deny radiation has bad side effects to because it "cures" cancer?
virologyj.biomedcentral.com...
chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.
This is from a 2005 study done by the NIH back when the much beloved and never wrong Dr. Fauci was the director.
CQ and HCQ are basically the same drug. Seeing how it was determined to be "very effective" against a Coronavirus 15 years ago so similar to the current one that it shares the same name (nearly 80% identical in fact) you don't find it the least bit curious that there is an obvious and concerted effort to restrict its use and silence anyone who promotes it now?
Who knows why all of a sudden Fauci believes the opposite of what he did 15 years ago. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that he holds patents on the Remdisivir that he promotes.
Thing is, if you actually take the time to read the report, it says exactly what these Doctors are saying. This is known to be an effective treatment AND preventative for the transmission of Coronavirus with "almost no side effects" according to the study.
So can you show anything at all that even remotely proves anything you said about it being "so deadly"?
Just the fact that you are talking about a different (but similar) drug tested 15 years ago on a different (but similar) virus shows you don't know what your talking about. If your logic is sound why doesn't the flu vaccine protect against COVID. COVID is just the flu after all.
originally posted by: themove1904
I,m not asking you to get into a link war Just asked for the one link please.If you can’t be bothered or can’t find one it’s all good And I never mentioned masks a reply to: FishBait
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: FishBait
Just the fact that you are talking about a different (but similar) drug tested 15 years ago on a different (but similar) virus shows you don't know what your talking about. If your logic is sound why doesn't the flu vaccine protect against COVID. COVID is just the flu after all.
Somehow your responses get even more nonsensical with every post.
I have proved my point, can you do the same?
You realize all the "studies" your asking for are done well in advance of a drug being approved for public use by the FDA?
originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: FishBait
You realize all the "studies" your asking for are done well in advance of a drug being approved for public use by the FDA?
Boy, reading comprehension is really not your strong suit is it.
Ibuprofen can cause liver damage, hormone disruption, even death if you take enough of it.
But nobody calls it "deadly". So thank you for that dynamic post Captain Obvious.
As another poster asked, can you show some trials that dispute the use of this drug as a preventative for transmission of Covid?