I wonder where science was when hydroxychloroquine was proven to be effective in treating covid19, and the media/dnc said otherwise to own the orange man. Wonder how many people died as a result of that narrative 🤔
June 15, 2020 Update: Based on ongoing analysis and emerging scientific data, FDA has revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) to use hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to treat COVID-19 in certain hospitalized patients when a clinical trial is unavailable or participation is not feasible. We made this determination based on recent results from a large, randomized clinical trial in hospitalized patients that found these medicines showed no benefit for decreasing the likelihood of death or speeding recovery. This outcome was consistent with other new data, including those showing the suggested dosing for these medicines are unlikely to kill or inhibit the virus that causes COVID-19. As a result, we determined that the legal criteria for the EUA are no longer met. Please refer to the Revocation of the EUA Letter and FAs on the Revocation of the EUA for Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate and Chloroquine Phosphate for more information.
Living under a rock maybe?
There is one review that found it might help, but was highly flawed:
Specifically, the average age in the group who received other COVID-19 treatments was 68.1 years, the median age was 71 years, and 64.1% were over the age of 65. In the HCQ group, on the other hand, the average age was 63.2 years, the mean age was 53 years, and 48.9% were over 65.
Patients in the HCQ group were also significantly more likely to receive steroids in addition to the drug. While 78.9% of patients in this group received steroids, only 35.7% of patients in the other COVID-19 treatment groups did.
“In addition, white race is a risk factor they identified, and it too was unbalanced,” Dr. Le added.
In the group receiving other COVID-19 treatments, 45.5% were white, while in the HCQ group, 27.6% were white.
edit: let me clarify before you words words words you fucking sperg, I cannot prove your shithead points a nor b, but I sure as shit can prove some monkey scientists sacrificed their careers fabricating studies to prove orange man pill bad. And before you ask for some retard sources, my job isn't to educate you sweaty, go look up the effects these falsified papers had on global hydroxychloroquine funding and research yourself
Why don't you read the rest of the sentence and figure it out? Are you telling me that all of your arguing on the internet has failed to make you more intelligent? Much surprise!
Oh sorry, I didn't know linking to articles of papers being retracted was making random shit up. Goodnight sweaty, don't let your delusions run too wild.
edit: also, big YIKES from me pizzashill, you need to cool it with the gaslighting and goal post moving. Changing your questions when faced with your own mental and ideological inferiority is really off-color, and NOT in the spirit of this sub's culture of open discussion and debate.
Again, cool it with the gaslighting. I'm not going to respond any further until you apologize for changing your questions and admit that I have provided evidence and did not just make "random shit up".
You clearly stated that these scientists had ruined their careers to spite Trump, and were in fact liberals.
I've asked you the same questions in every comment, you've yet to answer them because you literally made those accusations up and have no ability to support them, and we both know that you do not.
Again, cool it with the gaslighting. I'm not going to respond any further until you apologize for changing your questions and admit that I have provided evidence and did not just make "random shit up".
A) Where is your evidence these scientists were liberals.
B) Where is your evidence there's a global plot to sink Trump.
and then
A) Which questions were changed.
B) When you claimed liberal scientists tanked their careers to sink Trump, how was that not made up?
Nice try fascist, but your gaslighting and deflection doesn't work on someone who is actually educated and intelligent. I'm reporting you to the mods for harrassment, but I'll ask them to only temp ban you in the hopes that you'll reform your toxic behavior. I hope you take your time out to reflect on your negative ways and rectify them. In the future, I hope that any debates you have with me or others are done in good faith. Have a good day!
Also, if you ever read the link I posted you would have found evidence of studies being falsified, which definitely sinks careers. Your questions could have never been completely answered because they require motive to be established when only conjecture is possible, but you knew that and continued to insist that I magically conjure irrefutable evidence when analysis of the topic could provide enough merit to the claims "A" and "B" to warrant further discussion, regardless of concrete establishment of motive. But of course, because you are of poor breeding, intelligence, and education you insisted on gaslighting and moving the goal posts. You were put down, in the future please refrain from talking about topics you know nothing about.
Oh, refute my above post then instead of just repeating the same gaslighting questions again and again please, Pizza. Oh wait, you can't, otherwise you would have instead of posting the same unhinged questions half a dozen times.
Okay, I don't think you realize this but I 'm not even the original poster so even if those claims were patently false, I never made them so I never lied.
And an inability to address my points while continuously screeching the same two things over and over makes you my bitch, pizza shrill.
Pizza shrill, this is how i know you're a retard and I've unequivocally won. I'm not the person who you made that comment to, so I have no need to answer it. I injected myself into the argument to add context and analysis on a different point of the topic, which you knew from the beginning but could not acknowledge as it would mean being incorrect. More fully, your inability to address any points that I made to add nuance and detail to the argument means that you are fully incapable of defending your position. I do not need to address your ridiculous claim because your position is indefensible while mine is iron clad. Trying to ignore points made in order to focus on one infinitesimal detail is proof of a loser.
I'm not the person who you made that comment to, so I have no need to answer it
It doesn't matter, you mongo. I don't care about any other argument you made, or any point you made. You don't get to inject yourself into arguments and change the topic you poorly educated moron.
I have no interest in any points made here outside of the point I argued against.
Thanks for the desperate cope and smug posting, so I repeat. The FDA is only recommending clinical trials due to mixed results and you think that the scientists bunked his career for the hell of it. Don't just rephrase what I said in a slightly negative light and think you've proven anything I said wrong.
Good response, take a fucking seat you ape. This is why everyone mocks you dropper, you're absurdly bad faith and never respond ot counter anything said to you because you brain is so fried from the fent you don't even know what's going on.
Lol I’m about to OD on cope here. Imagine serious posting on drama, the user that responded to you below me already made the point I would have if I were to lower myself to your paint chip eating level 😂
Dropper, this larp isn't fooling anyone. You're a guy that runs around trying to argue with others and has no ability to formulate a coherent point or respond to anything said.
And ur the lolcow that copy pastes lengthy text from opinion articles to support your online ‘arguments’. I appreciate you and your contributions, but show a little respect hun.
Edit>
Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, are the used in concert to treat covids symptoms. It’s not a cure, nor does it prevent infection. Google news search the drug name and make note of how the articles frame what it does. Most say it is not effective in preventing or curing covid 19, which is correct. I have family in this very field, that has used this very combination which is the only reason I’m serious posting. This is what he has told me, granted you know he’s also a rightoid.
When has the FDA ever jumped on board with something that hasn’t had years of clinical trials. Gotta start using a tiny bit of common sense ps, even if it goes against some contrived narrative that keeps the walls you have created, from falling around you.
Okay I texted him just for you. The two together have been proven effective, but due to litigious implications and the general pre existing conditions/advanced age of the critical covid patients, it’s deemed to have too many risk factors. He said the two together are taxing on the heart, but that he would use it for a generally otherwise healthy individual with effectiveness. Since so few covid people under 80 face serious life or death situations, I’m guessing they aren’t trying to kill off too many more boomers. I think the five governors that put covid patients into nursing homes was as far as they were willing to go, to run up the score.
Fact of the matter is the combination has been scientifically proven effective, but it brings more risk than value when airing on the side of legal caution. I was trying to find a conversation we had from 2016 earlier but forgot I overwrote my old account. I had said that the demand for racism was greater than the supply, in which you had taken umbrage with and did your sperg out thing. Low and behold you come to this exact conclusion today. At least you are somewhat evolving, as much as a Neo liberal ‘race realist’ can I suppose.
I read the FDA website, there is no need to filibuster. It doesn’t make what my dad said untrue or less factual. You are dismissed ps. You need to work on your style, it needs a refresh and more tact.
We have by far the most retarded rightoids on earth. They're a party you'd expect to see in Saudi Arabia or some 3rd world country.
Sometimes I get hyper aware and ask myself 'Am I just biased against conservatives or are they actually this dumb?" and as hard as I try I can never prove myself wrong.
Hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin has been widely misrepresented in both clinical reports and public media, and outpatient trials results are not expected until September. Early outpatient illness is very different than later hospitalized florid disease and the treatments differ. Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone, or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients, is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in early high-risk outpatient disease. Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin has been used as standard-of-care in more than 300,000 older adults with multicomorbidities, with estimated proportion diagnosed with cardiac arrhythmias attributable to the medications 47/100,000 users, of which estimated mortality is <20%, 9/100,000 users, compared to the 10,000 Americans now dying each week. These medications need to be widely available and promoted immediately for physicians to prescribe.
Unfortunately as that retracted Lancet study (and the swiftness of the WHO reaction to it) demonstrated we can no longer trust scientists and (inter) government agencies when the bad orange man is involved. If those people went and outright fabricated most of their data, you can't trust the rest not to try and pull the wool over your eyes in subtler ways. You're still operating under the assumption that you can point to the FDA citing a large study (which specifically studied inpatients) and assume that this has some sort of authority because surely they wouldn't sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives to own the bad orange man? Sorry to inform you Pizza but we are not in Kansas anymore.
Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone, or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients, is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in early high-risk outpatient disease.
But also because these days we can start with an assumption that they are all lying and then ask what evidence do we have that points in the direction of them being truthful. No, I don't like living in a world like that either, but we do regardless of whether we like it or not. Prove me wrong.
My point is, it might be that this medication has some effect on covid for this reason, but still isn't worth using compared to some other medication that doesn't have the draw backs.
My point is, anyone running around shilling this as an actual treatment for covid despite the growing evidence it probably isn't all that effective is an imbecile.
We don't even know enough about the virus to make that claim. All you're doing is endangering people. Why? Because Trump said so.
Anyone that starts from the assumption everyone is lying to them is, to be frank, of low intelligence and it's completely pointless engaging them.
Not everyone and not in every situation.
I have evidence that TDS has reached such a fever pitch that some of our scientists outright manufacture data and then our organizations such as The Lancet and the WHO fast track this fake science to policies.
In fact the FDA guidelines you linked is more evidence for that, thank you. Wouldn't you think that using inpatient studies when everyone has been saying that HCQ etc seems to work as an early intervention seem to be uncharacteristically negligent, maybe criminally so?
On the other hand I have no evidence that there's a symmetric pro-TDS going on. So I'm having an easier time trusting all the evidence in form of multiple papers that did find HCQ benefits in the relevant groups.
I also have some evidence in the form of Trump and Bolsonaro taking HCQ when their lives are literally on the line.
I also have evidence in form of some pretty graphs that you didn't look at the first time I posted the link, maybe you need to do it this time.
You on the other hand have blind trust towards institutions that have proven themselves unfaithful times and times again.
I have evidence that TDS has reached such a fever pitch that some of our scientists outright manufacture data and then our organizations such as The Lancet and the WHO fast track this fake science to policies.
This is literally retarded and just exposes how scientifically illiterate you are and how disconnected you are.
People buying sketchy data they don't know is sketchy is not "manufacturing data."
If you knew anything about this subject you'd know this happens often.
Selling data is an entire industry, sometimes the data sold is bad. That doesn't mean scientists are "manufacturing data."
Like I had to stop reading here, it's just serious evidence you're completely scientifically illiterate and just have no understanding of this subject. Your brain is simply too rotted to be reasoned with.
I put you on a "do not engage" list after that "climate change is actually good" fiasco and I have no idea why I ignored the tag.
People buying sketchy data they don't know is sketchy is not "manufacturing data."
Sapan Desai, the head of that sketchy company, is a brother in law of Amit Patel, a coauthor of the two retracted papers. The company claimed to have 11 employees (though only 6 listed on linked-in) and operated from a rented office, while providing an insanely large database that no one else knew about somehow.
In my opinion this is well past the point where the claim that the researchers didn't know the data was sketchy gets stretched so much it rips apart like an old used condom found in a gutter.
And then of course there are questions of how on Earth the paper passed the peer review in The Lancet and why the WHO dropped all further research into the HCQ immediately because of just one paper. You know the answer, of course.
But all right, I admit that I exaggerated when I said that the scientists involved personally manufactured the data. They did the next best thing but that's not quite the same, I retract my earlier statement.
Sapan Desai, the head of that sketchy company, is a brother in law of Amit Patel, a coauthor of the two retracted papers. The company claimed to have 11 employees (though only 6 listed on linked-in) and operated from a rented office, while providing an insanely large database that no one else knew about somehow.
If this is true (I don't know that it is and am trying to write something currently, so I'll take it at face value) it sounds more like run of the mill corruption, and I highly doubt every scientist working on the paper knew the data was bad.
And then of course there are questions of how on Earth the paper passed the peer review in The Lancet and why the WHO dropped all further research into the HCQ immediately because of just one paper. You know the answer, of course.
Peer-review doesn't check the credibility of the data you present, they check methodology and other things. For example, that's why the debunked autism paper was around for so long, he used fake data, but peer-review doesn't tend to check that part, they simply take your word for it and look at the methodology.
Either way, some papers being retracted doesn't mean there's some global conspiracy against Donald Trump, nor is there any evidence anything that happened here had anything to do with Donald Trump outside of the eternal conservative victim complex.
If this is true (I don't know that it is and am trying to write something currently, so I'll take it at face value)
The company has an excellently sourced Wikipedia page, in case you want to educate yourself instead of intellectual midgeting your way around.
Either way, some papers being retracted doesn't mean there's some global conspiracy against Donald Trump
It's not a conspiracy, it's an infectious mental illness.
Have you heard about Youtube retroactively removing promo videos of a UV device developed in one of the largest nonprofit academic medical centers in the U.S., to own the bad orange man?
How long do I have to keep giving you examples of this shit happening for until you recognize that yeah maybe there is a problem and that our truth-producing institutions can no longer be trusted to produce truth?
The company has an excellently sourced Wikipedia page, in case you want to educate yourself instead of intellectual midgeting your way around.
Is this satire? Is a guy that unironically tried to argue that climate change was good for the economy throwing this at me?
It's not a conspiracy, it's an infectious mental illness.
No, it's a delusion created by Donald Trump and the Republican party, one they started forming well over 30 years ago as they increasingly started losing ground in every academic institution in the country.
Rather than do some self-reflection and ask why education seems to conflict so hard with the social conservative mindset, they opted for creating a siege mentality within their base.
Have you heard about Youtube retroactively removing promo videos of a UV device developed in one of the largest nonprofit academic medical centers in the U.S., to own the bad orange man?
This is just, to be frank, intellectually dishonest. It was removed because it's fucking bunk, medical woo. It got removed after Trump mentioned it because it probably didn't have all that much attention before he did so.
Youtube agreed to follow WHO guidelines when hosting covid content, literally nothing that happened here had anything to do with Donald Trump outside of him bring attention to medical woo.
How long do I have to keep giving you examples of this shit happening for until you recognize that yeah maybe there is a problem and that our truth-producing institutions can no longer be trusted to produce truth?
Considering your only relevant example above was literal bullshit, why don't you keep going bud.
I'm going to blow your mind here, people don't hate Donald Trump because he's orange, but because he's a mentally ill, pathological lying, racial demagogue.
Donald Trump is probably one of the least trustworthy people on earth.
Is a guy that unironically tried to argue that climate change was good for the economy throwing this at me?
And I was right. I linked to a bunch of economists estimating the effects of AGW on economy and you countered with your gut feeling and nothing more.
Another thing I was right about by the way now that you reminded me is how Trump was right and the Birmingham NWS twitter was factually wrong about that hurricane. You tried to claim that in meteorology specifically 15% are numerically equal to zero. I want that nadir of your internet interactions to be forever burned into your consciousness.
This is just, to be frank, intellectually dishonest. It was removed because it's fucking bunk, medical woo.
Proof? And how the fuck Youtube is the peer review now?
Donald Trump is probably one of the least trustworthy people on earth.
How could you not understand that I can wholly approve of that statement, which for the record I do, and also decry the complete and deserved deterioration of trust in our public institutions? Stop being a tard asap please.
And I was right. I linked to a bunch of economists estimating the effects of AGW on economy and you countered with your gut feeling and nothing more.
No, you were not. You linked a paper that literally said they couldn't account for natural disasters or human factors - such as mass migration or war which would surely be involved in any serious climate change scenario.
You seemingly didn't read your own paper and then doubled down as I explained to you why your understanding of it was wrong.
Proof? And how the fuck Youtube is the peer review now?
Youtube agreed to remove anything that went against public health organization suggestions you ape.
It's being studied right now, but that doesn't change the fact suggesting something that is unproven is peak ignorance.
This seems to be a common trend with you morons - your cult leaders make absurd suggestions with no real medical evidence behind them, and when everyone else calls you on it you start pretending your opinions are on equal footing with reality and it's all a grand conspiracy against you.
How could you not understand that I can wholly approve of that statement, which for the record I do, and also decry the complete and deserved deterioration of trust in our public institutions? Stop being a tard asap please.
You are unironically a moron dude.
Not only have you repeatedly lied (or at the very least misrepresented current events) you're still trying to double down on said misrepresentations because you have nothing else to do at this point.
No, you were not. You linked a paper that literally said they couldn't account for natural disasters or human factors - such as mass migration or war which would surely be involved in any serious climate change scenario.
What mass migration, lol?
Whatever happens we have got
The Maxim gun
And they have not.
My point was that the current AGW narrative completely misrepresents the nature of the issue. It tries to convince everyone in the West that we are fucked, personally. Like someone who lives in Canada is afraid that their grandchildren will perish in blistering heat. And that's just not true, it's pretty much only Africans who are fucked like that, and yes we'd probably have to help them somehow and that would create inconveniences, but that's pretty different.
And I made that point in the context of a discussion of how dishonest reporting on climate change is not sustainable and long term disastrous. My generation was told that we must vote for Al Gore or else Manhattan will be literally under water by 2015, 2015 came and went, the flood failed to materialize, and also gone is any desire to support the fuckers who would lie to us and get us seriously worried for momentary political gains. What do you think will happen in 15 years when zoomers are all grown up and notice that their world has not gone up in flames?
It's being studied right now, but that doesn't change the fact suggesting something that is unproven is peak ignorance. [..] your cult leaders make absurd suggestions with no real medical evidence behind them, and when everyone else calls you on it you start pretending your opinions are on equal footing with reality and it's all a grand conspiracy against you.
My problem is with the retrocausal nature of all this. So we have one of the largest nonprofit academic medical centers in the U.S. researching this thing since 2016, and successfully using it for treatment of other viral infections, and posting a promo video, and then Trump says something about maybe putting UV light in the lungs, and then everyone laughs at him because what a moron, and then someone discovers that these folks has been working on exactly that since 2016, and then their video that was posted before any of this happened gets removed because idk it might encourage someone to swallow a tanning bed?
Your comment has been removed because it contained a bad word. The word was FAQs. If you intend to use this word in a purely demonstrative manner, please use the first letter of the word followed by '-word' or '-slur'. Thank you for helping us keep /r/drama safe.
It's deleted bro. But yeah I've heard that intelligence is highly heritable, which does pose interesting questions about variations in intelligence based on regions one is born in
90 comments
1 AutoModerator 2020-07-12
do not comment or vote in linked threads
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
20 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
I wonder where science was when hydroxychloroquine was proven to be effective in treating covid19, and the media/dnc said otherwise to own the orange man. Wonder how many people died as a result of that narrative 🤔
30 Damuel 2020-07-12
Don't forget how being outside at beaches would spread covid disastrously but protests definitely didn't.
1 [deleted] 2020-07-12
[deleted]
3 Damuel 2020-07-12
Why did you reply to me about HCQ when I didn't mention anything about it?
Are you having another brain meltdown?
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Idk why it responded to you, I was responding to dropper.
3 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
You a bit slow dropper?
Living under a rock maybe?
There is one review that found it might help, but was highly flawed:
7 wabasada 2020-07-12
not even you read your fucking words words words. But here's what it says.
The FDA is only recommending clinical trials due to mixed data. Plenty of studies have shown positive results
You also have liberal scientists who sacrificed their career making pretend studies to prove orange man pill bad: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/covid-19-lancet-retracts-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials
9 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
The FDA pulled an emergency authorization bud.
The general point is the idea the medicine works is dubious, and the comment I responded to tried to pretend it was a valid treatment currently.
What evidence do you have that:
A) Those scientists are liberals.
B) They did what they did to spite Trump.
This should be fun. I'm sure you didn't just make those things up out of thin air to bolster your own worldview.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/14/health/virus-journals.html
edit: let me clarify before you words words words you fucking sperg, I cannot prove your shithead points a nor b, but I sure as shit can prove some monkey scientists sacrificed their careers fabricating studies to prove orange man pill bad. And before you ask for some retard sources, my job isn't to educate you sweaty, go look up the effects these falsified papers had on global hydroxychloroquine funding and research yourself
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
If you can't answer my questions, why did you make the statements?
On what basis have you concluded the scientists are liberals trying to sink Trump?
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Why don't you read the rest of the sentence and figure it out? Are you telling me that all of your arguing on the internet has failed to make you more intelligent? Much surprise!
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
I read your comment, seemingly you're trying to avoid admitting you just made random shit up you can't possibly support.
Where is your evidence for the following:
A) These scientists are liberals.
B) There's a global plot to make Trump look bad.
If you can't support these claims, you need to admit that you can not support them.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Oh sorry, I didn't know linking to articles of papers being retracted was making random shit up. Goodnight sweaty, don't let your delusions run too wild.
edit: also, big YIKES from me pizzashill, you need to cool it with the gaslighting and goal post moving. Changing your questions when faced with your own mental and ideological inferiority is really off-color, and NOT in the spirit of this sub's culture of open discussion and debate.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
A) Where is your evidence these scientists were liberals.
B) Where is your evidence there's a global plot to sink Trump.
Better yet, where is your evidence that these scientists used faulty data specifically to target Trump?
Can you produce any of this?
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Again, cool it with the gaslighting. I'm not going to respond any further until you apologize for changing your questions and admit that I have provided evidence and did not just make "random shit up".
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
What question did I change?
You clearly stated that these scientists had ruined their careers to spite Trump, and were in fact liberals.
I've asked you the same questions in every comment, you've yet to answer them because you literally made those accusations up and have no ability to support them, and we both know that you do not.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
A) Which questions were changed.
B) When you claimed liberal scientists tanked their careers to sink Trump, how was that not made up?
You being poorly educated and illiterate is not me "gaslighting you."
I'm sorry you got slapped down, next time don't make wild accusations you can't support.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
to
and then
Nice try fascist, but your gaslighting and deflection doesn't work on someone who is actually educated and intelligent. I'm reporting you to the mods for harrassment, but I'll ask them to only temp ban you in the hopes that you'll reform your toxic behavior. I hope you take your time out to reflect on your negative ways and rectify them. In the future, I hope that any debates you have with me or others are done in good faith. Have a good day!
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
How mantally ill are you?
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Not as retarded as you, lol
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Also, if you ever read the link I posted you would have found evidence of studies being falsified, which definitely sinks careers. Your questions could have never been completely answered because they require motive to be established when only conjecture is possible, but you knew that and continued to insist that I magically conjure irrefutable evidence when analysis of the topic could provide enough merit to the claims "A" and "B" to warrant further discussion, regardless of concrete establishment of motive. But of course, because you are of poor breeding, intelligence, and education you insisted on gaslighting and moving the goal posts. You were put down, in the future please refrain from talking about topics you know nothing about.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
A) Where is your evidence they are liberals.
B) Where is your evidence this was a plot against Trump.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
lol, I broke Pizza
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
No, I'm proving my point you made random shit up.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Oh, refute my above post then instead of just repeating the same gaslighting questions again and again please, Pizza. Oh wait, you can't, otherwise you would have instead of posting the same unhinged questions half a dozen times.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
let's do this again.
A) Show me your evidence they are liberals.
B) Show me your evidence anything they did was directed at Donald Trump.
If you can not provide these things, admit you lied.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Okay, I don't think you realize this but I 'm not even the original poster so even if those claims were patently false, I never made them so I never lied.
And an inability to address my points while continuously screeching the same two things over and over makes you my bitch, pizza shrill.
Highpoweredcope 1 - 0 Pizza shrill
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
I don't care who you are, you injected yourself into this argument. It's reasonable to assume you were defending his points.
So in following:
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
2-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Delusional.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
says the moron who parroted the same statement 8 times in a row because they couldn't read
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
I read everything you typed, I simply don't care about that. The only argument I care about, and the argument you injected yourself into:
"these scientists were liberals and did this thing to attack Trump."
Full stop. If you can't support those claims, nothing else you say to me is relevant.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
Pizza shrill, this is how i know you're a retard and I've unequivocally won. I'm not the person who you made that comment to, so I have no need to answer it. I injected myself into the argument to add context and analysis on a different point of the topic, which you knew from the beginning but could not acknowledge as it would mean being incorrect. More fully, your inability to address any points that I made to add nuance and detail to the argument means that you are fully incapable of defending your position. I do not need to address your ridiculous claim because your position is indefensible while mine is iron clad. Trying to ignore points made in order to focus on one infinitesimal detail is proof of a loser.
3-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
It doesn't matter, you mongo. I don't care about any other argument you made, or any point you made. You don't get to inject yourself into arguments and change the topic you poorly educated moron.
I have no interest in any points made here outside of the point I argued against.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
4-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
This is what rabid delusion looks like.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
5-0. How many more times are you going to ask the same questions that were already answered?
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
You did not answer the questions.
You did not provide evidence for the claims made. Reality is not subjective.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
6-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Again, you are delusional.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
7-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Delusional.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
8-0
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Delusional.
1 highpoweredcope 2020-07-12
9-0
-1 wabasada 2020-07-12
Thanks for the desperate cope and smug posting, so I repeat. The FDA is only recommending clinical trials due to mixed results and you think that the scientists bunked his career for the hell of it. Don't just rephrase what I said in a slightly negative light and think you've proven anything I said wrong.
2 TellMeToStudyPls 2020-07-12
we got a terminally rightoid here.
Hey fatty, literally no one cares about the US's stand on Covid. You have utterly failed. So just die in silence.
Thank you.
2 wabasada 2020-07-12
I'd try and guess your country but chances are no one gives a shit about it.
Try obsessing about another country sweaty.
4 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
Can you make this same post except proving the russia conspiracy 🤔. Regardless I’m gonna use this pasta for my Neo liberal Covidcel account.
6 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Good response, take a fucking seat you ape. This is why everyone mocks you dropper, you're absurdly bad faith and never respond ot counter anything said to you because you brain is so fried from the fent you don't even know what's going on.
5 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
🤤🤤🤤🤤
Lol I’m about to OD on cope here. Imagine serious posting on drama, the user that responded to you below me already made the point I would have if I were to lower myself to your paint chip eating level 😂
7 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Dropper, this larp isn't fooling anyone. You're a guy that runs around trying to argue with others and has no ability to formulate a coherent point or respond to anything said.
You're a joke.
2 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
And ur the lolcow that copy pastes lengthy text from opinion articles to support your online ‘arguments’. I appreciate you and your contributions, but show a little respect hun.
Edit>
Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, are the used in concert to treat covids symptoms. It’s not a cure, nor does it prevent infection. Google news search the drug name and make note of how the articles frame what it does. Most say it is not effective in preventing or curing covid 19, which is correct. I have family in this very field, that has used this very combination which is the only reason I’m serious posting. This is what he has told me, granted you know he’s also a rightoid.
2 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
What does the FDA say?
1 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
When has the FDA ever jumped on board with something that hasn’t had years of clinical trials. Gotta start using a tiny bit of common sense ps, even if it goes against some contrived narrative that keeps the walls you have created, from falling around you.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
What research did the FDA use to pull the emergency authorization?
1 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
Okay I texted him just for you. The two together have been proven effective, but due to litigious implications and the general pre existing conditions/advanced age of the critical covid patients, it’s deemed to have too many risk factors. He said the two together are taxing on the heart, but that he would use it for a generally otherwise healthy individual with effectiveness. Since so few covid people under 80 face serious life or death situations, I’m guessing they aren’t trying to kill off too many more boomers. I think the five governors that put covid patients into nursing homes was as far as they were willing to go, to run up the score.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
I don't give a shit what your father says dropper.
I am asking you a question.
Which research did the FDA use to pull it?
1 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
Fact of the matter is the combination has been scientifically proven effective, but it brings more risk than value when airing on the side of legal caution. I was trying to find a conversation we had from 2016 earlier but forgot I overwrote my old account. I had said that the demand for racism was greater than the supply, in which you had taken umbrage with and did your sperg out thing. Low and behold you come to this exact conclusion today. At least you are somewhat evolving, as much as a Neo liberal ‘race realist’ can I suppose.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
1 cakejerry_B0T 2020-07-12
I read the FDA website, there is no need to filibuster. It doesn’t make what my dad said untrue or less factual. You are dismissed ps. You need to work on your style, it needs a refresh and more tact.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
I am asking you a question.
Which research did the FDA use to pull it?
2 TellMeToStudyPls 2020-07-12
Sometimes I forget that not everyone on /r/drama is pretending to be a retarded degenerate and some are actually amerifat rightoids.
oof, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy to be born in the US. Such a shit hole of a country.
2 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
We have by far the most retarded rightoids on earth. They're a party you'd expect to see in Saudi Arabia or some 3rd world country.
Sometimes I get hyper aware and ask myself 'Am I just biased against conservatives or are they actually this dumb?" and as hard as I try I can never prove myself wrong.
They're just dumb people.
1 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
https://academic.oup.com/aje/advance-article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa093/5847586
There's also some very suggestive graphs here.
Unfortunately as that retracted Lancet study (and the swiftness of the WHO reaction to it) demonstrated we can no longer trust scientists and (inter) government agencies when the bad orange man is involved. If those people went and outright fabricated most of their data, you can't trust the rest not to try and pull the wool over your eyes in subtler ways. You're still operating under the assumption that you can point to the FDA citing a large study (which specifically studied inpatients) and assume that this has some sort of authority because surely they wouldn't sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives to own the bad orange man? Sorry to inform you Pizza but we are not in Kansas anymore.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
A) Which research did the FDA use to the pull the authorization?
B) I have no interest in your opinions of scientists. You're both scientifically illiterate and poorly educated.
1 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
Was the main one as I understand it. Unlike you Pizza I actually read the shit linked by the people I argue with.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Why is the FDA's analysis of the scientific data invalid?
1 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
But also because these days we can start with an assumption that they are all lying and then ask what evidence do we have that points in the direction of them being truthful. No, I don't like living in a world like that either, but we do regardless of whether we like it or not. Prove me wrong.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Anyone that starts from the assumption everyone is lying to them is, to be frank, of low intelligence and it's completely pointless engaging them.
And just so you're aware, Covid is seemingly causing serious blood clotting:
And there's at least some loose evidence that hydroxychloroquine has some mitigating effects in relation to blood clot formation:
My point is, it might be that this medication has some effect on covid for this reason, but still isn't worth using compared to some other medication that doesn't have the draw backs.
My point is, anyone running around shilling this as an actual treatment for covid despite the growing evidence it probably isn't all that effective is an imbecile.
We don't even know enough about the virus to make that claim. All you're doing is endangering people. Why? Because Trump said so.
2 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
Not everyone and not in every situation.
I have evidence that TDS has reached such a fever pitch that some of our scientists outright manufacture data and then our organizations such as The Lancet and the WHO fast track this fake science to policies.
In fact the FDA guidelines you linked is more evidence for that, thank you. Wouldn't you think that using inpatient studies when everyone has been saying that HCQ etc seems to work as an early intervention seem to be uncharacteristically negligent, maybe criminally so?
On the other hand I have no evidence that there's a symmetric pro-TDS going on. So I'm having an easier time trusting all the evidence in form of multiple papers that did find HCQ benefits in the relevant groups.
I also have some evidence in the form of Trump and Bolsonaro taking HCQ when their lives are literally on the line.
I also have evidence in form of some pretty graphs that you didn't look at the first time I posted the link, maybe you need to do it this time.
You on the other hand have blind trust towards institutions that have proven themselves unfaithful times and times again.
0 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
This is literally retarded and just exposes how scientifically illiterate you are and how disconnected you are.
People buying sketchy data they don't know is sketchy is not "manufacturing data."
If you knew anything about this subject you'd know this happens often.
Selling data is an entire industry, sometimes the data sold is bad. That doesn't mean scientists are "manufacturing data."
Like I had to stop reading here, it's just serious evidence you're completely scientifically illiterate and just have no understanding of this subject. Your brain is simply too rotted to be reasoned with.
I put you on a "do not engage" list after that "climate change is actually good" fiasco and I have no idea why I ignored the tag.
2 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
Sapan Desai, the head of that sketchy company, is a brother in law of Amit Patel, a coauthor of the two retracted papers. The company claimed to have 11 employees (though only 6 listed on linked-in) and operated from a rented office, while providing an insanely large database that no one else knew about somehow.
In my opinion this is well past the point where the claim that the researchers didn't know the data was sketchy gets stretched so much it rips apart like an old used condom found in a gutter.
And then of course there are questions of how on Earth the paper passed the peer review in The Lancet and why the WHO dropped all further research into the HCQ immediately because of just one paper. You know the answer, of course.
But all right, I admit that I exaggerated when I said that the scientists involved personally manufactured the data. They did the next best thing but that's not quite the same, I retract my earlier statement.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
If this is true (I don't know that it is and am trying to write something currently, so I'll take it at face value) it sounds more like run of the mill corruption, and I highly doubt every scientist working on the paper knew the data was bad.
Peer-review doesn't check the credibility of the data you present, they check methodology and other things. For example, that's why the debunked autism paper was around for so long, he used fake data, but peer-review doesn't tend to check that part, they simply take your word for it and look at the methodology.
Either way, some papers being retracted doesn't mean there's some global conspiracy against Donald Trump, nor is there any evidence anything that happened here had anything to do with Donald Trump outside of the eternal conservative victim complex.
2 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
The company has an excellently sourced Wikipedia page, in case you want to educate yourself instead of intellectual midgeting your way around.
It's not a conspiracy, it's an infectious mental illness.
Have you heard about Youtube retroactively removing promo videos of a UV device developed in one of the largest nonprofit academic medical centers in the U.S., to own the bad orange man?
How long do I have to keep giving you examples of this shit happening for until you recognize that yeah maybe there is a problem and that our truth-producing institutions can no longer be trusted to produce truth?
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
Is this satire? Is a guy that unironically tried to argue that climate change was good for the economy throwing this at me?
No, it's a delusion created by Donald Trump and the Republican party, one they started forming well over 30 years ago as they increasingly started losing ground in every academic institution in the country.
Rather than do some self-reflection and ask why education seems to conflict so hard with the social conservative mindset, they opted for creating a siege mentality within their base.
This is just, to be frank, intellectually dishonest. It was removed because it's fucking bunk, medical woo. It got removed after Trump mentioned it because it probably didn't have all that much attention before he did so.
Youtube agreed to follow WHO guidelines when hosting covid content, literally nothing that happened here had anything to do with Donald Trump outside of him bring attention to medical woo.
Considering your only relevant example above was literal bullshit, why don't you keep going bud.
I'm going to blow your mind here, people don't hate Donald Trump because he's orange, but because he's a mentally ill, pathological lying, racial demagogue.
Donald Trump is probably one of the least trustworthy people on earth.
1 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
And I was right. I linked to a bunch of economists estimating the effects of AGW on economy and you countered with your gut feeling and nothing more.
Another thing I was right about by the way now that you reminded me is how Trump was right and the Birmingham NWS twitter was factually wrong about that hurricane. You tried to claim that in meteorology specifically 15% are numerically equal to zero. I want that nadir of your internet interactions to be forever burned into your consciousness.
Proof? And how the fuck Youtube is the peer review now?
How could you not understand that I can wholly approve of that statement, which for the record I do, and also decry the complete and deserved deterioration of trust in our public institutions? Stop being a tard asap please.
1 professorshillphd 2020-07-12
No, you were not. You linked a paper that literally said they couldn't account for natural disasters or human factors - such as mass migration or war which would surely be involved in any serious climate change scenario.
You seemingly didn't read your own paper and then doubled down as I explained to you why your understanding of it was wrong.
Youtube agreed to remove anything that went against public health organization suggestions you ape.
If you want more on this:
It's being studied right now, but that doesn't change the fact suggesting something that is unproven is peak ignorance.
This seems to be a common trend with you morons - your cult leaders make absurd suggestions with no real medical evidence behind them, and when everyone else calls you on it you start pretending your opinions are on equal footing with reality and it's all a grand conspiracy against you.
You are unironically a moron dude.
Not only have you repeatedly lied (or at the very least misrepresented current events) you're still trying to double down on said misrepresentations because you have nothing else to do at this point.
1 zergling_Lester 2020-07-12
What mass migration, lol?
Whatever happens we have got
The Maxim gun
And they have not.
My point was that the current AGW narrative completely misrepresents the nature of the issue. It tries to convince everyone in the West that we are fucked, personally. Like someone who lives in Canada is afraid that their grandchildren will perish in blistering heat. And that's just not true, it's pretty much only Africans who are fucked like that, and yes we'd probably have to help them somehow and that would create inconveniences, but that's pretty different.
And I made that point in the context of a discussion of how dishonest reporting on climate change is not sustainable and long term disastrous. My generation was told that we must vote for Al Gore or else Manhattan will be literally under water by 2015, 2015 came and went, the flood failed to materialize, and also gone is any desire to support the fuckers who would lie to us and get us seriously worried for momentary political gains. What do you think will happen in 15 years when zoomers are all grown up and notice that their world has not gone up in flames?
My problem is with the retrocausal nature of all this. So we have one of the largest nonprofit academic medical centers in the U.S. researching this thing since 2016, and successfully using it for treatment of other viral infections, and posting a promo video, and then Trump says something about maybe putting UV light in the lungs, and then everyone laughs at him because what a moron, and then someone discovers that these folks has been working on exactly that since 2016, and then their video that was posted before any of this happened gets removed because idk it might encourage someone to swallow a tanning bed?
1 [deleted] 2020-07-12
[removed]
2 AutoModerator 2020-07-12
Your comment has been removed because it contained a bad word. The word was
FAQs. If you intend to use this word in a purely demonstrative manner, please use the first letter of the word followed by '-word' or '-slur'. Thank you for helping us keep /r/drama safe.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 Detective_Fallacy 2020-07-12
???
7 wtboriginalthought 2020-07-12
PArTy oF ScIEnCE -> post r/neoliberal banned me for
5 AnotherLibtardRekt 2020-07-12
It's deleted bro. But yeah I've heard that intelligence is highly heritable, which does pose interesting questions about variations in intelligence based on regions one is born in
5 rakrakaon 2020-07-12
le enlightened redditor
2 Whaddaulookinat 2020-07-12
$20 they're thinking about Galileo and the Catholic Church...
3 Pepperglue 2020-07-12
I love science when it agrees with my worldview.