Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
indydave

Audacious! "Show meet someone who believes in Noah's ark and..."

Recommended Posts

On ‎5‎/‎26‎/‎2020 at 10:17 PM, piasan said:

There's a reason for that.   For example, in NC, the average of 5 polls has Biden ahead 47% to 46% with an average of +1.0%  In MI, 8 polls have an average to Biden ahead 49-43 with a an average gap of 6.1%.

The biggest problem with this is that the oldest of the polls I mentioned is May 5 and half of them have been since May 20.

See the source image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, popoi said:

"Attention workers, an employee has tested positive, but there is no cause for alarm, as only 2.72 of you are expected to die in the worst case. Please remain at your stations!"

 

a good plan would be continued testing of the employees and implementing a sane, workable procedure to keep these people at work.

one such procedure could be the issuance of full face gas masks and latex gloves.

also, instructing the employees on how to effectively reduce the spread of this virus.

if the employees were asked whether they would voluntarily stay home or wear the gas masks i'm confident that quite a few of them would opt for the latter.

i've heard that UV light kills this bug.

implementing some kind of "UV barrier" for the people and incoming material would prove highly effective.

the bottom line is simply this:

hardly anyone here locally observes the mask, gloves, distancing rules and the number dead is 3 or 4 of confirmed cases.

this IS NOT the "black death", "bulbonic plague", or some other "deadly menace".

why isn't it slathered all over the news when someone dies from a dose of aspirin or a dose of penicillin?

i can't even imagine the number of deaths caused by cancer medicines.

these medicines are downright TOXIC POISONS.

but hey, they are overwhelmingly prescribed to persons over 60 and the "young" are hardly affected.

sound familiar?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2020 at 11:56 PM, indydave said:

I went to a very popular site especially among Democrats and I found that the individual polling for each of the states just HAPPENED in nearly every instance to show the margin of error (of something just above 1000 polled) to be exactly the same as Biden's "lead." (This article was May 1.)

IMG_20200527_005910_083.jpg.e94e643c95dab2d46451331f09dfd15f.jpg

On 5/27/2020 at 12:17 AM, piasan said:

There's a reason for that.   For example, in NC, the average of 5 polls has Biden ahead 47% to 46% with an average of +1.0%  In MI, 8 polls have an average to Biden ahead 49-43 with a an average gap of 6.1%.

On 5/27/2020 at 12:31 AM, indydave said:

??? THAT WAS MY POINT. if you understand statistics you know it is false to say there is a lead if it is within the margin of error!

 

 

On 5/27/2020 at 2:03 AM, indydave said:

Thanks (not) for the lesson. Do you need you eyes checked? The blue area GIVES the ACTUAL margins and  the differences are within or with a fraction of a point of within the margins. AND this does not even account for the possible stealth Trump voter phenomenon, where they don't participate in polls or give false answers.

 

Let's go back to your original statement that "the individual polling for each of the states just HAPPENED in nearly every instance to show the margin of error"  The blue area is "average difference" not "margin of error."  What they have done is show the number of polls; the average for Biden; the average for Trump; and the difference between them.  What the table does NOT give is the margin of error.

As for the "stealth Trump voter" effect.... the polls have figured that out pretty well.  Besides, most Trump supporters are pretty vocal.

 

On 5/27/2020 at 2:03 AM, indydave said:

That means then, you're in agreement WITH ME. At this time Trump seems to have the lead among likely voters in the key battleground States! YAY!

Not so fast .....

All Silver says is that likely voters will lean more toward Trump.... not how much more.

"538" shows Biden leading in each state but doesn't give poll specifics. 

270towin does give specifics of up to 5 polls in the last 30 days at https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/ .  Click on "all polls" to get the detail.  Detail includes polls over 30 days that are not in the pie chart.  For the states listed by "538" we have:

  • North Carolina ... Biden leading 48-46 in 5 polls of registered voters (RV) between 5/1 and 5/20. Two polls of likely voters (LV) are Biden 48-45 on 4/29 and Trump 49-42 on 4/15.
  • Wisconsin ... Biden 47-41 in 2 polls  of RV on 5/12 and 5/21. There is one poll of LV on 4/13 with Biden 48-47.
  • Florida .... Biden 49-46 in 3 polls of RV between 5/15 and 5/28. No LV polls available.
  • Pennsylvania .... Biden 49-41 in 2 polls.  One RV on 5/21 is 48-39 and an LV on 5/1 that's 49-43.  There is another LV outside the 30 day window with Biden ahead 48-42 on 4/23
  • Michigan .... Biden 49-43 in 3 polls.  There is a 49-46 on 5/21 in an LV and two RV 51-45 on 5/20 and 47-39 on 5/21.  There is another LV with Biden ahead 50-41 on 4/13.

While these are all close," I don't see a lot of evidence Trump has a lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, piasan said:

The blue area is "average difference" not "margin of error."

You are right. I saw "margin" and immediately thought "margin of error." I appreciate the correction.

If the Dems BELIEVE he has a good lead, I wonder why that enthusiasm level is so dang LOW???

Maybe I will feel differently later but I think that's about all I have to say on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, indydave said:

You are right. I saw "margin" and immediately thought "margin of error." I appreciate the correction.

If the Dems BELIEVE he has a good lead, I wonder why that enthusiasm level is so dang LOW???

Maybe I will feel differently later but I think that's about all I have to say on this.

You asked about enthusiasm before and I hadn't gotten back to it ...

There are two kinds of enthusiasm .... pro-Biden and anti-Trump.   Pro-Biden isn't near as strong as anti-Trump.... but either one will get people out to vote.

In those "swing" states, neither Biden nor Trump has a "good" lead.  We can expect most of the campaign will be concentrated in those 5 or 6 states though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, what if said:

here are some scientific findings regarding the above video.

a large part of this may be relevant to what is happening today.

since it's an analysis of the 1918 epidemic i seriously doubt if there is any spin or bias.

also note in figure 1 the general death rate in the lower 2 curves, this is the typical death rate of a typical flu, the classic "u shape".

most deaths are less than 10 years of age and greater than 60 years of age and it applies to covid 19.

the video mentions 675,000 dead, the paper a "conservative" 500,000.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2740912/

 

edit:

i googled the 1918 US population and it cam back as 103 million.

for comparison, the 675, 000 deaths in 1918 would translate roughly to a little more than 2 million today.

as of now, we haven't come anywhere near that. by a very long shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Fox tonight...Brad Hunstable was interviewed about his 12 year old son who killed himself because of despair and isolation due to the lockdown. IF suicides and overdose deaths go up (say) 30%, not to mention alcoholism deaths, or certain muders from domestic abuse...it would probably rival if not exceed the virus itself.

If people want a FAIR non-political picture, they should try to model THAT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, indydave said:

On Fox tonight...Brad Hunstable was interviewed about his 12 year old son who killed himself because of despair and isolation due to the lockdown. IF suicides and overdose deaths go up (say) 30%, not to mention alcoholism deaths, or certain muders from domestic abuse...it would probably rival if not exceed the virus itself.

If people want a FAIR non-political picture, they should try to model THAT.

It's a fair and reasonable point.

I suggest Fred's topic at:   https://evolutionfairytale.com/forum/index.php?/topic/6940-25-ways-the-shutdown-kills-conspiracy-list/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 2:46 AM, indydave said:

You and others (including Pi...famous "splitter" known for asking that side topics be taken to another thread) have had a chance to "air" your thoughts but please don't "hijack" the thread.

Hey ! ! ! 

Last time I suggested a new topic, someone told me to "MYOB."  Do you know who that might have been?  :D

How many subjects have we discussed under this single topic heading that have absolutely nothing to do with the OP?   Here's one .... hydroxychloroquine.  Trump's response to COVID-19 is another. 

I bet I can go back and find at least 10 good, extended topics we've had in the nearly 70 pages of this one.

I just don't understand why a single topic that runs 70 pages is better than 7 topics of 10 pages each.  Or even 14 topics of 5 pages each    :dono:

Speaking for myself only .... when I browse the net and happen on a new forum I will look to see what's being discussed.  When there are a half dozen conversations on different topics going on, I'm a lot more likely to stick around ..... and maybe even join ...... than if everything is bundled into a single 70 page discussion.

Comments ? ? ?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, piasan said:

Comments ? ? ?

agreed.

one thread that has a variety of discussion will have a broader readership than a thread of a single discussion.

if you don't like a particular discussion you can always skip that part.

evolution has more to do with the thread title than either covid 19 or trump/ biden.

please don't be offended by the poll like nature of my post

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2020 at 2:08 AM, popoi said:

 

On 5/28/2020 at 12:48 AM, what if said:

i'm quite sure that accidents account for a higher death rate than this virus does.

 

On 5/28/2020 at 2:08 AM, popoi said:

In 2018, the rate of fatal work injuries in manufacturing was 2.2/100,000 full time equivalent workers, or .0022%.

actually i was talking about all accidents, auto, home, and industrial.

this comes to approximately 200,000 per year.

if you want to include cancer, which most of the cases has an environmental cause, we have about 600,000 per year.

you most certainly DO NOT see the government going after big business to clean up its act in regards to cancer deaths.

OTOH, i most certainly see the point in taking precautions in regards to COVID 19.

i will continue to wear my mask and gloves even though my mask makes it hard for me to breath.

i suspect it's hard for others to breath as well.

one walmart employee continually pulled her mask down from her nose to breath easier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

a good plan would be continued testing of the employees and implementing a sane, workable procedure to keep these people at work.

If there was a workable alternative available, don't you think Ford would have done that instead of shutting down?

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

one such procedure could be the issuance of full face gas masks and latex gloves.

Do you think they'd have that on hand, or might it take time and money to procure and distribute them?

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

also, instructing the employees on how to effectively reduce the spread of this virus.

I think at this point pretty much everyone is aware of the steps we can take individually to reduce the spread.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

if the employees were asked whether they would voluntarily stay home or wear the gas masks i'm confident that quite a few of them would opt for the latter.

Enough to staff a whole line?  Keep in mind that we're talking about a number of specialized roles here, not 800 completely interchangeable people.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

i've heard that UV light kills this bug.

implementing some kind of "UV barrier" for the people and incoming material would prove highly effective.

Leaving aside that the type of UV that is effective at killing viruses is pretty bad for humans and some types of material, we're back to the cost and time required to implemenet the plan, only now we're talking about an uncertain process and much more complicated equipment.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

the bottom line is simply this:

hardly anyone here locally observes the mask, gloves, distancing rules and the number dead is 3 or 4 of confirmed cases.

A higher level of risk doesn't guarantee that the risk will be realized.  You may be able to drive without your seatbelt on without any problems for a very long time, but we don't wear seatbelts because we will definitely die without them or because we definitely won't die with them, it's about improving the odds.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

this IS NOT the "black death", "bulbonic plague", or some other "deadly menace".

Nobody said this was on par with the single worst pandemic in human history, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take it seriously.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

why isn't it slathered all over the news when someone dies from a dose of aspirin or a dose of penicillin?

Because someone who has contacted you dying from an aspirin overdose or penicillin allergy doesn't imply a risk to you, unless the contact was them pouring a bunch of aspirin in your mouth.  The risks of those things are adequately addressed by education about proper use, safety measures for people who don't or can't understand that proper use, and testing for allergies or particular vulnerability.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

i can't even imagine the number of deaths caused by cancer medicines.

these medicines are downright TOXIC POISONS.

I would imagine less than the number caused by cancer itself, which is pretty much the point.

On 5/28/2020 at 5:08 AM, what if said:

but hey, they are overwhelmingly prescribed to persons over 60 and the "young" are hardly affected.

sound familiar?

Are you implying that young people don't/shouldn't worry about cancer?

7 hours ago, what if said:

actually i was talking about all accidents, auto, home, and industrial.

this comes to approximately 200,000 per year.

if you want to include cancer, which most of the cases has an environmental cause, we have about 600,000 per year.

How is that comparison in any way relevant?  Sure, this virus isn't as dangerous to those employees as the entire rest of the world combined, but the sources and means to mitigate those risks are enormously varied, as opposed to a single and very addressable risk of someone in the building they have to be in having a communicable disease.

What you're arguing seems like standing around in a lightning storm with a metal pole, and telling people who question you that statistically speaking it's more likely you'll die from cancer than a lightning strike.  It may actually be true, but the point is that there's an obvious and immediate way to reduce one of those risks, not that it is the only risk you should ever worry about.

7 hours ago, what if said:

you most certainly DO NOT see the government going after big business to clean up its act in regards to cancer deaths.

Not as much as they should, but the idea the government doesn't do anything at all to prevent cancer deaths is absurdly wrong.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, piasan said:

Hey ! ! ! 

Last time I suggested a new topic, someone told me to "MYOB."  Do you know who that might have been?  :D

How many subjects have we discussed under this single topic heading that have absolutely nothing to do with the OP?   Here's one .... hydroxychloroquine.  Trump's response to COVID-19 is another. 

I bet I can go back and find at least 10 good, extended topics we've had in the nearly 70 pages of this one.

I just don't understand why a single topic that runs 70 pages is better than 7 topics of 10 pages each.  Or even 14 topics of 5 pages each    :dono:

Speaking for myself only .... when I browse the net and happen on a new forum I will look to see what's being discussed.  When there are a half dozen conversations on different topics going on, I'm a lot more likely to stick around ..... and maybe even join ...... than if everything is bundled into a single 70 page discussion.

Comments ? ? ?

 

Thankfully this site has a very effective search function. Plus as for me, if you had not mentioned IN THIS THREAD the new topic regarding risks of lockdown I would have never known. If it were posted here I would have. But I'm not going do back and forth on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever fired Bright had good reason to!

 

https://aapsonline.org/fda-bureaucrat-brags-he-blocked-physician-prescribing-of-hydroxychloroquine-in-early-covid-19/

 

FDA Bureaucrat Brags On Blocking Physicians Prescribing Hydroxychloroqine in Early COVID-19

By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D.

How could a cheap, effective drug, FDA-approved and in use worldwide since 1955, suddenly be restricted for outpatient use by American physicians? On March 28, 2020, as physicians worldwide were seeing striking success using hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19, the FDA erected bureaucratic barriers.

Rick Bright, Ph.D., is an FDA bureaucrat, vaccine researcher, and was appointed by President Obama on November 15, 2016 to head BARDA (Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority, a sub-agency of the FDA). In an unprecedented move, Bright expanded his power and claimed credit for being the person imposing his will on all of us.

In an appalling admission, Bright said: “Specifically, and contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack scientific merit.”  Meanwhile, he promoted both remdesivir, a never-approved experimental antiviral in development by Gilead Sciences, and a vaccine for COVID-19. Early effective use of the older, safe, and  available hydroxychloroquine, whose patents had expired decades ago, would decrease demand for these new products.

Rick Bright’s dictatorial decree restricts the use of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) from the National Strategic Stockpile in COVID-19 to hospitalized patients only. States are using Bright’s fiat to impose broad restrictions limiting the drugs’ availability for physicians to use for outpatients to help them recover without hospitalization.

In other countries, early use in outpatients is changing the life-and-death equation by reducing severity and spread of illness, greatly reducing the need for hospitalization and ventilators and markedly reducing deaths.

By his own admission, Rick Bright, who is not a physician, knowingly and unilaterally countermanded Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, Admiral Giroir in charge of Public Health Service and the President of the United States, who had directed BARDA to establish a Nationwide Expanded Access Investigational New Drug (“IND”) protocol for chloroquine, which would provide significantly greater outpatient access for the drug than would an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Unlike an EUA, a Nationwide Expanded Access IND protocol would make the drug available for the treatment of COVID-19 outside a hospital setting at physicians’ medical discretion based on patients’ needs.

How does one non-physician bureaucrat have such power with impunity? How can one person brag about blocking physicians’ attempt to reduce hospitalization and deaths during a national emergency?

It is a falsehood to say that the administration promoted HCQ as a “panacea” or that this medicine “clearly lacks scientific merit.” Both statements are contradicted by video recordings of Presidential briefings, by NIH/CDC studies going back 15 years, and by U.S. and worldwide clinical outcomes studies in COVID-19.

It is unprecedented to restrict physicians from prescribing FDA-approved drugs for a newly discovered use—“off-label.” This is contrary to FDA regulations in place since World War II.

Basic science studies published in 2005 from our own CDC and NIH showed clearly that CQ and HCQ work early in SARS-CoV to block viral entry and multiplication, and suggested that they would not work as well in late-stage disease when the viral load had become huge. When SARS-CoV-1 waned and disappeared by late 2003, the drugs were not submitted for FDA-approval for this coronavirus. 

In 2019, when Chinese doctors recognized the deadly impact of SARS-CoV-2, they began trying known and available anti-viral medicines, especially CQ and HCQ, based on 15-year-old studies. They shared information with South Korea, India, Turkey, Iran, and several other countries, who also began quickly and successfully using CQ and HCQ, alone or with azithromycin. Later, Brazil, Israel, Costa Rica, Australia, and others followed, with good results .  

Based on these initial clinical reports, President Trump said, at an early press briefing, that CQ and HCQ “offered hope.”

More studies have replicated these findings. HCQ given within the first week of symptoms, especially with zinc, can prevent the virus from entering your body’s cells and taking over, much like people use locks and alarms to stop burglaries. Waiting until you are in the ICU is like installing home locks and alarm system after burglars have invaded, vandalized your home, and stolen all your valuables. The drugs cannot reliably undo the damage from the exaggerated immune response, or cytokine storm, triggered by COVID-19.

Examples from the world data on May 18, 2020, which is updated daily, show how Third-World countries are faring far better than the U.S., where entrenched bureaucrats, governors, and medical and pharmacy boards are interfering with physicians’ medical decisions.
 

Instead of orchestrating a war on HCQ,  the media should be asking key questions, such as:

How does ONE person, by his own admission, block directives from his superiors to expand availability of HCQ for outpatients and nursing home patients in the U.S.?What is the cost in lives and economic damage resulting from one person’s decision to restrict physicians’ independent medical decision-making?How many nursing home deaths could have been prevented if physicians had been allowed early access to HCQ?Why are U.S. doctors and nurses prevented from using HCQ prophylactically when workers in China, South Korea, India, Brazil, Argentina, Israel, Australia, Turkey, France, and other countries can be protected?Why does the U.S. with its a much more sophisticated medical infrastructure have a much higher mortality rate than poor countries?

Bright’s disastrous bureaucratic decision may well be remembered as one of the worst preventable medical tragedies in our time. Never again should one government employee be allowed unrestrained power without oversight, and allowed to make a sweeping order interfering with the prescribing authority of front-line physicians trying to save lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump has been right all along despite some here believing in fake news. Dated May 28.

http://covexit.com/yale-epidemiology-professor-urges-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-early-therapy-for-covid-19/

“Available evidence of efficacy of HCQ+AZ has been repeatedly described in the media as “anecdotal,” but most certainly is not.” 

A new article to be published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, calls for hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to be made widely available and promoted immediately for physicians, to be prescribed for early outpatient treatment.

The article, titled “Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis,” is authored by Professor Harvey Risch, MD, from Yale University. 

Dr. Harvey Risch is Professor of Epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. Dr. Risch received his MD degree from the University of California San Diego and PhD from the University of Chicago. He was a faculty member in epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Toronto before coming to Yale. Find his complete bio here.

We Cannot Afford the Luxury of Perfect Knowledge

Professor Risch recognizes that, in an ideal world, randomized double-blinded controlled clinical trials are preferable, yet, regarding ongoing randomized trials with HCQ+AZ, he notes: 

For the earliest trial, between now and September, assuming a flat epidemic curve of 10,000 deaths per week, I estimate that approximately 180,000 more deaths will occur in the US before the trial results are known.”

“In this context, we cannot afford the luxury of perfect knowledge and must evaluate, now and on an ongoing basis, the evidence for benefit and risk of these medications.” 

The author describes various studies. He also compares the case fatality rates typically observed without treatment to those with HCQ+AZ treatment.

For example, he notes that there was 12-13% mortality of hospitalized patients receiving placebos in the remdesivir trials both by Wang et al and in the ACT trials sponsored by NIH.

Professor Risch also discusses the issue of adverse events, which brings him to conclude that:

“the FDA, NIH and cardiology society warnings about cardiac arrhythmia adverse events, while appropriate for theoretical and physiological considerations about use of these medications, are not borne out in mortality in real-world usage of them.”  

“It would therefore be incumbent upon all three organizations to reevaluate their positions as soon as possible,” writes Professor Risch.

It is Our Obligation Not to Stand By

The analysis by Professor Risch brings him to the following concluding remarks.

“Some people will have contraindications and will need other agents for treatment or to remain in isolation. But for the great majority, I conclude that HCQ+AZ and HCQ+doxycycline, preferably with zinc can be this outpatient treatment, at least until we find or add something better, whether that could be remdesivir or something else.” 

“It is our obligation not to stand by, just “carefully watching,” as the old and infirm and inner city of us are killed by this disease and our economy is destroyed by it and we have nothing to offer except high-mortality hospital treatment.”

“We have a solution, imperfect, to attempt to deal with the disease. We have to let physicians employing good clinical judgement use it and informed patients choose it.” 

“There is a small chance that it may not work. But the urgency demands that we at least start to take that risk and evaluate what happens, and if our situation does not improve we can stop it …”

“… but we will know that we did everything that we could instead of sitting by and letting hundreds of thousands die because we did not have the courage to act according to our rational calculations.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, popoi said:

What you're arguing seems like standing around in a lightning storm with a metal pole, and telling people who question you that statistically speaking it's more likely you'll die from cancer than a lightning strike.

actually i'm not arguing anything.

i'm posting what i know to be facts.

and as of now, covid 19 seems to be about 20+ times less severe than the 1918 pandemic in regards to deaths.

i have no need nor desire to spin things, situations, or facts.

i've explicitly stated that i see the relevance of stormin normans suggestion that the precautions that WERE taken is the reason of the current situation. OTOH, what i see locally doesn't agree with that observation.

plus, i've given at least a workable model for keeping auto manufacturers in business and it isn't the only solution available, nor will it apply to every employer, but at least it's a start on how we can keep people working.

BTW, i believe i could buy a full face gas mask for less than the stimulus payment i received from the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Dr. Risch's primary source article.

https://academic.oup.com/aje/advance-article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa093/5847586

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....(indy- and Trump DID exactly that!)

The FDA has recently issued guidance (15) to physicians and the general 
public advising that the combination HCQ+AZ should not generally be used except by critically 
ill hospital inpatients or in the context of registered clinical trials. The NIH panel for Covid-19 
treatment guidelines say essentially the same (16), and a similar statement has been released by 
the major cardiology societies (17). Numerous reviews of HCQ efficacy and adverse events 
have been and continue to be published. To my knowledge, all of these reviews have omitted the 
two critical aspects of reasoning about these drugs: use of HCQ combined with AZ or with 
doxycycline, and use in the outpatient setting. For example, the Veterans' Administration 
Medical Centers study (18) examined treated hospitalized patients and was fatally flawed (19). (Indy-same goes for Lancet!)
The same point about outpatient use of the combined medications has been raised by a panel of 
distinguished French physicians (20) in petitioning their national government to allow outpatient 
use of HCQ+AZ. It appears that the FDA, NIH and cardiology society positions have been
based upon theoretical calculations about potential adverse events and from measured 
physiologic changes rather than from current real-world mortality experience with these 
medications and that their positions should be revised. In reviewing all available evidence, I will 
show that HCQ+AZ and HCQ+doxycycline are generally safe for short-term use in the  early 
treatment of most symptomatic high-risk  outpatients
where not contraindicated, and that they are
effective in preventing hospitalization for the overwhelming majority of such patients. If these 
combined medications become standard-of-care, they are likely to save an enormous number of 
lives that would otherwise be lost to this endemic disease....

evidence for utility or 
lack thereof or toxicity in hospitalized patients cannot be extrapolated to apply to outpatient use,...

 

The third piece of evidence involves the cohort of 1450 patients treated by Dr. Vladimir 
Zelenko of Monsey, NY. Dr. Zelenko has released a two-page report (28) describing his clinical 
reasoning and procedures, dosing conditions and regimen, and patient results through April 28. 
Symptomatic patients presenting to Dr. Zelenko were treated with five days of HCQ+AZ+zinc 
sulfate if they were considered high-risk, as evidenced by one or more of: age 60 years or older; 
high-risk comorbidities; body-mass index>30; mild shortness of breath at presentation. Patients 
were considered to have Covid-19 based on clinical grounds and started treatment as soon as 
possible following symptom onset, rather than delaying for test results before starting treatment. 
Of the 1450 patients, 1045 were classified as low-risk and sent home to recuperate without active 
medications. No deaths or hospitalizations occurred among them. Of the remaining 405 treated 
with the combined regimen, 6 were ultimately hospitalized and 2 died.
No cardiac arrhythmias 
were noted in these 405 patients....

The fourth relevant study was a controlled non-randomized trial of HCQ+AZ in 636 
symptomatic high-risk outpatients in São Paulo, Brazil (29). All consecutive patients were 
informed about the utility and safety profile of the medications and offered the treatment, and 
those who declined (n=224) comprised the control group. Patients were monitored daily by 
telemedicine. The study outcome was need for hospitalization, defined as clinically worsening 
condition or significant shortness of breath (blood oxygen saturation <90%). Even though the 
severities of all of the recorded flu-like signs and symptoms and of important comorbidities 

(diabetes, hypertension, asthma, stroke) were substantially greater in the treated patients than the 
controls, the need for hospitalization was significantly lower, 1.2% in patients starting treatment 
before day 7 of symptoms, 3.2% for patients starting treatment after day 7, and 5.4% for 
controls, P-value<.0001. No cardiac arrhythmias were reported in the 412 treated patients....

Examination of 
the database for adverse events reported from the beginning of the database in 1968 through 
2019 and into the beginning of 2020, shows for hydroxychloroquine 1064 adverse event reports 
including 200 deaths for the total of cardiac causes that could be both specifically and broadly 
classified as rhythm-related. Of these, 57 events including 10 deaths were attributed to Torsades 
de Pointes and long QT-interval syndrome combined. This concerns the entirety of HCQ use 
over more than 50 years of data, likely millions of uses and of longer-term use than the 5 days 

recommended for Covid-19 treatment. ...

These very small numbers of 
arrhythmias, as well as the null results in this very large empirical study should therefore put to 
rest the anxieties about population excess mortality of HCQ+AZ outpatient use, either from 
cardiac arrhythmias, or as mortality from all causes....

No studies of Covid-19 
outpatient HCQ+AZ use have shown higher mortality with such use than without, cardiac ORIGINAL 
arrhythmias included, thus there is no empirical downside to this combined medication use....

But for the great majority, I conclude that HCQ+AZ and HCQ+doxycycline, 
preferably with zinc (47) can be this outpatient treatment, at least until we find or add something 
better, whether that could be remdesivir or something else.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎28‎/‎2020 at 7:06 PM, piasan said:

Let's go back to your original statement that "the individual polling for each of the states just HAPPENED in nearly every instance to show the margin of error"  The blue area is "average difference" not "margin of error."  What they have done is show the number of polls; the average for Biden; the average for Trump; and the difference between them.  What the table does NOT give is the margin of error.

As for the "stealth Trump voter" effect.... the polls have figured that out pretty well.  Besides, most Trump supporters are pretty vocal.

 

Not so fast .....

All Silver says is that likely voters will lean more toward Trump.... not how much more.

"538" shows Biden leading in each state but doesn't give poll specifics. 

270towin does give specifics of up to 5 polls in the last 30 days at https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/ .  Click on "all polls" to get the detail.  Detail includes polls over 30 days that are not in the pie chart.  For the states listed by "538" we have:

  • North Carolina ... Biden leading 48-46 in 5 polls of registered voters (RV) between 5/1 and 5/20. Two polls of likely voters (LV) are Biden 48-45 on 4/29 and Trump 49-42 on 4/15.
  • Wisconsin ... Biden 47-41 in 2 polls  of RV on 5/12 and 5/21. There is one poll of LV on 4/13 with Biden 48-47.
  • Florida .... Biden 49-46 in 3 polls of RV between 5/15 and 5/28. No LV polls available.
  • Pennsylvania .... Biden 49-41 in 2 polls.  One RV on 5/21 is 48-39 and an LV on 5/1 that's 49-43.  There is another LV outside the 30 day window with Biden ahead 48-42 on 4/23
  • Michigan .... Biden 49-43 in 3 polls.  There is a 49-46 on 5/21 in an LV and two RV 51-45 on 5/20 and 47-39 on 5/21.  There is another LV with Biden ahead 50-41 on 4/13.

While these are all close," I don't see a lot of evidence Trump has a lead.

See the source image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what really happened here?

i mean why has our economy upended itself?

everybody had to stay home?

i'm quite certain that some manufacturers could remain in operation, and some have.

what happened to americas legendary innovation?

one of the primary problems i think is americans hasn't realized we've entered the age of the internet.

oh sure, we have social sites like facebook and twitter, but we have failed in the "personal website" area.

a person with a vehicle could easily start a "grocery delivery" service to lockins.

comcast has already provided a backbone for something like that by providing dirt cheap good internet service.

a person could start a service that provides instruction on how to create organize and maintain a website.

and it still may come about, who knows.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/05/30/george-floyd-protests-riots-violent-outside-agitators-minnesota/5291658002/

why doesn't the media report this for what it is?

it's flat out TERRORISM.

shortly after 911 our leaders put in place strong measures to fight this type of nonsense but it was systematically gutted by various lawmakers.

to them i ask, are you happy?

put your thumbs in your suspenders and tell everyone how proud you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 9:13 PM, Blitzking said:

I'm not a religious person "

Oh you are.. You just dont use that term "religious"..

Born again Christian's arent religious.. Jesus railed against the "religious people" of his day calling them whitewashed tombs.. 

We just dont have the amount of FAITH required in order to believe in Metaphysical Naturalism.... 

He is using the death of this woman as a political football for his own selfish gain against someone he sees as an adversary.  If Scarborough was a Trump supporter, then Trump wouldn't give two turds about her.  The family doesn't want him to use her name this way;  they don't  want to get "to the bottom of it."  Does that not matter?  Scarborough was a Republican congressman from Florida....so, I doubt she was a Democrat.  But, does that really matter, e.g., would that make her death any less tragic, Indy???  I'm just extremely surprised that those who are Born Again Christians or at least claim to be find this behavior totally acceptable.  I'm not a Born Again Christian, but I sure wouldn't accept this callous behavior from anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/29/2020 at 5:11 PM, popoi said:

Enough to staff a whole line?  Keep in mind that we're talking about a number of specialized roles here, not 800 completely interchangeable people.

some of those positions would require "special knowledge" yes.

for example knowing the various paint codes.

but most would be of a generic type.

running a punch press for example.

the fact of the matter is that ford didn't even attempt this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StormanNorman said:

He is using the death of this woman as a political football for his own selfish gain against someone he sees as an adversary.  If Scarborough was a Trump supporter, then Trump wouldn't give two turds about her.  The family doesn't want him to use her name this way;  they don't  want to get "to the bottom of it."  Does that not matter?  Scarborough was a Republican congressman from Florida....so, I doubt she was a Democrat.  But, does that really matter, e.g., would that make her death any less tragic, Indy???  I'm just extremely surprised that those who are Born Again Christians or at least claim to be find this behavior totally acceptable.  I'm not a Born Again Christian, but I sure wouldn't accept this callous behavior from anyone. 

Why do you selectively criticize Trump for THIS yet ignore ALL of the unbelievable filth and lies and the CONSTANT Immoral disgusting and vile behaviour that the Democrats and the Media has been guilty of for years??

Selective outrage on steroids??...LOL 

Are you kidding me?? Do you need me to give you a PARTIAL list to wake you up??

Jesus had something to say about that (Not that you care)

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. MATT 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StormanNorman said:

He is using the death of this woman as a political football for his own selfish gain against someone he sees as an adversary.  If Scarborough was a Trump supporter, then Trump wouldn't give two turds about her.  The family doesn't want him to use her name this way;  they don't  want to get "to the bottom of it."  Does that not matter?  Scarborough was a Republican congressman from Florida....so, I doubt she was a Democrat.  But, does that really matter, e.g., would that make her death any less tragic, Indy???  I'm just extremely surprised that those who are Born Again Christians or at least claim to be find this behavior totally acceptable.  I'm not a Born Again Christian, but I sure wouldn't accept this callous behavior from anyone. 

"I'm not a Born Again Christian"

Right.. And I'm not a 7 foot tall NBA Basketball Star..

Duh..

The difference is, I could NEVER BE a 7 foot tall NBA Basketball Star

We "Born Again" Christians  (Is there any other kind?) are fully aware that God uses imperfect people to do his will... It has happened all throughout history and the list is quite long to say the least.. If you WERE to become a Born Again Christian (I know of no other type) The blinding scales of Evolutionism would fall from your eyes and you would be a new creature in spirit and in truth, You would realize the Trump is putting pro life judges on federal benches by the hundreds and maybe we can stop killing helpless defenseless young humans for convenience by the millions some day soon.. 

 

Let me ask you a question..

 

Evolutionists force themselves  to believe that over the course of "500 million years" while SOME comb jellyfish were evolving into humans, OTHER comb jellyfish were evolving into.. comb .jellyfish!.... ("Living fossils")  LOL

 Wouldn't a much more PARSIMONIOUS explanation be that God created Humans and God Created Jellyfish separately in the beginning just like he said he did in Genesis?

Aren't the IMPLICATIONS of Evolutionism the reason why you force yourself to believe it?

Isnt it because they happen to align with your philosophical worldview and science has nothing to do with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

Our Terms