If doctors could prescribe HCQ, 'we wouldn't need the lockdowns'

Why do you suggest the presumption is invalid??? After all the basis of mortality and infection rates have been found to be reasonably accurate. Pointing to the presumption as being reasonable basis for analysis, as we remain still to have failure of any kind in reality to indicate future without such...


HCQ may work well for what is prescribed for, but if you actually read the links I gave you would see.

In other words, it will only be prescribed if the reward outweighs the risk. That was not in doubt and I never claimed it was any different.

I simply point out that considering some effects on the system (as pointed too) prescribing these medications on the basis of treating Covid19 is serious risk due to these effects. I don’t think you will find ANY practitioner who would question that presumption without much further study…

The problem you have with HCQ is that ALL the evidence provided AND all the claims made are unsupported. Proud of the politicization of medications??? No, I am not even proud of the way many US governments and political identities have politicized the treatment, prevention and seriousness of the virus to the point that people would rather take medical advice from politicians rather than medical practitioners.


Trying to insult me for the claim politicization of your point seems just a little strange considering your arguing in a political forum about the use of medications in treatment of pandemic virus, seems rather self-reflective from what I see. I have provided reasonable and straight forward case that points NOT to the failure of medications use, but that make case for better study of such. I have not tried to insult you or demonstrate any fault or failure of yours in trying to score political points of any kind.


So what have I pointed out??? That it is clear these medications place greater strain in use on heart and respiratory system suggesting uses may carry great problems with this virus. Also, based on the premise of the thread, to prevent the spread the use would have to commence on health people, that nobody, anywhere has made case that these medications prevent infection from Covid19. Also that in Australia, the use of lockdowns and quarantines has been far more successful in prevention of infections over ANY medications.

So, since you have reverted to insults I will assume the discussion has halted from failure to address the points I put forward. I will also consider that future discussion with you will be more demonstration of the contempt you have for other posters and return in kind.[/quote]

 

[/QUOTE]

Because the presumption ignores certain facts regarding the efficacy of HCQ. That makes it a bad presumption, and all that follows irrelevant.

The other fact you seem to ignore is that censorship of dissident truth speakers, whistleblowers in this case, shows that the censors have something to hide, something that happens to be truth.

 

Check out this article.
https://www.jpands.org/vol25no3/merritt.pdf

 

Oh, I see, my apologies. I thought you were talking about the presumption based upon projected outcomes. I didn’t think you were trying to tell me the listed effects of HCQ was presumptive.


No, it would make bad presumption if it was an assumption. However, it is not. Saying that it is devoid of ‘certain facts’ does not make it irrelevant. Telling us what those facts you consider make the case would help.


Again, there is no presumption in what I said. I base my own assessment on the facts that these drugs carry heavy load on heart and respiratory system AS STATED by the makers of the drugs themselves. I also note that they state prescription, should be on the terms of reward over risk. To suggest that is irrelevant is somewhat lacking…


No, I have not ignored censorship of speakers, I have pointed out the irrelevant of arguing about this in comparison of getting to workto stop infections. fact of the matter is, those who want to claim benefit are still free to do so, however, they are reminded risk of career and credibility should they be wrong. I do not consider these people as Whistle-blowers because they blow the whistle on nothing.

At any case, No matter what you believe, you have shown absolutely nothing to support your case. Again, I don’t know if the drug is a reasonable method to treat Covid19 in some people. However, In this thread the premise fails immediately You and others are talking treatment what the lockdowns claimed to be averted with the use, as to prevent infection. 2 totally different things... It doesn’t take a genius to see the argument is faulty.

 

I think you are right about cardiac implications long term from HCQ use. I took it 5 days a week for a year, as instructed.

Several years later I developed premature ventricular contraction, or as some cardiologists call it "extra systole". I still have it today. It's no big deal at all, but I still have it. Until the recent controversy, I had never connected the two, but it seems obvious today.

This whole thing is a scam.

 

I am not sure that your issues were from the drugs. I wouldn't rule it out though. The problem is that combined effect of Virus and drugs effect on the body could be detrimental to health. As stated, needs to be assessed case by case.

 

Keep in mind Doc, LIFE is detrimental to health. We live until our body cannot function properly any longer, then we die.