Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
COVID-19 Check-in 2.0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
My concern is regarding why the medical community, led by the CDC, LITERALLY still has zero outpatient treatment for these people when they test positive. They just send them home and expect them to live under a rock until they need to be hospitalized. Only then do they give the steroid dexamethazone for inflammation.
However, the minute they have a vaccine every living human will be asked to take it.
Can you provide any evidence or identify who the "fanatics" are that are putting all their chips in HCQ?
How many tested positive in the trial you linked?
16
I pointed out it was only 16 and tou said you doubted it.
I quoted directly from the conclusions. I haven’t misrepresented anything.
Be honest. That’s all anyone can ask.
This is a great example to discuss (for critical thinkers). Just so everybody can follow the argument (it isn't that easy). The study enrolled 821 people who were suspected of being exposed to CV. The objective was to determine whether HCQ would prevent or minimize the disease if given early after exposure (w/i four days). They randomized and assigned about half of the people to receive HCQ and about half to receive a placebo. Then they followed them to see whether they got sick. Everything looks awesome and well designed to me to this point. It is just an HCQ arm, so they could have thrown in an HCQ+zinc arm, but we still have a great idea for a study to test HCQ as a prophylaxis.
Then, wham! They lay this little fact on you: they weren't able to test the overwhelming majority of the people with a lab test to see whether they actually got Covid! Only 20 of the 800+ people were actually tested. You've got to be kidding. They relied on symptoms instead of tests. Obviously, CV 19 has about every symptom imaginable, from none whatsoever (possibly a high percentage), to fever, cough, GI issues, and a whole bunch of other ones! The key problem is that one might expect, if HCQ were successful, that there would be a lot of asymptomatic positives. This study had no way to determine that.
It certainly doesn't mean HCQ works, but I can't find any possible use for this study. Can you? If so, why?
These attempts to discredit a well run and widely accepted study just because it doesn't support your bias are extremely pathetic. Nothing was hidden by the authors. They say at the beginning of the paper the result they were looking for was development of symptoms in line with COVID-19 with particular interest regarding those that had a confirmed high risk exposure. Almost all of the participants fit this description.
If you live with someone that has a confirmed case of COVID-19 and you develop COVID-19 symptoms, would you think you had the flu or cold?
I'd rather not bring prominent politicians into this discussion
I would go with cold, since that’s what this is for the vast majority of people. A cold.
So, are all of these doctors wrong?
If it is working the way you claim where the proportion of positives is the same but more are asymptomatic within the HCQ group, you would expect there to be a higher proportion of symptomatic people in the control group. That was not the case in this trial.
So if your spouse had a PCR confirmed case of COVID-19, and you started developing COVID-19 symptoms you wouldn't think you had COVID-19?
I wouldn't put much stock into this group. First, this was a video put together by breitbart and the America's frontline doctors group does not disclose who owns or funds the group, but it is known they work directly with the Tea party patriots. Of the doctors listed in their group none of them are infectious disease experts.
@texdawg I wanted to make a couple of points on something you brought up, even though I can't find it anymore. This is getting very little discussion in the media, but it is absolutely huge imho: the three biggest hotspots right now are TX, FL and CA. All three have or will soon pass NY in total cases. Also, those three states have the most seniors (65+). In fact, those three states have right at 25% of all the seniors in the US--one in four in just three states, about 13 million people! The one thing most everyone agrees on is that age is probably the biggest risk factor for mortality in CV 19. So, we should see a higher death rate in these states. We don't. All #s rounded and from Worldometer.
Cases Deaths
CA 467K 8.55K
FL 442 6.12K
TX 404K 5.88K
NY 441K 32.7K
NY has around a third of the cases of the big three combined, yet it has over 50% more deaths! And consider that there are over 4X more seniors in those states. They are more at risk. Not only that, but if you add the cases from the big five in Europe--Spain, UK, Italy, Germany, and France, you get a number very close to our big three. Europe ~1.26MM cases; TX/FL/CA 1.31MM cases. Yet, Europe's big 5, even though they have slightly less cases, have lost just under 150,000 souls to CV 19--more than 7X our big three with higher cases. Perhaps the deadliest place on earth for cases to fatalities is Connecticut, where just under 10% of the positives died. You can see that our big three are currently at about 1.5%, or one sixth of CT's rate. Now, many of the cases are active in the big three, so the numbers will likely get worse, but they shouldn't get anywhere close to NY or CT or Europe in rates. There could be a number of explanations, but I think it is fair to say the disease is much less deadly in summer.
That's what I thought, an unsubstantiated political ad hominem that demonstrates a confirmed case of TDS.
Cool
How do you know any of the numbers are correct if you don't actually test the people? Better question, why even publish something like this without accurate data?