Started By
Message

re: Looks Like Stafford Has Covid

Posted on 8/5/20 at 1:57 pm to
Posted by FinleyStreet
Member since Aug 2011
7912 posts
Posted on 8/5/20 at 1:57 pm to
quote:

I’m one of the few people in this place that brings supported facts to back up what I say.


Hold on now. I asked for proof of padding the pockets of those scientists spearheading studies, and you did not provide any. You talked about people who appeared on CNN and give contradictory information, and that you were able to "connect the dots" and if I can't do that I'm an idiot. That isn't evidence. And I wasn't asking about the opinions of the talking heads on CNN or any other news station, for that matter.

There are studies coming out of places like Johns Hopkins, CDC, Mayo, etc from scientists who devote their entire lives to studying infectious diseases. Where is the proof that they're giving fake results?

If you're going to make bold assertions that scientists are being paid off to falsify results, the onus is on you to provide supporting information. A prosecutor won't get anybody convicted by saying "hey guys, that dude totally did it. Connect the dots!" There are certain standards for gathering and presenting evidence, none of which include watching CNN and "connecting the dots" while you eat cheese toast in your barcalounger.

You also mentioned that there was never a strain on PPE, which isn't correct either. The only reason we haven't completely run out is because people are reusing equipment (like the N-95s), which you aren't supposed to do. I've personally been scrambling to find suppliers, and we still don't have enough for every staff member. Aside from my own anecdotal experience, there are a lot of articles out there that show PPE has been in short supply depending on location. Here is one from WSJ LINK

Look, I don't think CV is going to kill us all. But science doesn't support the theory that it's just the flu either. The truth is somewhere in between.
Posted by BeefDawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
4747 posts
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:40 pm to
quote:

FinleyStreet

Here ya go.

quote:

A DOCUMENT NO LONGER AVAILABLE FROM THE U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION REGARDING “EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION” OF POTENTIAL COVID-19 TREATMENTS APPEARS TO SUGGEST THAT HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE SATISFIES THE CRITERIA FOR THE CLASSIFICATION, BUT WOULD STAND IN THE WAY OF LUCRATIVE OTHER DRUGS, AND A VACCINE.


The document is strangely deleted from the FDA site now, but this article has a full 8-page copy attached.

quote:

The possible treatment, shunned by the mainstream media and Big Tech, has far-ranging champions from Yale epidemiologists to frontline doctors to President Trump. Despite this support, corroborated by scientific studies, the medical establishment under the auspices of Dr. Anthony Fauci have refused to grant hydroxychloroquine “Emergency Use Authorization” (EUA).

July 29th documents from a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) presentation reveal, however, that the “qualifying criteria” for extending EUA to the drug appear to have been met: it “may be effective” and that “no adequate, approved, and available alternative” exists.

The document makes clear that Emergency Use Authorization cannot be used for more than one drug or therapeutic, and the establishment is potentially therefore saving the EUA pre-emptively for vaccines and remdesivir – patently high-value Big Pharma drugs – instead of hydroxychloroquine.

Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who authored a study on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine, outlined the medical establishment’s campaign against the drug on the War Room: Pandemic show.

He emphasized that Dr. Fauci has “lied to the American people” by insisting that authorizing a treatment for COVID-19 rests on “controlled trials to get anything through the FDA.”

“That is not true. That has never been the historical precedent and almost no other medication has ever had to meet those standards,” Dr. Zelenko continued.

He also noted that due to the sheer existence of hydroxychloroquine – a potential treatment – “available drugs like Remdesevir and the vaccine by [the FDA’s] own internal rules cannot get EUA.”

Such a classification would “facilitate the availability and use” of the drug and represents a fast-track alternative to authorizing potential life-saving treatments during public health emergencies such as the ongoing pandemic.

The eight-page presentation entitled “Considerations for FDA Licensure vs. Emergency Use Authorization of COVID-19 Vaccines” posits two additional prerequisites for EUA: “declaration by HHS Secretary of emergency situation leading to serious or life-threatening disease or condition,” which occurred in January, and that the “known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the product.”





And what you’re asking for is retarded. Of course there isn’t readily available evidence all over the ether of Big Pharma paying doctors to stymie HCQ. That would defeat the purpose, no?

But can you rationally explain why a drug that’s been used for 50 years to treat malaria and other SARS-related diseases, and has been deemed safe for those ailments, and is being tested and confirmed effective at treating COVID-19 by numerous studies, epidemiologists, and doctors, is being cock-blocked by government entities, told to us by the media it’s dangerous, and censored off social media for merely mentioning it as a possible treatment??

Seriously, who gains from this, and who loses if it becomes THE go to treatment and it turns out overwhelmingly effective in squashing this whole pandemic??

How is it that some “scientists” say it’s bad and some say it’s damn near a cure?

And why is the media and Dems continually saying, “Listen to the scientists”, but ONLY the ones that are on the other side of the fence to Trump’s narrative?

What does Trump have to gain if HCQ is effective?

What does the media and Dems lose if it’s not effective? Should be nothing. So why are they so opposed to a drug that millions of people have safely taken for 50 years?

Why did they push a story about a couple ingesting fish tank cleaner as rationale for HCQ being dangerous? And why do they continue to act like it’s dangerous?



It’s fricking asinine that I can present something like this and still you want to hold the media up as the beacon of credibility simply because there isn’t a smoking gun showing who’s the truth and who’s lying.

But even that wouldn’t matter if it existed. Project Veritas posts video proof of media corruption, bias, lying, and political agenda all the time and you clowns just ignore it. Video proof doesn’t even fix you peoples fricked up beliefs.
Posted by BeefDawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
4747 posts
Posted on 8/5/20 at 2:49 pm to
quote:

You also mentioned that there was never a strain on PPE, which isn't correct either. The only reason we haven't completely run out is because people are reusing equipment (like the N-95s), which you aren't supposed to do. I've personally been scrambling to find suppliers, and we still don't have enough for every staff member. Aside from my own anecdotal experience, there are a lot of articles out there that show PPE has been in short supply depending on location. Here is one from WSJ LINK

I said this...

quote:

We never ran out of PPE,


You can’t even be honest about what I actually said, so frick you.
Posted by BeefDawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
4747 posts
Posted on 8/5/20 at 3:05 pm to
By the way, here are the stats on lobbying expenditure in the US.

LINK

Big Pharma is by far the biggest. Almost double the next closest.

quote:

Leading lobbying industries in the U.S. 2019
Published by Erin Duffin, Mar 4, 2020
In 2019, the pharmaceuticals and health products industry in the United States spent the most on lobbying efforts, totaling to about 295.17 million U.S. dollars. In the same year, the automotive industry spent about 68.92 million U.S. dollars on lobbying.
What is lobbying?
Put quite simply, lobbying is when a company or organization tries to influence government leaders to create legislation that will benefit the lobbyist in some way. Lobbying can also be done in business in an attempt to create beneficial circumstances for the lobbyist. Oftentimes, lawyers and former government officials are hired as lobbyists as they know how government works and already have connections within the government. Lobbying has become controversial in the United States, because large corporations tend to lobby in favor of their business rather than the needs of the public.


You want a money-trail? There was nearly $300 million spent on trying to influence government policy for Pharma last year alone.

And you really think there’s no shinannigans going on?? That’s it’s all legit? That this campaign to squash a 50 year old effective drug that has been taken safely by millions is simply organic concern and caution for... whom?

SMH
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter