My friend has a neighbor who died. She had heart trouble, cancer, and diabetes.
She also tested positive for corona virus. Guess what they put down as cause of death? Yup....the virus.
How many deaths have been listed as the virus, that had underlying health issues that actually compounded the problems?

Just because a country doesn’t state the cause of death was the virus doesn’t mean people that died did not have the virus, which added with their other illnesses actually killed them.
Trusting that othe countries are being honest with their covid numbers, is being naive in my opinion.
I also wonder if some of the states posting higher numbers might be an attempt to blame the President to make him lose the election. Politics can play into this.

---

My friend has a neighbor who died. She had heart trouble, cancer, and diabetes.
She also tested positive for corona virus. Guess what they put down as cause of death? Yup....the virus.
How many deaths have been listed as the virus, that had underlying health issues that actually compounded the problems?

Just because a country doesn’t state the cause of death was the virus doesn’t mean people that died did not have the virus, which added with their other illnesses actually killed them.
Trusting that othe countries are being honest with their covid numbers, is being naive in my opinion.
I also wonder if some of the states posting higher numbers might be an attempt to blame the President to make him lose the election. Politics can play into this.

I am certain politics play into this. I'm avoiding that because it is not something I can remotely cite as a valid source.

Most sources I've found are not stating the cause of death is COVID-19, rather, they are stating their death total is a "COVID-19 related death". Which, as you pointed out, if the individual is already under poor health, COVID-19 could be what expedited the process. I've even seen some people say vast majority of the dead would have died in a year anyway. Personally, that's a callous statement. I'm not saying it's a wrong statement. But, I know if I had another year with my mom, I would have gladly taken that year ... PROVIDED she was in COMFORTABLE health. If she was miserable and struggling to live day to day, I have to say (and this is callous in it's own right), maybe HER losing that extra is some kind of mercy.

The numbers, even with the exaggerated totals, are not worthy of the reaction received. But people see 145,000 people DIED and they all freak out. It's because we can't quantify ~145,000 out of ~328,000,000 with any sense of reality. If you have $100 and you lose $5, you can quantify that because you've probably had $100 before. We can't quantify 328 million and losing 145 thousand ... that's just not reality. But because we are more familiar with 145k than 328 million, ... which one slams us harder?

---

The amount of positive cases and the lingering issues afterwards gives me more fear than the death numbers.

 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.



Speaking of the death numbers, this is eye opening. Holy crap! The percent column is percent of deaths against total COVID-19 related deaths. This has really slammed hard on those 55 and up.

 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.


Wow.
 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.


Source: https://data.cdc.gov/NCH...Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku/data 

---

Zero, I totally understand what you’re saying. My Dad died 46 years ago, my Mom 30 years ago. What I wouldn’t give for even one more day with them. To tell them how much I love them, how much I miss them. We never know when we might lose our loved ones.

The deaths from this disease is terrible. Using common sense should help to stop or at least slow it down.
But how many people are killed every month by evil people that don’t care about human life? Senseless murders? How about the yearly unborn lives that are snuffed out for convenience?
What I’m saying is, the sky isn’t falling. Yes, we have to take it seriously. But use common sense. Hopefully they will come up with a vaccine soon.
No one is to blame for this pandemic. It’s not Trumps fault. China should have made the world aware of this disease long ago. If there is any real blame, it belongs with China’s leaders.
When Trump shut down flights coming in from China, the Democrats said he was being a racist. Then as the disease shot through the country, the Democrats screamed he wasn’t doing enough. To me, that alone shows they are trying to use it to blame the President and get him kicked out.
I feel like the Democrats would rather have more people sick then to come up with a vaccine if they can get more votes, claming
it to be Trumps fault.

Oh....and I’m adding this so there is no misunderstanding of what I mean. I do NOT think all the people who vote democrat are like this. It’s the leadership that is like that. People like Nancy Pelosi.
The general people that are Democrats I don’t believe are like that.

---

Sweden: the One Chart That Matters
MIKE WHITNEY • JULY 25, 2020
https://www.unz.com/mwhi...-one-chart-that-matters/ 

While the Covid-19 epidemic continues to drag on in the United States, it’s largely over in Sweden where fatalities have dropped to no more than 2 deaths per day for the last week. Sweden has been harshly criticized in the media for not imposing draconian lockdowns like the United States and the other European countries. Instead, Sweden implemented a policy that was both conventional and sensible. They recommended that people maintain a safe distance between each other and they banned gatherings of 50 people or more. They also asked their elderly citizens to isolate themselves and to avoid interacting with other people as much as possible. Other than that, Swedes were encouraged to work, exercise and get on with their lives as they would normally even though the world was still in the throes of a global pandemic.

The secret of Sweden’s success is that its experts settled on a strategy that was realistic, sustainable and science-based. The intention was never to “fight” the virus which is among the most contagious infections in the last century, but to protect the old and vulnerable while allowing the young, low-risk people to circulate, contract the virus, and develop the antibodies they’d need to fight similar pathogens in the future. It’s clear now that that was the best approach. And while Sweden could still experience sporadic outbreaks that might kill another 2 to 300 people, any recurrence of the infection in the Fall or Winter will not be a dreaded “Second Wave”, but a much weaker flu-like event that will not overwhelm the public health system or kill thousands of people.

As we’ve noted before, the media has been particularly vicious in their criticism of Sweden’s approach which they’ve characterized as overly “relaxed.” Check out this sampling of recent headlines:

As you can see, the media has taken a very hardline with Sweden. But, why? What has Sweden done that has provoked such a hostile response?
Nothing, really, they’ve just shrugged off the repressive stay-at-home orders and pursued their own independent policy. The Swedish approach stands in stark contrast to the lockdowns which are costly, ineffective and socially damaging. Here’s an excerpt from an article at The Evening Standard that underscores these very points:

• “Lockdowns made little difference to the number of people who have died from coronavirus, a study has claimed. Researchers from the University of Toronto and University of Texas found that whether a country was locked down or not was “not associated” with the Covid-19 death rate.
• Experts compared mortality rates and cases in 50 badly-hit countries up until May 1 and calculated that only 33 out of every million people had died from the virus…The study found that imposing lockdown measures succeeded in stopping hospitals becoming overwhelmed, but it did not translate into a significant reduction in deaths.
  
• “Government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of Covid-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality,” the study, published in the Lancet online journal EClinicalMedicine, said.”
  (“Coronavirus lockdown ‘made no difference to number of deaths but stopped hospitals being overwhelmed”, Evening Standard)

….

---

Sweden's population is under 11 million. I think the State of Illinois has more than that. Kind of hard to compare Sweden to the US when one has 11 million vs 328 million.

Instead, Sweden implemented a policy that was both conventional and sensible. They recommended that people maintain a safe distance between each other and they banned gatherings of 50 people or more. They also asked their elderly citizens to isolate themselves and to avoid interacting with other people as much as possible. Other than that, Swedes were encouraged to work, exercise and get on with their lives as they would normally even though the world was still in the throes of a global pandemic.

This is the table I've been pounding my hand onto. I can't say it's gonna work even thought it worked for a (relatively speaking) small Country like Sweden, but it feels like the proper course based on the statistics.

---

Holy crap. I grabbed the numbers from CDC today and decided to do percent for each age group. I'm sure there's a smart term for this, but it's kind of a bottoms up sum. Meaning, The percent is that of the total of that row, plus the values below it.

So, 97.20% of the deaths have come from ages 45 and above. If you look at the "Under 1 year" row, that's under 1 year and everyone older, thus, 100%.


 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

---

Ugh. Numbers. So confusing, yet supposed to be the same.


 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.
 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.
Source: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality 

---

I honestly don’t think they have a clue what the exact amount of deaths were because of the virus.

It surprises me how many people still don’t wear a mask in stores and gas stations. Now that it’s law in Wisconsin, I see more without masks then before.
Maybe it will end up being a “Darwin’s award”, where they end up dying because of their stubbornness.
A “thinning of the herd”.
Not that I want more deaths, but it’s their choice I guess.

---

Why don't people wear masks? https://youtu.be/v3hisCybFME 

Perhaps this is why Sweden didn't bother with masks. They also didn't shut schools or cripple their economy....and they are doing better than almost anyone else.

Also in the absolutely moronic response category https://www.zerohedge.co...se-virtual-zoom-meetings .

At almost every level our medical and governmental response has been misguided. At least now, people are starting to tell government officials to go pound sand...justifiably so.

---

It's my understanding that Covid-19 attacks the under lying issues, and your not likely to die directly from it, but that activate the other problems your body already has, and makes them worse.

Americans on average, don't live as healthy as they should, which is partly why they're struggling more with this issue than other nations that have actually make healthy living a higher priority. So Americans have a higher level of underlying conditions, especially when you consider obesity, blood pressure, diabetes, etc.

As for Sweden, they actively try to limit any provide or for for profit healthcare I'm their country, having universal government-funded healthcare and making sure they have a clean natural environment, which has consistently ranked their people among the healthiest countries in the world.

In other words, just because that strategy works for Sweden, one of the healthiest nation's in the world, with less underlying problems in no ways means that would of worked well for America, a country with more underlying issues, when battling a disease that attacks underlying issues.

I honestly think their are muliple ways to combat Covid-19, and America's biggest problem is they have failed to unite and as a whole committed to one. As each state or regional States, are basically doing their own thing.

But clearly there are American who have no interest in working together, heck there are a good number of people who don't even believe it's real still.

Even when a vaccine comes out, who's going to jump in line for that? An unproven vaccine with unknown side effects to prevent a virus that kills such a small percentage of those infected? They should release the numbers of those who survived but have a long-term issue because of COVID. The death numbers are not enough to scare people.

I used to have opinions like that, but have been proven wrong time and time again, as people will rush to do things if they think it'll greatly help.

But there are already have been a good number of people that have read something online and tried it, even with little science behind it... some with deadly consequences. 

---

The hero worship of Fauci has got to stop...he and the FDA are responsible for tens of thousands of deaths because of their poor advice and recommendations. I had to abbreviate the letter because of the length....it can be viewed in its entirety at the link below.
Open letter to Dr. Anthony Fauci regarding the use of Hydroxychloroquine for treating COVID-19
• By George C. Fareed, MD Brawley, California Michael M. Jacobs, MD, MPH Pensacola, Florida Donald C. Pompan, MD Salinas, California
• Aug 13, 2020 Updated Aug 13, 2020

https://www.thedesertrev...a-80b5-bf80983bc072.html 

Anthony Fauci, MD
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Washington, D.C.

Dear Dr. Fauci:

You were placed into the most high-profile role regarding America’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. Americans have relied on your medical expertise concerning the wearing of masks, resuming employment, returning to school, and of course medical treatment.

You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions. You are the de facto “COVID-19 Czar." This is unusual in the medical profession in which doctors’ opinions are challenged by other physicians in the form of exchanges between doctors at hospitals, medical conferences, as well as debate in medical journals. You render your opinions unchallenged, without formal public opposition from physicians who passionately disagree with you. It is incontestable that the public is best served when opinions and policy are based on the prevailing evidence and science, and able to withstand the scrutiny of medical professionals.

As experience accrued in treating COVID-19 infections, physicians worldwide discovered that high-risk patients can be treated successfully as an outpatient, within the first five to seven days of the onset of symptoms, with a “cocktail” consisting of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin (or doxycycline). Multiple scholarly contributions to the literature detail the efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine-based combination treatment.

Dr. Harvey Risch, the renowned Yale epidemiologist, published an article in May 2020 in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled “Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to Pandemic Crisis." He further published an article in Newsweek in July 2020 for the general public expressing the same conclusions and opinions. Dr. Risch is an expert at evaluating research data and study designs, publishing over 300 articles. Dr Risch’s assessment is that there is unequivocal evidence for the early and safe use of the “HCQ cocktail.” If there are Q-T interval concerns, doxycycline can be substituted for azithromycin as it has activity against RNA viruses without any cardiac effects.

Yet, you continue to reject the use of hydroxychloroquine, except in a hospital setting in the form of clinical trials, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting its use. Hydroxychloroquine, despite 65 years of use for malaria, and over 40 years for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, with a well-established safety profile, has been deemed by you and the FDA as unsafe for use in the treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infections. Your opinions have influenced the thinking of physicians and their patients, medical boards, state and federal agencies, pharmacists, hospitals, and just about everyone involved in medical decision making.

Indeed, your opinions impacted the health of Americans, and many aspects of our day-to-day lives including employment and school. Those of us who prescribe hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin/doxycycline believe fervently that early outpatient use would save tens of thousands of lives and enable our country to dramatically alter the response to COVID-19. We advocate for an approach that will reduce fear and allow Americans to get their lives back.

We hope that our questions compel you to reconsider your current approach to COVID-19 infection.

QUESTIONS REGARDING EARLY OUTPATIENT TREATMENT:
QUESTIONS REGARDING SAFETY:
QUESTIONS REGARDING METHODOLOGY:
…
COMPARISON BETWEEN U.S. AND OTHER COUNTRIES REGARDING CASE FATALITY RATE:
(IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO HAVE THE GRAPHS COMPARING OUR CASE FATALITY RATES TO OTHER COUNTRIES.)


GIVING AMERICANS THE OPTION TO USE HCQ FOR COVID-19:

FINAL QUESTIONS:

While previous questions are related to hydroxychloroquine-based treatment, we have two questions addressing masks.CONCLUSION:
Since the start of the pandemic, physicians have used hydroxychloroquine to treat symptomatic COVID-19 infections, as well as for prophylaxis. Initial results were mixed as indications and doses were explored to maximize outcomes and minimize risks. What emerged was that hydroxychloroquine appeared to work best when coupled with azithromycin. In fact, it was the president of the United States who recommended to you publicly at the beginning of the pandemic, in early March, that you should consider early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and a “Z-Pack.” Additional studies showed that patients did not seem to benefit when COVID-19 infections were treated with hydroxychloroquine late in the course of the illness, typically in a hospital setting, but treatment was consistently effective, even in high-risk patients, when hydroxychloroquine was given in a “cocktail” with azithromycin and, critically, zinc in the first five to seven days after the onset of symptoms. The outcomes are, in fact, dramatic.

As clearly presented in the McCullough article from Baylor, and described by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, the efficacy of the HCQ cocktail is based on the pharmacology of the hydroxychloroquine ionophore acting as the “gun” and zinc as the “bullet,” while azithromycin potentiates the anti-viral effect. Undeniably, the hydroxychloroquine combination treatment is supported by science. Yet, you continue to ignore the “science” behind the disease. Viral replication occurs rapidly in the first five to seven days of symptoms and can be treated at that point with the HCQ cocktail. Rather, your actions have denied patients treatment in that early stage. Without such treatment, some patients, especially those at high risk with co-morbidities, deteriorate and require hospitalization for evolving cytokine storm resulting in pneumonia, respiratory failure, and intubation with 50% mortality. Dismissal of the science results in bad medicine, and the outcome is over 160,000 dead Americans. Countries that have followed the science and treated the disease in the early stages have far better results, a fact that has been concealed from the American Public.
...
It is essential that you tell the truth to the American public regarding the safety and efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine/HCQ cocktail. The government must protect and facilitate the sacred and revered physician-patient relationship by permitting physicians to treat their patients. Governmental obfuscation and obstruction are as lethal as cytokine storm.

Americans must not continue to die unnecessarily. Adults must resume employment and our youth return to school. Locking down America while awaiting an imperfect vaccine has done far more damage to Americans than the coronavirus. We are confident that thousands of lives would be saved with early treatment of high-risk individuals with a cocktail of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin. Americans must not live in fear. As Dr. Harvey Risch’s Newsweek article declares, “The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it.”

Very Respectfully,

George C. Fareed, MD
Brawley, California
Michael M. Jacobs, MD, MPH
Pensacola, Florida
Donald C. Pompan, MD
Salinas, California

---

The blindly following period needs to end.

When Doctors first announced hydroxychloroquine as the answer, I thought we were entering the finishing of this dieses.

But then all these different countries did studies on it, and almost all the studies came to the same exact conclusion, it's more dangerous than helpful.

Those studies, done by countries all over the world, don't give two shits about what American think or say, they came about what can be proven, and I was quite surprised that they almost all came to the same exact conclusion.

These doctors say it works, but have they completed blind studies with a controlled group? If no, then we got nothing but educated opinions, and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

---

When Doctors first announced hydroxychloroquine as the answer, I thought we were entering the finishing of this dieses

Regrettably not....and vaccines are likely to be a ways off and have unknown side effects.

But then all these different countries did studies on it, and almost all the studies came to the same exact conclusion, it's more dangerous than helpful.

Incorrect. Malaysia, Russia,Turkey, UAE, Costa Rica, Morroco, India, Kazakhstan, and after bad (now retracted) studies Switzerland are some of the countries which use it. ALL HAVE LOWER DEATH RATES PER CASE THAN THE U.S. In smaller geographic examples, South Dakota has much lower than average death rate than the U.S. in total.

Re Safety...during BHO's administation, Fauci himself advocated its use for the swine flu. The drug is used for 65 years, without warnings (aside for the need for periodic retinal checks), but the FDA somehow felt the need to send out an alert on June 15, that the drug is dangerous. Further, when they cite studies which give 10x the necessary dosage, and give it when people are already on their death bed, its isn't going to work....just like Tamiflu. If one takes it AFTER 2-3 days from symptom onset, it doesn't do jack. Further,

Those studies, done by countries all over the world, don't give two shits about what American think or say, they came about what can be proven, and I was quite surprised that they almost all came to the same exact conclusion.

They didn't...and thank God for their citizens they didn't listen to Fauci and the USFDA.

These doctors say it works, but have they completed blind studies with a controlled group?

1. You don't need one for drug with the long term safety profile, especially with the preponderance of anecdotal evidence. There have been at least 8 major studies showing its efficacy. It is sold over the counter in many countries.
2. People may not be aware that the FDA approved a number of cancer chemotherapy drugs without randomized control trials based solely on epidemiological evidence. Trials came later as confirmation.
3. People may not be aware that there were no randomized clinical trials when penicillin was prescribed in WWII...that saved thousands of lives

I think it was a good idea for Dr.'s to prescribe those meds then....I think we all would agree on that?

If no, then we got nothing but educated opinions, and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

Yes but many of these assholes want to dictate decisions that should be between me and my Dr. Thank God I live in a state which will prescribe it.

Nationally, these decisions really need to be re-examined by an independent group who are not in the pocket of big pharma. I reassert that Fauci and his ilk have provided misguided advice costing 10's of thousands of lives. He needs to STF up and get out of the way.

---

Incorrect. Malaysia, Russia,Turkey, UAE, Costa Rica, Morroco, India, Kazakhstan, and after bad (now retracted) studies Switzerland are some of the countries which use it. ALL HAVE LOWER DEATH RATES PER CASE THAN THE U.S. In smaller geographic examples, South Dakota has much lower than average death rate than the U.S. in total.

Since you claim that's incorrect, then please post the links to these scientific studies, which prove it's effective against Covid-19.

As so far, you're just claiming lower death rate, which completely fails to show any cause or effect. But does show jumping to conclusions and one is biased.

My limited understanding is that the Switzerland study got retracted because one American hospital refused to release all their data points citing confidentiality and contracts, stating that they legally couldn't... so the study couldn't be completely reviewed to check for errors, not that they did find any errors.


But even still, there are still 5 scientific studies, including ones by the United States of America , which suggest Covid-19 enters human's lung cells via the TMPRSS2 enzyme, which hydroxychloroquine does not effectively block and cellular entry of the virus occurs.

Hoffmann, et al.6 recently published the mechanisms of hydroxychloroquine’s action in both the Vero E6, green monkey kidney cell line, and the Calu-3, human lung cancer cell line. The mechanism of action of hydroxychloroquine is to block entry of the virus into cells. Viral entry requires a helper enzyme. In the Vero E6 (Monkey) cell line, this enzyme is cathepsin L which hydroxychloroquine blocks.

However, in the human lung cell line, the helping enzyme is TMPRSS2. Hydroxychloroquine does not effectively block this enzyme and cellular entry of the virus occurs.

But just follow the link to see those 5 studies listed, and since you said I'm incorrect about the country studies, I'll be waiting to see what your non-American country studies suggest.

---

Since you claim that's incorrect, then please post the links to these scientific studies, which prove it's effective against Covid-19.

I have already addressed the red herring argument about double blind studies. They are not necessary when stats show efficacy on a safe drug, especially in a pandemic. But if you want scientific studies which indicate efficacy, here are a few:

• Khurana et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.07.21.20159301 (Preprint)
• Zhong et al., Lancent Rheumatology, 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30227-7 (Peer Reviewed)
• Ferreira et al., J. Medical Virology, July 9, 2020, doi:10.1002/jmv.26286 (preprint 6/29) (Peer Reviewed)
• SMSH Sawai Man Singh Hospital, India
• Otea et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.06.10.20101105

Moreover, I am more interested in what works than what Dr. Fauci tells me to do. Results matter...
Overall, countries that use it have a 78% lower death rate:

By country:
Malaysia https://ourworldindata.o...ation&pickerSort=asc 
Russia https://ourworldindata.o...ation&pickerSort=asc 
Turkey https://ourworldindata.o...ation&pickerSort=asc 
UAE https://ourworldindata.o...ation&pickerSort=asc 
India https://ourworldindata.o...ation&pickerSort=asc 
You can go to the website yourself to get additional countries.
Re Switzerland here is the data

As so far, you're just claiming lower death rate, which completely fails to show any cause or effect. But does show jumping to conclusions and one is biased.

Correlation is not always causation, but considering non of these countries has inferior health care systems to ours, an open and objective mind would conclude that cause is more likely than not, not the converse.
Ignoring the data shows bias.

If this data, these trends and statistics were true about any other medicine, the FDA and Fauci would be all over it. But since Orange Man mentioned it....and so much of the country had TDS, including the medical community....it use must be destroyed, regardless of the cost.

Moreover, if someone doesn't want to take it, then don't frigging take it. But keep your nose out of my options, my life, and my choices.

---

I have already addressed the red herring argument about double blind studies.

Which in itself is you casting your own red herring because no one said DOUBLE blind study, yet you're acting as if there did.

I called for a blind study, not a double blind study, I'm sure you can understand the difference.

But if you want scientific studies which indicate efficacy, here are a few:

• Khurana et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.07.21.20159301 (Preprint)
• Zhong et al., Lancent Rheumatology, 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30227-7 (Peer Reviewed)
• Ferreira et al., J. Medical Virology, July 9, 2020, doi:10.1002/jmv.26286 (preprint 6/29) (Peer Reviewed)
• SMSH Sawai Man Singh Hospital, India
• Otea et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.06.10.20101105

Thank you for posting those, and again mine were in the link.of the article if you were interested, I'll try to look into those cases when I get available time.

Though based on the initial research, It would seem that you're using either C19study.com or a website that is using their data.

I can't confirm their reputation is accurate, but sounds like they have a reputation of printing every single positive study about this drug, including many studies that are just observational, and highly flawed, and printing some of the lower level studies who results go against the drug while ignoring the higher level study that have results against the drug. In other words their reputation is they're as unbiased as the average Vikings super homer.

Moreover, I am more interested in what works than what Dr. Fauci tells me to do. Results matter...

Overall, countries that use it have a 78% lower death rate:

Your obsession with Dr. Fauci is making you look more and more politically motivated than scientifically motivated.

And those numbers are ignoring the counties that don't fit their narrative, as it's ignores countries like Iran and Brazil, which according to John Hopkins University, would be ahead of the United States, and John Hopkins would suggest that Indonesia would also be higher than United States, despite that graph having them extremely low for some reason .

If what works is truely you're motivation, then I'm sure you are pushing for mask wearing just as hard as you are for this drug, as the very exact same logic you keep using.

See, as all the countries with a low death rate according to your graph, have required mask according to this site.
 Screenshot_20200817-102806.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

Correlation is not always causation, but considering non of these countries has inferior health care systems to ours, an open and objective mind would conclude that cause is more likely than not, not the converse.

Ignoring the data shows bias.

Hm, interesting, they have inferior health care and yet you believe their health care over our own health care.

I agree, ignoring data shows biased, which proves that website is biased as it ignored some of the largest studies and countries they don't fit their narrative.

An open and objective mind wouldn't blindly follow... not blindly follow Dr. Fauci, nor blindly followed clearly biased websites, but they would try to follow the actual science.

If this data, these trends and statistics were true about any other medicine, the FDA and Fauci would be all over it. But since Orange Man mentioned it....and so much of the country had TDS, including the medical community....it use must be destroyed, regardless of the cost.

Moreover, if someone doesn't want to take it, then don't frigging take it. But keep your nose out of my options, my life, and my choices.

Awe, so you are more politically motivated than actually scientifically motivated, got it. So much for that "open and objective mind"... which explains why all your comments have followed the political spectrum and not the scientific spectrum.

---

I called for a blind study, not a double blind study, I'm sure you can understand the difference.

My mistake...although I don't need a blind study either, for the reasons cited.

Nevertheless, as mentioned in an earlier post, there wasn't blind study when penicillin was prescribed in WWII...that decisions saved thousands of lives. HCQ is far safer than penicillin especially at low doses

Your obsession with Dr. Fauci is making you look more and more politically motivated than scientifically motivated.

Point taken....and a fair observation...but I am just a pissed at Trump for listening to him for WAAAAY to long. Somewhere over the last 3 years, his balls fell off.

Hm, interesting, they have inferior health care and yet you believe their health care over our own health care.

No, actually it accentuates their favorable results with HCQ. Their systems are vastly inferior, but their death rates are much lower per case. I am suggesting HCQ has alot to do with that.

I am tired of other people, with questionable motivations, dictating policy, especially when those decisions may be costing 10s of thousands of live.

If we can agree that patients and Dr. should be permitted to make the choice, I am fine.

---

The numbers are getting worse, even in Wisconsin. Whatever we're doing, it doesn't appear to be having a positive effect.

 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

---

Too many people put their blind faith in Dr. Fauci.
The guy isn’t perfect, and his opinion shouldn’t be taken as gospel truth.
And like KRK said, it should be between a patient and their doctor whether they feel it’s worth taking a chance at any drug. Especially when waiting might kill the patient.
Sometimes there isnt time to wait for a long drug trial to be finished.

---

I thought this was an interesting read.
https://www.medicalnewst...-weather-affect-covid-19 

Also,

The numbers are getting worse, even in Wisconsin. Whatever we're doing, it doesn't appear to be having a positive effect.

The numbers tell us that Wisconsin IS doing at least SOME things right. Hopefully keeping the infected away from the the most vulnerable....and the most vulnerable lowering their risk.

---