ADVERTISEMENT

JAMA v. Gab post.

I'd note it was exactly 1 study that shutdown HCQ and turned everyone into medical quacks regarding a drug that's been used globaly for decades. It took one study to create the term Anti-Vaxxer with the linkage of vaccines to autism in children. Its easy to say "one study does not move the needle for me", yet there are numerous examples of us moving the needle at a national or even global scale based on JUST one study, particularly when that one study gives us the narrative that we desire.

And while I agree with your last paragraph, I do believe that the peers themselves are broken. Whether its due to funding sources, ideaology, or simply societal pressure, the peers doing the reviews are already of the same scientific opinion and thus accept (too often without question) the results because they fit their preconceived notions.

Are all scientists leftists? Nope. However, the ones that aren't seem to be called "science deniers" in today's parlance.

As for HCQ, what would actually convince you that it could be a beneficial treatment, and certainly would have been more beneficial than our initial treatment strategies based on these studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33042552/

As for supporting Trump, you're projecting. I acknowledge that Trump got screwed, but Biden is president now and we're still doing the same STUPID shit. Somehow, half the world (all with a lower COVID death rate than the US) used HCQ and Ivermectin as their primary treatments, and there is significant evidence that the treatments were beneficial. Are they perfect? Nope, but like you said, no treatment is (including the Vaccine). But because of political expedience, its become easier to simply mock and name-call outside opinions rather than actually address them with science. See the FDA tweet below as a clear example of such disdain and malfeasance:


As if the FDA didn't know that Ivermectin had been prescribed for YEARS to humans, or that it was the primary treatment for bringing India's raging Covid outbreak under control this summer. Those facts are inconvenient to today's scientists. Whether that's due to political ideology, or simply indicative of the absolute strength of the Big Pharma lobby, I don't know, but its clear as day that we are deliberately choosing to ignore and ostracize (rather than investigate) any alternatives to our current Covid strategies.
I do want to point out one thing, since we got off track from the original point. The link you directed in the second quoted post directly contradicts your statement that further study of HCQ was shut down from your first quoted post. The linked study is a meta-analysis, which is a collection of studies combined into a single analysis. Additionally, there were 13 articles that cited the one you posted, meaning, study did and has continued.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT