• Before posting anything about the COVID-19 virus, please read this first Click Here

COVID-19 Dolores Cahill on the Niall Boylan Show: Covid-19 lock-down unnecessary - no proof for social distancing.

Polyco

PI Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,017
Likes
844
Ive put this link up already but here you go...


Feel free to do your homework.
Reading that letter it appears that the US government has not "pulled its authorisation for the use of HQ as a treatment for covid 19", only the issuing of it from its emergency stockpiles for use as a treatment.

Not only that but the research it cites considered its use with patients already badly infected whereas the claims for its effectiveness centre around the attenuation of the effects earlier in the course of the illness. In other words HCQ is claimed to be a preventative measure rather than a cure for those with the full blown disease which is what the FDA looked at.
 

Greengoose

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,861
Likes
1,466
I have consistently stated facts... the body of science out there does not support cahills claims that HQ can be used to successfully treat covid 19.

This is shown by the many scientific papers out there stating so and now,helpfully, the FDA are also saying so.

Heres another one liner for you:

The body of science as you see it are in constant conflict with one another! Your beloved FDA are an American outfit akin to the WHO. Need I say more? I assume you read your own link in its entirity. It would explain your confusion...
 

TheWexfordInn

Donator
PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
5,112
Likes
6,876
Reading that letter it appears that the US government has not "pulled its authorisation for the use of HQ as a treatment for covid 19", only the issuing of it from its emergency stockpiles for use as a treatment.

Not only that but the research it cites considered its use with patients already badly infected whereas the claims for its effectiveness centre around the attenuation of the effects earlier in the course of the illness. In other words HCQ is claimed to be a preventative measure rather than a cure for those with the full blown disease which is what the FDA looked at.
Indeed.
US Health Secretary Alex Azar in response to questions at a press conference yesterday has clarified that while the letter from the FDA declares that HCQ is ineffective when it comes to treatment in a hospital setting whereas it says nothing about HCQ being used in a non hospital setting.

And for the really slow learners out there no one has claimed that HCQ is effective in treating patients hospitalised with Covid.
A cynic might think that any study of HCQ effectiveness in patients hospitalised with HCQ is as study that has been designed from the outset to fail with nefarious intent.
Azar described the media interpretation of FDA's letter as inaccurate. "With the FDA finding that they don't see enough data to support hospital-based use, for those who are the most extreme cases of patients who have been hospitalised, they took that restriction off. They took the Emergency Use Authorization off," he said.
..
Azar said. "In fact, the FDA's removal of the Emergency Use Authorization takes away what had been a significant misunderstanding by many that had made people think that somehow it could only be used in a hospital setting, and we've tried to make that clear throughout," he said in response to a question.
 

Charlottesweb

PI Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
999
Likes
225
Like i said...if i said 2+2 = 4 , some posters here would tell me the calculator is biased.

HQ is not effective. The majority of the most up to date studies say so. There is no evidence that cahill is right. There are many studies still ongoing so i will await the definitive results of those studies. I will also make sure to come back here and say "i told you so".
 

Greengoose

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,861
Likes
1,466
Like i said...if i said 2+2 = 4 , some posters here would tell me the calculator is biased.

HQ is not effective. The majority of the most up to date studies say so. There is no evidence that cahill is right. There are many studies still ongoing so i will await the definitive results of those studies. I will also make sure to come back here and say "i told you so".
Karma. You will enjoy the benefits of a red face from sheer embarrassment for your nonsense. It's good for the skin apparently. It hasn't been tested in a hospital setting so you won't believe that anyway. The calculator is biased towards the truth, unlike you!
 

Charlottesweb

PI Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
999
Likes
225
Karma. You will enjoy the benefits of a red face from sheer embarrassment for your nonsense. It's good for the skin apparently. It hasn't been tested in a hospital setting so you won't believe that anyway. The calculator is biased towards the truth, unlike you!
If i am wrong i will gladly delete my account and disappear from this site... i have made this promise before and was proved correct. This is no different. But i wont be a gracious winner this time
 

Greengoose

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,861
Likes
1,466
If i am wrong i will gladly delete my account and disappear from this site... i have made this promise before and was proved correct. This is no different. But i wont be a gracious winner this time
Oh dear! How old are you? It seems, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
 
Top Bottom