Getting hydroxychloroquine

PornAddict

Active member
Aug 30, 2009
3,620
2
36
60
; said:
Speculation now that the hydroxychloroquine hype was a deliberate part of a "pump and dump" stock fraud scheme that Trump, Tucker Carlson and other Fox News personalities were set to make $ from.

Fox and Trump are suddenly no longer talking up hydroxy. Presumably, they've made enough and have cashed out their stock holdings and banked their money while idiots like Porn continue to believe.


Franky,
LOL,
Here is the video below that torn a new asshole on the studies you post “ Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with covid-19 “ . He totally ripped into this study watch your paper you post will get retract!

Extremely flaw studies. It a garbage study and like Dr Chris Martenson “ real garbage still have some value “. You study you post worth shit!!!



All you naysayers suggest you viewed this video and try to debunk anything what he says!

Here the deal on Hydroxychloroquine !

Go to video time 4:12




Then do not take the drug when or if you catch covid-19.
Make sure you tell to your doctor if you are in the Hospital!
Leave whatever limit supply that are left to the people who want it!
I pretty sure once those local supply of hydroxychloroquine are depleted, India make 100% of Hydroxychlooquine will not export any to countries.
Reason they are banned all export of Hydroxychloroquine and they are keeping for local consumption!
By the way .. What the population of India? They are the 2nd most populated countries in the world .

PS. I just following the data! Fuck your politics ( Fuck the all governments left or right)!

PPS. HCQ will be just like N95 mask almost impossible to get! Plus 90% antibiotic produce by China and 10% antibiotics produced by India that mean you going have problem with getting ( AZITHROMYCIN too)
. Zinc supplements demand will skyrocketed also.
 
Last edited:

Ben19

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2015
776
444
63
Neither are the opinions of an internet forum poster on an escort site acting like an expert in everything medical related to this drug, i.e. you. Why should anyone believe - anything - you opine on this topic. You could simply be a medical student who doesn't really know much of anything related to this. You could also have political or other biases, such as to certain medical opinions.
I never claimed medical training and If you read what I said my point is that this drug may or may not work and we need to wait for the proper trials. I also encouraged people to take information from proper medical channels via peer reviewed articles and not YouTube videos or even worst anyone’s opinion here. I still gave my opinion here as an anonymous user on a escort forum and that is just as valuable as anyone elses that posted on this thread no less no more. I encourage you to be just as critical on people’s opinions on medical topics even if they agree with you since I am also assuming you’re not a board certified academic ID specialist.

End of the day as I mentioned earlier if anyone is serious about trying HCQ talk to your GP about it you never know you may be one of the ones they get an off label prescription. If you find a doctor in Canada giving hcq in exchange for some sort of financial package then I’d be curious to know lolz
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,232
2,035
113
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/22/politics/read-whistleblower-vaccine-development/index.html


Updated 4:52 PM ET, Wed April 22, 2020

(CNN)Dr. Rick Bright, the director of the agency responsible for leading the charge on the production and purchase of vaccines in the Trump administration, released a statement Wednesday blaming political motives for his abrupt reassignment.
Read the statement in full:
"Yesterday, I was removed from my positions as the Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response by the Administration and involuntarily transferred to a more limited and less impactful position at the National Institutes of Health. I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit. I am speaking out because to combat this deadly virus, science -- not politics or cronyism -- has to lead the way.
"I have spent my entire career in vaccine development, in the government with CDC and BARDA and also in the biotechnology industry. My professional background has prepared me for a moment like this -- to confront and defeat a deadly virus that threatens Americans and people around the globe. To this point, I have led the government's efforts to invest in the best science available to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, this resulted in clashes with HHS political leadership, including criticism for my proactive efforts to invest early in vaccines and supplies critical to saving American lives. I also resisted efforts to fund potentially dangerous drugs promoted by those with political connections.

"Specifically, and contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the Administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack scientific merit. While I am prepared to look at all options and to think "outside the box" for effective treatments, I rightly resisted efforts to provide an unproven drug on demand to the American public. I insisted that these drugs be provided only to hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 while under the supervision of a physician. These drugs have potentially serious risks associated with them, including increased mortality observed in some recent studies in patients with COVID-19.
"Sidelining me in the middle of this pandemic and placing politics and cronyism ahead of science puts lives at risk and stunts national efforts to safely and effectively address this urgent public health crisis.


"I will request that the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services investigate the manner in which this Administration has politicized the work of BARDA and has pressured me and other conscientious scientists to fund companies with political connections as well as efforts that lack scientific merit. Rushing blindly towards unproven drugs can be disastrous and result in countless more deaths. Science, in service to the health and safety of the American people, must always trump politics.
"I am very grateful for the bipartisan support from Congress and their confidence in my leadership of BARDA as reflected in the generous appropriation to BARDA in the CARES 3 Act. It is my sincere hope that the dedicated professionals at BARDA and throughout HHS will be allowed to use the best scientific acumen and integrity to continue their efforts to stop the pandemic without political pressure or distractions. Americans deserve no less."


Corrupt, profiteering nutbar president fires top doc who won't aid him pushing quack cures on innocent sufferers, just so Trump and his cronies can make extra $$$$$$$.
We had to get some balanced reporting from Politico of all places. As in most situations of personal conflict, there's two sides to the story and then the truth. I'm not surprised CNN, NY Times and other outlets rushed Bright's narrative to press. It's a juicy tale of palace intrigue damaging to the Administration in these dark and challenging times. Benevolent administrator taking on the big bad, evil President and his cronies.

I wouldn't always presume Federal bureaucrats are doing a good job and making great decisions. It was kind of sad how so many in media were pushing for weeks an elaborate misinformation campaign regarding the U.S. failures in rolling out COVID testing. You know how could the CDC and all these agencies ever make a mistake. It must be the President and his team micromanaging all their decisions.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/22/hhs-ousts-vaccine-expert-as-covid-19-threat-grows-201642
 

Nesbot

Well-known member
Jan 25, 2016
2,086
1,141
113
I find it disturbing that people care so much about what drug is the right drug. When you inevitably get sick because this is a hoax afterall (/s), your ICU dr will treat you with whatever they can to keep you alive.

Why are you so invested in a drug or drug combo? It doesn't matter in the end. It either works or it doesn't. Linking a bunch of youtube videos is insane.
 

sp free

Well-known member
May 31, 2003
2,094
590
113
The “study” was a survey, was flawed and the hyper sensationalism brought to you by the media was specifically intended to bash Trump.

What drug or treatment will save people that are past the point of being saved?

Hospitals are using it. That’s the truth.
 

Saskatchewan

Active member
Jan 20, 2010
1,309
4
38
Just A Lay Person's Take

I never claimed medical training and If you read what I said my point is that this drug may or may not work and we need to wait for the proper trials.
I concur entirely, however, the problem is this. If you are a person in severe respiratory distress caused by COVID-19, and the doctors are telling you 'sorry mate, we don't have anything other than nasel oxygen or a respirator to offer you', then even if there is only scant evidence that HCQ might be effective, I'd be seriously requesting it.

I think it's also telling that the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has issued a memo telling doctors to stop prescribing HCQ, as many doctors were prescribing it "for office use". Translation: If I as an MD or my family members/loved one's get COVID, I want to have at least the option of trying this drug out because there aren't many other options available to combat this deadly virus.

Again, I think that's perfectly logical and I'd be doing exactly the same thing if I were an MD. It's better have have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. But those are just my meanderings and thoughts, and I am not a medical person although I try listening to the wide spectrum of medical opinions. Like the Supreme Court of Canada, it's possible to have many opinions (up to 9) on the same subject matter. Consensus on COVID won't be happening.
 

Ben19

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2015
776
444
63
I concur entirely, however, the problem is this. If you are a person in severe respiratory distress caused by COVID-19, and the doctors are telling you 'sorry mate, we don't have anything other than nasel oxygen or a respirator to offer you', then even if there is only scant evidence that HCQ might be effective, I'd be seriously requesting it.

I think it's also telling that the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has issued a memo telling doctors to stop prescribing HCQ, as many doctors were prescribing it "for office use". Translation: If I as an MD or my family members/loved one's get COVID, I want to have at least the option of trying this drug out because there aren't many other options available to combat this deadly virus.

Again, I think that's perfectly logical and I'd be doing exactly the same thing if I were an MD. It's better have have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. But those are just my meanderings and thoughts, and I am not a medical person although I try listening to the wide spectrum of medical opinions. Like the Supreme Court of Canada, it's possible to have many opinions (up to 9) on the same subject matter. Consensus on COVID won't be happening.
That is valid and that is why it should not be banned in my opinion, if someone really wants it and they are sick then why not? I am not in favour of fighting with people when they are desperate as long as they understand the risks.

People need to realize though that while we do not know the benefits of it or lack there of yet we know for sure it is not a miracle drug or a cure and when someone is in end stage resp failure it does nothing against it. The problem with the office prescriptions were actually the medical "spas" with doctors prescribing it for profit, several have been confronted with it. There were also people stealing the medications from those with rheumatological conditions that actually need it. Me personally even if I had + COVID I would not want HCQ even if it was offered given the current evidence, I would much rather have some of the aniviral being trialed that have much better results or plasma exchange.

My point is there amount of attention this medication is getting is ridiculous, there are other medications and efforts that have MUCH more promise but you dont see people making a million youtube videos about them. All this attention brings with it opinions and drama which stains the scientific process which is my worry, any benifit or harm of this drug is going to be debated for ever. As soon as this medication was brought on to the political scene essentially it was the end of it as it was never really a cure and at best it was being looked at for minor prevention but now its hard to actually study it. The results we are seeing with this drug now are literally the exact same we saw in the early stages of SARS, it was also tried then and it was also suggested early on as a treatment and we later discovered it does not have any benifit.
 

PornAddict

Active member
Aug 30, 2009
3,620
2
36
60
Just curious what are your opinions on ........remdesevir or the new hrsACE2 drug on COVID.... those things to me show MUCH more promise...
Stocks Dump, Gilead Crashes After FInancial Times Reports Gilead's Remdesivir "Flops" In First Clinical Trial


https://www.ft.com/content/0a4872d1-4cac-4040-846f-ce32daa09d99
Gilead antiviral drug remdesivir flops in first trial



Exclusive: Disappointing results revealed in draft documents published accidentally by WHO

Chinese trial showed remdesivir — developed by California-based Gilead Sciences — did not improve

Donato Paolo Mancini in London and Hannah Kuchler in New York APRIL 23, 2020
Donato Paolo Mancini in London and Hannah Kuchler in New York APRIL 23, 2020 Print this page
Be the first to know about every new Coronavirus story
Get instant email alerts

A potential antiviral drug for the coronavirus has flopped in its first randomised clinical trial, disappointing scientists and investors who had high hopes for remdesivir, according to draft documents published accidentally by the World Health Organization and seen by the Financial Times.

The Chinese trial showed remdesivir — developed by California-based Gilead Sciences — did not improve patients’ condition or reduce the pathogen’s presence in the bloodstream. Researchers studied 237 patients, giving the drug to 158 and comparing their progress with the remaining 79. The drug also showed significant side effects in some, which meant 18 patients were taken off it.

The WHO said the draft document, which is undergoing peer review, was published early in error. “In response to WHO asking for information and studies to be shared early, a draft document was provided by the authors to WHO and inadvertently posted on the website and taken down as soon as the mistake was noticed,” it said.

Gilead warned that the post included “inappropriate characterisations of the study”.

“Importantly, because this study was terminated early due to low enrolment, it was underpowered to enable statistically meaningful conclusions,” it said. “As such, the study results are inconclusive, though trends in the data suggest a potential benefit for remdesivir, particularly among patients treated early in disease.”

Gilead trading was briefly halted on the Nasdaq on Thursday after the shares fell sharply on the news of the results of the study, and remained down almost 5 per cent at about $77 each when trading resumed. The stock surged to a high of almost $84 last week on hopes for remdesivir, valuing the company at nearly $100bn.

Until now, evidence from the use of Gilead’s remdesivir on treating Covid-19 had relied on studies that did not meet the robust scientific standards of being randomised and having a control arm.

There are multiple ongoing Phase 3 studies that are designed to provide the additional data needed to determine the potential for remdesivir as a treatment for Covid-19. These studies will help inform whom to treat, when to treat and how long to treat with remdesivir. The studies are either fully enrolled for the primary analysis or on track to fully enrol in the near future.


Gilead’s coronavirus drug: why experts are cautious on its prospects

Positive feedback from a clinical trial being conducted at the University of Chicago, leaked last week, buoyed the entire stock market as investors looked for any sign that the availability of a successful drug could help open up locked down economies.

“In this study of hospitalised adult patients with severe Covid-19 that was terminated prematurely, remdesivir was not associated with clinical or virological benefits,” the filing said.

The WHO collates current trials for possible Covid-19 interventions on a website titled “landscape analysis of candidate therapeutics for Covid-19.” A previous version of the website, which contained five pages and a column called “outcomes,” is no longer available. The new one only contains four pages and no “outcome” column.

The study was terminated early because of a lack of patients. It was conducted in China, which after a surge in cases earlier this year has seen a taper in the number of those affected.

Earlier this month, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine showed early positive results for remdesivir, with 68 per cent of patients improving on the drug. However, the study was not an official trial but rather the collation of data from patients who had been given the drug on a “compassionate use” basis — and was not compared to any control arm. The scientists behind the study and Gilead warned at the time that it was not conclusive.

There had been other positive signs too. Early impressions from a study showed rapid recoveries in almost all of the more than a hundred severely ill patients, when they were leaked to healthcare industry publication Stat news.

A recent US National Institutes of Health animal study also found the drug was effective at treating the disease in monkeys, when taken early in its progression.

Much larger randomised controlled trials are under way, comparing remdesivir with controls, which in Covid-19 usually means standard care for a respiratory illness, and to other drugs including the antimalarial hydroxychloroquine.

Gilead originally developed remdesivir as a treatment for Ebola, where it showed promise at stopping the virus from replicating in clinical trials, but it has never been approved.

PS. Still best bet treatment so far is Hyroxychloroquine & Zinc & Azithromycin taken earlier on the disease covid-19 as soon as you test positive better outcome. Especially you progressive worse or get to intubation Stage or ICU stage will be too late to help. Another word take drug combo treatment as early as possible for better outcome!
 

PornAddict

Active member
Aug 30, 2009
3,620
2
36
60
FYI

Coronavirus: Two clinical trials will study use of hydroxychloroqunie to prevent and treat healthcare workers and Parkwood residents

Global News Radio 980 CFPL

Here radio segment interview with Dr. Silverman from Globals News Radio
( London Ontario News) ----> see link below
https://omny.fm/shows/am980/coronavirus-two-clinical-trials-will-study-use-of

Description
The St. Joseph's Health Crisis Fund is supporting two clinical trials that will study the use of hydroxychloroqunie to prevent and treat healthcare workers and residents at Parkwood Institute.

Dr. Michael Silverman Medical Director of infectious diseases at St. Joseph's healthcare and an associate scientist at Lawson Research Institute joins Jess Brady to discuss.
 

sp free

Well-known member
May 31, 2003
2,094
590
113
There was a NYC ER doctor on Tucker Carlson Tonight weeks ago that said he was on prophylactic Plaquenil and had been testing negative repeatedly.

They’ve already been using it, everywhere, for weeks or months. They know that it works.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,307
6,665
113
Neither are the opinions of an internet forum poster on an escort site acting like an expert in everything medical related to this drug, i.e. you. Why should anyone believe - anything - you opine on this topic. You could simply be a medical student who doesn't really know much of anything related to this. You could also have political or other biases, such as to certain medical opinions.
Bang on. I'm sticking to the videos C-M posts.
 

PornAddict

Active member
Aug 30, 2009
3,620
2
36
60
Go to video time: 5:16 to 8:28
Brazil hydroxychlooquine & Azithromycin combo only results of the study,
The study didn't included zinc treatment with hydroxychlooquine


 

Jicama

Active member
Nov 19, 2014
238
177
43
Right top my head this what come into my mind.
Yeah, sure, top of Google search results. Funny how people with zero professional experience in the field are now suddenly experts in vaccine immunology. Fun fact: your opinions and "research" don't count for shit.
 

sp free

Well-known member
May 31, 2003
2,094
590
113
Yeah, sure, top of Google search results. Funny how people with zero professional experience in the field are now suddenly experts in vaccine immunology. Fun fact: your opinions and "research" don't count for shit.
By that standard, neither do yours.

Have a pleasant day.
 

Jicama

Active member
Nov 19, 2014
238
177
43
By that standard, neither do yours.

Have a pleasant day.
False equivalence.

Am I critiquing medical studies based on Google searches? Nope, I leave the analysis to actual peer reviewers.
Do you see me recommending random treatments I found on YouTube? Nope, I listen to guidance from a consensus of trained experts.
Are they 100% right all the time, especially with a fast-moving pandemic with limited research evidence? Nope, but that will work out way more often than not.
If you'd prefer mainlining bleach instead, be my guest.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts