Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #27086268 - 12/12/20 06:46 PM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

koods said:
Lol come on dude. He went to a political hearing wearing a lab coat. That is just a silly appeal to authority.



Did anyone here claim he is right because of his lab coat?  :flowstone:




Makes me question why Fauci doesn't show up in a lab coat.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: feevers]
    #27086828 - 12/13/20 07:13 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242184

For this retrospective study, we identified hospitalized patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving IVM between March 10th and 30th 2020 in Hospital Clinic in Barcelona, Spain. Patients from countries endemic for Strongyloides stercoralis receiving immunosuppressant drugs such as corticosteroids or tocilizumab for COVID-19 were empirically treated with IVM 200μg/kg, single dose, following standard hospital procedures based on international recommendations (IVM group) [6].

During the study period a total of 13 severe COVID-19 patients receiving immunosuppressant therapy were treated with IVM at 200 μg/kg, single dose. In the IVM group, 5 (38.5%) patients were treated with tocilizumab, 3 (23.1%) with high doses of steroids, 3 (23.1%) with both tocilizumab and steroids, and 2 (15.3%) with tocilizumab, steroids and anakinra. Five patients required admission to an ICU. IVM was administered a median of 12 (IQR 8–18) days after the initiation of symptoms. In the non-IVM group, six (46.2%) patients were treated with tocilizumab and steroids, 2 (15.3%) with anakinra and steroids, 2 (15.3%) with tocilizumab, 2 (15.3%) with high doses of steroids and 1 with siltuximab.

Following hospital protocols at that moment, all patients received hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. All patients in the control group and 12 up to the 13 patients in the IVM group were also treated with lopinavir/ritonavir. One patient in the IVM group did not receive lopinavir/ritonavir due to diarrhea. Two patients in the IVM group and one in the control group were also treated with remdesivir and one patient in the IVM group and two in the control group received beta-interferon. Comparison of baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, treatment and outcomes between COVID-19 patients treated with and without IVM is shown in Table 1. Although no significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed between groups, a higher proportion of patients in the IVM group required admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) (69% vs 38% in the non-IVM group) (Table 1).

--------

I have been criticized for posting retrospective studies, so you will too.

Looks like they're administering too late. It's known that early treatment is better.

It's going to be tough to find any medication to save lives once they're so far into a disease. Especially when a majority if those who perish are elderly with compromised immune systems.

Simple prophylactics such as vitamin D, C, zinc and magnesium would probably be more beneficial than some of these pharmaceuticals, even HCQ, at preventing severe covid 19 disease.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: Enlil]
    #27086851 - 12/13/20 07:39 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I wonder if the big pharma vaccine companies are trying to keep this story down?  The establishment media doesn't seem interested.  :shrug:



The NIH doesn't recommend the use of Ivermectin.  There's no real story for the media to tell.




"Last Updated: August 27, 2020

Clinical Data in Patients With COVID-19
The available clinical data on the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 are limited.

Retrospective Analysis of Using Ivermectin in Patients With COVID-19
This study has not been peer reviewed.

This retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (27% with severe COVID-19) who were admitted to four Florida hospitals compared patients who received at least one dose of ivermectin (n = 173) to those who received "usual care" (n = 103).

Ninety percent of the ivermectin group and 97% of the usual care group received hydroxychloroquine (the majority received hydroxychloroquine in conjunction with azithromycin).

Limitations
This was a retrospective analysis.
The study included little or no information on oxygen saturation or radiographic findings. It was also unclear whether therapeutic interventions other than hydroxychloroquine, such as remdesivir or dexamethasone, were used in the study.
The timing of therapeutic interventions was not standardized; if the timing is not accounted for, it can bias the survival comparison.
The analyses of the durations of ventilation and hospitalization do not appear to account for death as a competing risk.

Interpretation
The limitations of this retrospective analysis make it difficult to draw conclusions about the efficacy of using ivermectin to treat patients with COVID-19."

Needs updates, August 27? It's December, 3 months later, why no further updates?

Tough to find a drug that works when so many are being given at once. Which ones are working and at what times?

Might want to reevaluate what the 'standards' of treatment are, now that it's known that Remdesivir isn't effective either.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #27087092 - 12/13/20 10:25 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Great.  Then you realize your post is a bit dated, as HamHead mentioned.




:popcorn:


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: Enlil]
    #27087125 - 12/13/20 11:00 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Great.  Then you realize your post is a bit dated, as HamHead mentioned.



No, my post is based on the most updated information from the NIH.  That's only a few months old, and no one has posted any newer information from the NIH about it. 

Do you have newer information from the NIH?




Are there any other credible sources you would accept outside NIH?


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: HamHead]
    #27087135 - 12/13/20 11:04 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

HamHead said:
Quote:

Enlil said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Great.  Then you realize your post is a bit dated, as HamHead mentioned.



No, my post is based on the most updated information from the NIH.  That's only a few months old, and no one has posted any newer information from the NIH about it. 

Do you have newer information from the NIH?




Are there any other credible sources you would accept outside NIH?




Guess all these control measures are causing people to expand outside their normal thread viewing habbits.

I got some more :popcorn: to see if any other sources are accepted.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: Enlil]
    #27087158 - 12/13/20 11:30 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

I just find it odd how information is accepted from one source and not another.

So, I am simply asking, are there any other credible sources that we here can refer to in these discussions?

Example. What if a different county does its own trials and their health institute find a drug to be effective?


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: COVID-19 hearing/Professor asks for review [Re: koods]
    #27087179 - 12/13/20 11:57 AM (3 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

koods said:
You really find that odd?

You’ve been wrong about nearly everything for eight months. Why should anyone trust your judgement or your sources of information?




Yeah, it's odd. When information is only accepted from a single source. Duh?
:homerdrool:


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/


Extras: Unfilter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Supreme Court rules against medical marijuana Agent Cooper 4,423 12 09/10/12 08:36 PM
by MEEZIE

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
4,213 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.021 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 15 queries.