Now your speaking..... Haven't been working on egg cures in all too long, heck need fish to trial them on. I'm still fishing eggs from the freezer that are from 2006-2009. They still catch like they always did...

If we ever get a fishery you need to come down Parker, just don't bring that King County Rona with ya...

Keith

If your taking hydroxychloroquine don't click on this, you either Evo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-study/

I'm there dude!

This is why I sincerely hope that fat fuckin trainwreck is taking it...but I suspect, like virtually everything else that comes out of his mouth, that was actually a lie, too.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd are you prejudice toward fat people?

funny how you take the word of the Washington Post over the word of doctors from the American Associacion of Physicians and Surgeons...

sheep away....

No, just the fat orange pathological liar in the White House.

Fish on...

Todd

This may come as a shock to you, but the Washington Post didn't conduct the study.

They are reporting on an actual peer-reviewed study that was published in a medical journal.

Stupid away.

Fish on...

Todd

The Post was reporting on the findings of a study, not doing the study.

Go have some more paste.

Damn you and your 53 seconds, Toff!

It also mentions that every other study that has been done to date on Imbecillin has found the same thing.

Fish on...

Todd

hey Todd, this is from my article, from actual Physicians and Surgeons...

WTF does it say?


Peer-reviewed studies published from January through April 20, 2020, provide clear and convincing evidence that HCQ may be beneficial in COVID-19, especially when used early, states AAPS.

It says there's clear and convincing evidence that hcq may be beneficial.

That sounds fishy to me.

If the evidence is clear and covincing, it should say hcq IS beneficial, not that it may be beneficial.

"We have clear and covincing evidence that the defendant may have killed the victim."

In what world is half the jury not thinking now that the state's case is weak?

this is also from the NIH article that i posted in the other various threads...

you know, the agency that Fauci works for....


Results
We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.

Conclusion
Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.


now this is from the Lancet article...


Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, often in combination with a second-generation macrolide, are being widely used for treatment of COVID-19, despite no conclusive evidence of their benefit. Although generally safe when used for approved indications such as autoimmune disease or malaria, the safety and benefit of these treatment regimens are poorly evaluated in COVID-19.


so you mean to tell me, its safe when used for Malaria and AIDS, but if you take it for COVID you will have a heart attack and die...

sounds like some bullsh!t to me, and if that were the case, no one would be doing studies about it, well because "the Lancet" says its not safe...




also from that WP article...

The Lancet analysis is based on a retrospective analysis of medical records, not a controlled study in which patients are divided randomly into treatment groups — the method considered the gold standard of medicine.



welp, ive made my decision... actually i made it a long time ago, the WP is horsesh!t...

Hey, stupid. The WaPo didn't do the study.


Here, you're going to need this...again.

You know what might be fun to do? Search for "evo" and "flu" around February and early March of this year. That's when Dr. Evotard was telling us that Covid19 is no big deal and just another little ol' flu.

thats how i know im right...

neither of you can post anything proving me wrong...

as usual...

Looks like Evo is getting upset again.

Probably nappy time.

i mean the sh!t is easy...

dont post a fvcking WP article, dont post a Lancet article that CLEARLY states they didnt do the correct study..

post an article directly from the NIH or NIAID like i did, stating what they said 15 years ago was bullsh!t...

its simple...

but you cant, because it doesnt exist...

sheep...