Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#117,803
#117,803
You know, it strikes me that it doesn't have to be some huge conspiracy with millions of people keeping secrets. It could be a few bureaucrats who know a few people at Pfizer and who help suppress certain types of studies to keep them from being authorized for use. For example, if the FDA will only accept randomized control studies vs. observational studies (even though the Cochrane Library has shown that, on average, over thousands of clinical trials, over decades of research, OCT's and RCT's reach the same conclusions) and RCT's are 100x more expensive, then the only groups who have the cash to do studies which the FDA may approve are the large Pharma companies. It is the same principal for regulations in the power industry. TVA, Florida Power and Light, and Southern Company don't care if the government mandates astronomically expensive regulations, because they can pay them, and any would be competitors that would be new to the market can't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
#117,804
#117,804
The circled are all the drugs the the NIH recommends for their Covid protocol. I'm sure it is just a coincidence that the circled drugs on this list are all orders of magnitudes more expensive and have fewer studies with positive results than some non-recommended drugs like Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, and Vitamin D. I'm sure there is no possible way that the health organizations are in any way influenced by pharmaceutical companies. Just a big crazy coincidence!

1649445164647.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, norrislakevol and VolinWayne
#117,805
#117,805
SamRebel35 said:
You know, it strikes me that it doesn't have to be some huge conspiracy with millions of people keeping secrets. It could be a few bureaucrats who know a few people at Pfizer and who help suppress certain types of studies to keep them from being authorized for use.
Click to expand...
No, first it's not just a handful of people in the FDA. Second, even if they could suppress the authorization, they can't suppress the information. Word would get about studies outside the FDA channel.
 
#117,806
#117,806
utvolpj said:
It's one of the main conspiracy theories though. Hospitals make more treating cancer than they do a broken wrist. Conspiracy!

I have a very hard time believing very many doctors would choose their bonus over saving their patients lives. I know my doctor and I discussed early on the fact it was likely man made/manipulated. It's not like he was afraid to go into that territory
Click to expand...
I dont care either way about it, I dont have a dog in the fight. But to act like money doesnt play a role in decision making, even medically, is laughably naive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz, NurseGoodVol, VolinWayne and 1 other person
#117,807
#117,807
Velo Vol said:
No, first it's not just a handful of people in the FDA. Second, even if they could suppress the authorization, they can't suppress the information. Word would get about studies outside the FDA channel.
Click to expand...

You don't have to suppress individual studies. You just have to disallow retrospective observational controlled studies (which is what happens. FDA requires RCT's). They are as accurate on average as the hugely expensive Randomized trials, yet you can't use them for approval. Why is that??? Also, do you have any plausible explanation, other than conspiracy, for all of the NIH's recommended drugs for Covid protocol being thousands of dollars vs. more effective (with higher confidence) drugs which are nearly free by comparison, yet are not recommended in the protocol?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and VolinWayne
#117,808
#117,808
LouderVol said:
I dont care either way about it, I dont have a dog in the fight. But to act like money doesnt play a role in decision making, even medically, is laughably naive.
Click to expand...
And hospitals have done literally nothing to improve trust and dispel any feeling that they operate only for cash. Their destructively opaque pricing and complete resistance to transparency point one direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13, joevol33, DC_Vol and 1 other person
#117,810
#117,810
Looks like the average Chinese citizen is not too thrilled...

"We Are Starving To Death": Shanghai Residents Under Lockdown Shout At Visiting Vice Premier | ZeroHedge

In mid-December 2021, Sun visited Xi’an city, 12 million population, when it was in lockdown. Sun urged the municipal government to “quickly reach zero cases.” While in Xi’an Gaoxin district, Sun was greeted by residents calling loudly “I want to eat!”

Back in March 2020 when the COVID broke out in Wuhan, Sun went to Wuhan. The residents called out “Fake, fake, it is all fake!” during her visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 508mikey
#117,816
#117,816
Anyone who has used the "Together Trial" the last couple of weeks as proof positive that Ivermectin does not work, you have been completely duped. This was to be a randomized double blind placebo controlled trial. If it was truly a blind trial, why did 58% (391 people) of the placebo group drop out or become excluded from the trial while only 9% (55 people total) of the ivermectin arm dropped out or became excluded? The only plausible explanation for such a huge discrepancy is that the placebo group became unblinded. How might that have happened?

As if that wasn't enough of a reason to be suspicious of the trial, they used the wrong denominators in calculating the effect size. In the placebo group 288 (or is it 228? Depends which contradictory index you're looking at) are the number of patients who finished the trial (out of 679). Yet the 24 deaths in the placebo group were divided by the full 679 group as if all of those patients had finished the trial. That is completely inexcusable and is grounds for dismissing the findings out of hand. Using the wrong denominator for the placebo group would make the death rate go from potentially 8-10% (24/228 or 24/288 depending on which index you trust as the placebo denominator) to just 3.5% (24/679).

These are not small errors. How in the absolute hell were these findings even published? They are indefensible.

1649688082209.png


1649688096552.png
 
#117,818
#117,818
newyorkvol said:
are they serious???

Covid Could Be Surging in the U.S. Right Now and We Might Not Even Know It — Bloomberg
Click to expand...

Found this statement curious

People are increasingly relying on at-home rapid tests if they decide to test at all. But those results are rarely reported, giving public health officials little insight into how widespread the virus truly is.

Wouldn't those who test positive most likely contact their doc? Yes we don't know how many tests are negative but it seems most positive home tests would trigger some further testing.
 
#117,819
#117,819
volinbham said:
Found this statement curious

People are increasingly relying on at-home rapid tests if they decide to test at all. But those results are rarely reported, giving public health officials little insight into how widespread the virus truly is.

Wouldn't those who test positive most likely contact their doc? Yes we don't know how many tests are negative but it seems most positive home tests would trigger some further testing.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't contact a Dr for just a positive test unless there were issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol, Sea Ray and VolinWayne
#117,820
#117,820
utvolpj said:
I wouldn't contact a Dr for just a positive test unless there were issues.
Click to expand...

the instructions tell you to do so; I'm sure not everyone does

just saying that "results are rarely reported" is primarily because most results are negative which doesn't indicate an undetected surge. if anything it suggests an inflated test positivity rate
 
#117,824
#117,824
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top