Docs and scientists of letsrun, please read this article and tell me if what he is writing about Covid-19 treatment is fake news

Wow. Just wow.

substack = fake news

Posts like this are why I begged wejo to ban rojo from posting when he asked for message board improvements.

You don’t need a PHD in front of your name to know money corrupts even the most well intentioned people.

Media, Government, Big Tech, and Big Pharma have colluded to undermine rational scientific debate because of the billions of dollars at stake.

There are most definitely early treatments and prophylactic treatments- some which have been squashed here in the US. Whether this guy is 100% legit, I don’t know, but some treatments on the chart are known to work as early or prophylactic.

Watch/listen to the Joe Rogan/Robert Morgan podcast.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3SCsueX2bZdbEzRtKOCEyT?si=sJkOF49NQLCkZINAjyJwAA&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A4rOoJ6Egrf8K2IrywzwOMk

Consider that the substack article has a headline with a date that suggests it was originally published October 2017.

Does it seem credible that useful information on Covid-19 was published two years prior to the emergence of the virus?

KTHXBAI wrote:

Wow. Just wow.

I don't get why me asking gets that type of reaction. Basically I asked a question if the chart he used - which a little more research reveals comes from c19early.com - is totally bogus or not. Instead of citing some facts about how it's known this guy is a crock and that website is a crock, you get mad at me asking if there is a way to treat Covid-19 if you aren't eligible for the new $700 pill.

Another friend recently got Covid. His main complaint was, "Why did I even spend the money to go to the emergency clinic to get tested all they did was tell m e I was positive and to go home." He wanted them to give him something - he actually said cough medicine as his cough was so bad he ended up throwing up.

I don't get why asking questions upsets people. I mean a Supreme Court justice just said we have over 100,000 kids seriously sick with Covid. Am I just supposed to believe everything that is printed. I doubted that (it wasn't true) and not I'm doubting this. What is written by this guy seems to good to be true so I asked if it was true or not.

Me contemplating it upsets you? Why?

About 50% of the population has been convinced that the vaccine and only the vaccine is the savior from Covid. Since Fauci never talks about treatments, there is some type of anti-treatment sentiment in that population. It seems that they believe that if there is even a hint of a treatment, then people will be less inclined to be vaccinated. I know you didn't want it to turn into a vaccine thread but you asked the question. I think that there are several treatments that have helped people but doctors are scared to prescribe them. Vitamin D appears to be a preventative measure but I don't really know about treatment.

And most importantly if it's so obviously false, please provide a reason why so I can write back to the guy who sent it to me. He knows I'm triple vaxxed - h e's not and is sending it to me to probably justify his not being vaxxed.

This is really all you need to know about the article:

From the article itself: "However, (HCQ) lost that title after the 2020 war on HCQ was essentially won by Pharma (for now?), using tactics so sinister as to be unimaginable, and which I will not review here as that macabre war has already been expertly reviewed in incredible and highly referenced detail in the book “The Real Anthony Fauci” by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. His book, in my opinion, is a must read for all the globe’s citizens, as without it, no coherent understanding of the innumerable non-scientific actions and policies across the entirety of the developed (and majority of the undeveloped) world can be gained."

If you don't recognize the article as essentially a joke after reading that then I'm not sure there is much that can be done to help you.

I’m sure I’ll catch sh-T for saying this, but I’m a professor at one of the top 2 medical schools in the country. This guy Kory is a dangerous quack. He wraps up the crap he pedals in the trappings of science (like this lame systematic review of sorts,, but he’s either and imbecile, a huckster or cares more about notoriety than the public good. You can bet that anything he says is wrong. In addition, he went to medical school in Grenada:-). Rojo, if you seriously want to learn go to the twitter feed of Bob Wachter, MD. I can assure you he has no political agenda and is a great resource. It’s not just big pharma, it’s a fairly straight discussion of what works, what doesn’t, what’s known, what’s not, what we got right, what we F’d up.

Much of the data in your chart is nonsense, garbage. To really dig in to this you need to understand the basics of study design and biostatistics, but in brief observational data (looking back in the past) is ok for hypothesis generation, but it’s full of bias and firm conclusions about the effect of an intervention cannot be made, especially when the magnitude of the impact (relative risk or hazard ratio is modest) or the confidence intervals are wide and especially when there is no biological plausibility to the association. To get into the nitty gritty, each of the crappy studies included has to be examined individually to assess its quality. He’s limping super high quality studies, as with paxlovid, with garbage studies like with ivermectin.

rojo wrote:

And most importantly if it's so obviously false, please provide a reason why so I can write back to the guy who sent it to me. He knows I'm triple vaxxed - h e's not and is sending it to me to probably justify his not being vaxxed.

First of all, it's doubtful that anything you might write back is going to change this guys mind.

Second, whether or not other mitigations may or may not be effective is only tangentially relevant to whether one ought be be vaccinated.

These sorts of arguments are mostly post hoc rationalization not objectively rational evaluations of the data.

You seem totally oblivious to the fact that thoroughly debunking a site like that and breaking it down for you to understand would take days of work. Of course, people can tell you their opinions based on their intimate knowledge of the research. My opinion is that the table is a load of crap. If you want me to explain why then I will be happy to negotiate a price. Alternatively, here is an article that will give you some pointers but sadly you will have to use your brain:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/the-anonymous-meta-analysis-thats-convincing-people-to-use-ivermectin/

Quit being dumb rojo… you should be too old to fall for this stuff

I enjoyed the arstechnica article.

I still can't believe people are mad at me for asking questions. A week or two ago, the CDC cut the quarantine in half from 10 to 5 days. But they don't require a negative test. The head fo the American Medical Association was so upset by this advice that he published a statement on the matter writing in part, “Potentially hundreds of thousands of people could return to work and school infectious if they follow the CDC’s new guidance on ending isolation after five days without a negative test,."

It's not easy to know what to believe and what not to.

https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-cdc-quarantine-and-isolation-guidance-confusing-counterproductive

Give up trolling mate...its childish.

Either that , or you are the dumbest guy that keeps asking questions, and you know those two things don't go together

That’s the left for you rojo. You aren’t supposed to ask questions. Just do what what they say. Ask questions and be prepared to be ridiculed to submission. They never will answer your question though.