Exceptional work! Pointing out the obvious (12 irrelevant studies) was so impactful it has changed my perspective immediately! I was a Pfizer Pharmaceutical representative and know well how studies are used to manipulate narrative. Study dose has been used and abused to missinform. Ineffective small doses and known lethal doses have been used in published studies! Even highly renound NEJM AND Nature published and retracted terrible studies.
The question I always have about any Covid study is, With the pathetic inaccuracies in the PCR Covid test (up to 96% false positive) , how are any results meaningful? Thank you!
Btw, I am going to be supportive and subscribe. Voices like yours need support!
Thank you for the commentary. If you have observations from the pharmaceutical world you think might be helpful to me as I try to compile notes into articles for readers, please feel free to email me (mathew.crawford@protonmail.com).
"The question I always have about any Covid study is, With the pathetic inaccuracies in the PCR Covid test (up to 96% false positive) , how are any results meaningful? Thank you!"
Technically, if there are no infections, 100% of positives are false positives. There is only the *whole* as an upper bound.
We should definitely think through the array of realistic possibilities when examining research. Sometimes accuracy without precision is good enough to make important observations. When examining studies on HCWs tested the same way, the false positive rates, unless absolutely 100%, should not affect RRs and ORs on average.
I think any of the concerns you have can be explained by the lack of grant funding for these studies. Also when doing research the person must be careful of career damage in choosing a particular reseach study and so if one uses small N and does T-Tests, it is still statistically first rate but doesn't SPLASH and POP the way huge numbers do when read by the masses and the govt.
This is why we never should have let career beaurocrats and career politicians do a decades-long tiptoe-shimmy over line after line, dancing backward with the pharma corps. We reached the point of conflict of interest that might as well be pass-through governance of most of medical science by pharma.
Virilio is the great theorist on SPEED, which he says is WWIII. This happened so fast! I stopped doing Big Pharma decades ago but at one time when I was young I went to them as authorities. I had wonderful doctors when I was a child so I believed in them easily. But my mother as she aged became more and more paranoid about them, as well as about other things.
Interesting stuff. I'm not necessarily on board with this as a treatment but it's not because of some kind of politically motivated problem with it. I think people should have the option though and we should study it in the best way possible.
The main reason is that a lot of the concern over the virus has been overblown. While I support anyone wanting to take it if they want, that's a decision between the person and their doctor. I don't think anyone should be kept from having it, so long as it can be taken safely and has no long term side effects. I was just reading that it's historically been known that long flu is also something that happens. It's effectively just post-viral syndrome which is common among many diseases/viruses. CoVid isn't much different. But I wouldn't personally want to take it.
I don't understand. Are you saying that HCQ causes some harm? It seems like an extremely sharp cost-benefit ratio to me. I understand that you don't mean that other people shouldn't use it, but I'm still having a hard time what you're saying.
No, not necessarily. I honestly don't know enough about the drug to say. However, the vast majority of drugs have some side effects if taken at an improper dosage. For instance, opioids have remarkable pain reduction capabilities but they have the downside of being addictive. I'm not claiming that HCQ has addictive qualities. As I said, I don't know the drug well enough to say. I'm simply cautious. So long as a drug is taken within medically recommended guidelines and guarded against for potential negative effects, I say have at it. But the vast majority of people probably don't need HCQ or IVM or any other drug to help if they got the disease. They'd be fine with lots of bed rest, vitamin C and D intake and exercise.
Yeah, it's noteworth that most of the people I've talked to or heard about who went on HCQ were healthcare workers. It might also be a good idea for some nursing home residents, so long as the doctor watches for QTc prolongation. I'm 44 with good blood work done a few months back, but I might still take it were I going to be indoors in crowded conditions during an outbreak. I currently use an array of good zinc ionophores, anyhow. Might as well enjoy some green tea.
Worth researching for pre- or post- high risk contact prophylaxis: Povidone Iodine mouthwash/gargle and/or nasal spray, xylitol nasal spray, carrageenan nasal spray, nitric oxide nasal spray.
FYI, in early 2020 my wife and I both started regimens of quercetin, EGCg (green tea extract), zinc, D3, echinacea, and melatonin. At least five times we've spent hours or days with large groups of people that all or mostly came down with COVID within the next day or two after seeing them. Each time, we've been the only ones who never contracted it.
The doctors have all been forced to be complicit. Student loans of enormous amounts must be paid back. If you are not in the loop you cant practice anymore. No doctors left in their own home offices. They are all on a paycheck with the hospitals - the young ones anyway.
Exceptional work! Pointing out the obvious (12 irrelevant studies) was so impactful it has changed my perspective immediately! I was a Pfizer Pharmaceutical representative and know well how studies are used to manipulate narrative. Study dose has been used and abused to missinform. Ineffective small doses and known lethal doses have been used in published studies! Even highly renound NEJM AND Nature published and retracted terrible studies.
The question I always have about any Covid study is, With the pathetic inaccuracies in the PCR Covid test (up to 96% false positive) , how are any results meaningful? Thank you!
Btw, I am going to be supportive and subscribe. Voices like yours need support!
Thank you for the commentary. If you have observations from the pharmaceutical world you think might be helpful to me as I try to compile notes into articles for readers, please feel free to email me (mathew.crawford@protonmail.com).
"The question I always have about any Covid study is, With the pathetic inaccuracies in the PCR Covid test (up to 96% false positive) , how are any results meaningful? Thank you!"
Technically, if there are no infections, 100% of positives are false positives. There is only the *whole* as an upper bound.
We should definitely think through the array of realistic possibilities when examining research. Sometimes accuracy without precision is good enough to make important observations. When examining studies on HCWs tested the same way, the false positive rates, unless absolutely 100%, should not affect RRs and ORs on average.
Thank you for asking the question.
When doing research you must be carefful to do it trendy as that is what gets funded. One writes grants to get money so the wording has to be good.
I think any of the concerns you have can be explained by the lack of grant funding for these studies. Also when doing research the person must be careful of career damage in choosing a particular reseach study and so if one uses small N and does T-Tests, it is still statistically first rate but doesn't SPLASH and POP the way huge numbers do when read by the masses and the govt.
This is why we never should have let career beaurocrats and career politicians do a decades-long tiptoe-shimmy over line after line, dancing backward with the pharma corps. We reached the point of conflict of interest that might as well be pass-through governance of most of medical science by pharma.
Here's one of my very early ones on Virilio. The Accident https://janetabbey.substack.com/p/reading-covid-vaccinations-with-virilio
Virilio is the great theorist on SPEED, which he says is WWIII. This happened so fast! I stopped doing Big Pharma decades ago but at one time when I was young I went to them as authorities. I had wonderful doctors when I was a child so I believed in them easily. But my mother as she aged became more and more paranoid about them, as well as about other things.
Very glad to see this. Great work!
It is very fine work.
Interesting stuff. I'm not necessarily on board with this as a treatment but it's not because of some kind of politically motivated problem with it. I think people should have the option though and we should study it in the best way possible.
You will be if you check out the C EO of Moderna on a youtube TED talk. He lays it out there as a treatment especially for terminal illnesses.
What holds you back from wanting to use it as a treatment? The early treatment papers are also overwhelmingly positive.
The main reason is that a lot of the concern over the virus has been overblown. While I support anyone wanting to take it if they want, that's a decision between the person and their doctor. I don't think anyone should be kept from having it, so long as it can be taken safely and has no long term side effects. I was just reading that it's historically been known that long flu is also something that happens. It's effectively just post-viral syndrome which is common among many diseases/viruses. CoVid isn't much different. But I wouldn't personally want to take it.
I don't understand. Are you saying that HCQ causes some harm? It seems like an extremely sharp cost-benefit ratio to me. I understand that you don't mean that other people shouldn't use it, but I'm still having a hard time what you're saying.
No, not necessarily. I honestly don't know enough about the drug to say. However, the vast majority of drugs have some side effects if taken at an improper dosage. For instance, opioids have remarkable pain reduction capabilities but they have the downside of being addictive. I'm not claiming that HCQ has addictive qualities. As I said, I don't know the drug well enough to say. I'm simply cautious. So long as a drug is taken within medically recommended guidelines and guarded against for potential negative effects, I say have at it. But the vast majority of people probably don't need HCQ or IVM or any other drug to help if they got the disease. They'd be fine with lots of bed rest, vitamin C and D intake and exercise.
Yeah, it's noteworth that most of the people I've talked to or heard about who went on HCQ were healthcare workers. It might also be a good idea for some nursing home residents, so long as the doctor watches for QTc prolongation. I'm 44 with good blood work done a few months back, but I might still take it were I going to be indoors in crowded conditions during an outbreak. I currently use an array of good zinc ionophores, anyhow. Might as well enjoy some green tea.
Worth researching for pre- or post- high risk contact prophylaxis: Povidone Iodine mouthwash/gargle and/or nasal spray, xylitol nasal spray, carrageenan nasal spray, nitric oxide nasal spray.
FYI, in early 2020 my wife and I both started regimens of quercetin, EGCg (green tea extract), zinc, D3, echinacea, and melatonin. At least five times we've spent hours or days with large groups of people that all or mostly came down with COVID within the next day or two after seeing them. Each time, we've been the only ones who never contracted it.
I do Ivermectin 2 days of the month.
We used to pick it up when planning to travel in India because of malaria
The doctors have all been forced to be complicit. Student loans of enormous amounts must be paid back. If you are not in the loop you cant practice anymore. No doctors left in their own home offices. They are all on a paycheck with the hospitals - the young ones anyway.