The Lemon Fool

look wrote:here is the MATH+ protocol, updated september 2021

Why are you listening to fringe groups that ignore science, rather than say the WHO, who advise against ivermectin for Covid unless as part of clinical trials, or the FDA who are rather more blunt :

https://twitter.com/us_fda/status/1429050070243192839

Hallucigenia wrote:

look wrote:here is the MATH+ protocol, updated september 2021

Why are you listening to fringe groups that ignore science, rather than say the WHO, who advise against ivermectin for Covid unless as part of clinical trials, or the FDA who are rather more blunt :

https://twitter.com/us_fda/status/1429050070243192839

i consider the doctors of Virginia University as qualified, at least the leader is not a young doctor. But the fact that they are qualified doctors is not garanty for several things. I read careflly about this protocol and the updates since nearly appril 2020. The text inspire confidence.
I suppose you have not data to say that they ignore science. I consider the make science.

i place links to the protocol more than 10 times to the journal of my town. There were dard times when the journal didn't accept any link about remedies for covid.

the WHO and FDA doesn't inspire so much confidence. The WHO is commanded by the chinese since a long time. The FDA i$ a bit $en$ible to $everal intere$t$. Otherwise, Eeen the good guys in fda have a great difficulty to aprove anything quickly because they can be responsabilized.

if a remedy isn't approved, it doenst mean that it is not good. Remeber that only expensive remedies compensate the ritual of approval.

There was s situation in a film that has likehood with the present covid pest. Perhaps you know more than i about the situation.

The film was in England, the nation was in war, i don't remember if it was the first or second war. There was a farmer and his family. Guys from the government spoke with the farmer, they ask for he to plant food in a field. The man didn't like the idea.

The guys from government came a second time. They say the nation is in war, there is lack of food, people are dying in famine. The man liked the flowers that apeeared in spring in that field, and didn't want to plant in the area.

One day his oldest daughter simply seat on the tractor and prepared the land to plant without asking to the father. If my memory is correct, days before an airplane fell near that property.

look wrote:i consider the doctors of Virginia University as qualified, at least the leader is not a young doctor.

Are you actually being serious with that comment, or is this just a wind up?

I'm itching to try to respond, but my response would be spelling out the most blindingly obvious, that I can't seriously believe it's necessary. This has to be a wind up.

look wrote:I suppose you have not data to say that they ignore science. I consider the make science.

They tell you themselves that they ignore science... it's there in black and white... right there in the disclaimer ..." ...these products have not been proven to be safe and effective by prospective, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled studies... " https://covid19criticalcare.com/about/disclaimer/

look wrote:I read careflly about this protocol and the updates since nearly appril 2020. The text inspire confidence.

the WHO and FDA doesn't inspire so much confidence. The WHO is commanded by the chinese since a long time. The FDA i$ a bit $en$ible to $everal intere$t$. Otherwise, Eeen the good guys in fda have a great difficulty to aprove anything quickly because they can be responsabilized.

Staggering. You dismiss all those who do do proper science, all those that understand what the scientific process is about and what it's there for.

You dismiss the vast majority of other doctors around the world who are not promoting the stuff...

... and you single out one doctor, in one institution who you decide you trust because they are "not young", as if he's the only "not young" doctor in the world (let alone the idea that "not young" actually means anything), and even when they admit they are not following science, and they caution that what they are promoting may not have any benefit what-so-ever, and more over they even acknowledge it could even do harm...

.. .even then, you still listen to them over all the millions of other doctors and scientists around the world, why? because you say "The text inspire confidence".

This has to be a wind up.

"i place links to the protocol more than 10 times to the journal of my town. There were dard times when the journal didn't accept any link about remedies for covid."

I couldn't possibly imagine why they wouldn't accept such links.

-- bangs head on desk --

science is not only proof, it's made by theories and attemps. Einstein didn't proof anything from his relativity theory, but he is considered a scientist and some parts of his theories were confirmed later by other persons.

the processes in Fda and others are not science, it's burocracy.

some affirmations should not be considered because they are precaution against processes and attacks.

I see an analogy betwen the case of the film (in the other post) and the case of remdies used for other diseases that some persons attemp to use for covid. In the case of the film, due to war and people dying from lack of food, it was not the case to wait until the father approves to use the field for planting food. Now it's not the case to wait until certain remedies are approved in normal tests. Certain remedies will never be tested for covid because of the price. So every doctor and every person must have the liberty to do his or hers attemps.

sometimes it seems that this board is a confrary of fighters, box or karate fighters or something else. The issue is secondary, the fight is what really interests.

Otherwise, garlic is used against infection since oil times... This phrase doesn't mean that vaccines and distancing rules are not needed.

look wrote:science is not only proof, it's made by theories and attemps. Einstein didn't proof anything from his relativity theory, but he is considered a scientist and some parts of his theories were confirmed later by other persons.

the processes in Fda and others are not science, it's burocracy.

No - they're science. The mark of science is that it is never certain about anything, and it changes its mind when the evidence changes.

If you cannot change your mind when presented with evidence, that is not science but religion.

You claim the WHO and FDA are slow to respond to new evidence, so why do you listen to the MATH+ people, when they are ignoring the evidence on ivermectin? Which is that there is no evidence it works, and that there has been fraud in the studies that claim to see an effect?
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1003006/

And it's not about money, it's not about the evil drug companies discouraging cheap drugs. Just about the first drug shown to work against Covid-19 was dexamethasone, which costs pennies per pill. Just yesterday a trial from Brazil has shown that fluvoxamine seems effective against Covid - again it costs pennies. And yet Merck who make ivermectin agree that there's no evidence it works in Covid.

So why do you continue to proselytise the religion of ivermectin? Are you the one who is corrupted by a financial motive, not the FDA?

Hallucigenia wrote:

look wrote:science is not only proof, it's made by theories and attemps. Einstein didn't proof anything from his relativity theory, but he is considered a scientist and some parts of his theories were confirmed later by other persons.

the processes in Fda and others are not science, it's burocracy.

No - they're science. The mark of science is that it is never certain about anything, and it changes its mind when the evidence changes.

If you cannot change your mind when presented with evidence, that is not science but religion.

You claim the WHO and FDA are slow to respond to new evidence, so why do you listen to the MATH+ people, when they are ignoring the evidence on ivermectin? Which is that there is no evidence it works, and that there has been fraud in the studies that claim to see an effect?
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1003006/

And it's not about money, it's not about the evil drug companies discouraging cheap drugs. Just about the first drug shown to work against Covid-19 was dexamethasone, which costs pennies per pill. Just yesterday a trial from Brazil has shown that fluvoxamine seems effective against Covid - again it costs pennies. And yet Merck who make ivermectin agree that there's no evidence it works in Covid.

So why do you continue to proselytise the religion of ivermectin? Are you the one who is corrupted by a financial motive, not the FDA?

about dexamethazone, i asdt google what is better, cexamethazone or prednizolone? the answer was that prednizolone is better. i'm not sure if you asd the same the google will respond the same in your computer. i suggest you to asd this in google.

i don't have dex. nor pred., i think i should buy one of them.

about ivermectin, if in Egypt someone does a false research, it isn't a strong sinal that the drug is bad. Among the people that i know, there are good references for ivermectine, it's about real situations. The last: a party of 23 persons, they that use ivermectine, all good, they that doesn't use ivermectine, the half catch covid and some went to hospital.

you wrote:
"Just yesterday a trial from Brazil has shown that fluvoxamine seems effective against Covid - again it costs pennies. "

fluvoxamine is part of the MATH+ protocol.

in the last post, where i wrote "asd" it should be "ask". Please excuse me.

GrahamPlatt was the first poster to build a link for benfooxythiamine. Congratulations for him.

here other link with more details:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 1.full.pdf

but when will it be liberated for doctors? It seems it will take a long time, as the remedy is not used for other diseases, at least there's nothing in the news about this.

how should it works? The regulators should had it approved at least for buying with a doctor's receipt and the doctors should spent the last nights studying for whom they would receipt the remedy.

garlic has recognized anti viral properties.

discussion about garlic

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_ ... s_patients

we won't see a proof like the studies with placebo because nobody has a reason to spend all that money.

look wrote:garlic has recognized anti viral properties.

discussion about garlic

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_ ... s_patients

we won't see a proof like the studies with placebo because nobody has a reason to spend all that money.

Has coronavirus mutated into coronavirus-vampiris ?

look wrote:GrahamPlatt was the first poster to build a link for benfooxythiamine. Congratulations for him.

here other link with more details:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 1.full.pdf

but when will it be liberated for doctors? It seems it will take a long time, as the remedy is not used for other diseases, at least there's nothing in the news about this.

how should it works? The regulators should had it approved at least for buying with a doctor's receipt and the doctors should spent the last nights studying for whom they would receipt the remedy.

From reading that paper and a bit of other stuff I'd personally say that while any new possibility for effective treatments is great to hear about I would say it is far, far too early to get too hopeful about this. Unless there is other unpublished work this looks to be entirely based on in vitro work i.e. the conclusions so far are based on experiments in test tubes. Is there any safety data whatsoever for this even in animal models?

To get regulatory approval some drug company needs to run clinical trials to test it is actually safe and effective in humans and to even run the trials they need approval from the regulatory authorities and part of that application to start trials needs to include animal data, or at least that's how I understand the process from my pharmacologist friends who have all spent decades working in clinical science for various drug companies.

Unless there has been other stuff not reported I'd say we're looking at years before this could get full approval and the earliest access that doctors would get to it to try it on actual patients would be on a very limited basis (hundreds of patients globally) when it gets to phase 2 trials and then on a wider but still restricted basis (thousands or at best tens of thousands globally) when it gets to phase 3 trials. And if it really is only at the in vitro stage at the moment there are still many stages to go through any one of which could throw up a safety concern that kills it dead in its tracks.

I really do hope that this does form the basis for an effective new treatment but I'm not celebrating just yet, it's far too early for that.

- Julian

look wrote:garlic has recognized anti viral properties.

discussion about garlic

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_ ... s_patients

we won't see a proof like the studies with placebo because nobody has a reason to spend all that money.

Then we have no good reason at all to believe in it.

ursaminortaur wrote:

look wrote:garlic has recognized anti viral properties.

discussion about garlic

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_ ... s_patients

we won't see a proof like the studies with placebo because nobody has a reason to spend all that money.

Has coronavirus mutated into coronavirus-vampiris ?

It was posted a day late for Halloween.

There is evidence that garlic has antiviral properties. For example, from a link from the above-linked discussion:

We studied garlic extract's inhibitory effect against influenza virus A/H1N1... The concentration of 10μg/ml (EMCC) was found to inhibit virus growth to a large extent as was measured by reduction in HA titer and CPE induction.

http://journal.isv.org.ir/article-1-205-en.pdf

This was a lab experiment and did not quantify the benefits (if any) of adding garlic to one's diet.

Some posts in the linked discussion state that the garlic should be eaten raw. This is likely to have the positive effect of encouraging social distancing.


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw wrote:There is evidence that garlic has antiviral properties.

Of course, the idea that eating healthily might help defend against ailments is as old as the hills. An apple a day, and all that.

Why would anyone question that?

jfgw wrote:There is evidence that garlic has antiviral properties.

Some posts in the linked discussion state that the garlic should be eaten raw. This is likely to have the positive effect of encouraging social distancing.

So there is at least a plausible mechanism!

XFool wrote:

jfgw wrote:There is evidence that garlic has antiviral properties.

Some posts in the linked discussion state that the garlic should be eaten raw. This is likely to have the positive effect of encouraging social distancing.

So there is at least a plausible mechanism!

I thought garlic eaters couldn't smell the garlic breath of other garlic eaters or is that a myth ? If true then the social distancing effects would only show up when a small number were using garlic but would disappear if the use of garlic as a treatment was extended to the whole population.

Hasn't the horse bolted already
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59132968

...'Alice in Wonderland'

Labour MP Ben Bradshaw tweeted: "You get chucked out of Parliament for not wearing a jacket and tie.

"If you won't wear a mask, a recommended public health measure to protect others, nothing. What an antediluvian Alice in Wonderland this remains."