…the President’s tweet on this Surgifraud development…Aloha, Steve
Seems like there isn’t a whole lot of evidence that a high viral load results in a worse outcome but nothing conclusive either way and it’s not like there can be a randomised controlled blind trial. I’d still go for minimising it.
Link to full article:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(03)00806-5/fulltext?fbclid=IwAR0LTG0U0zvEWA1C5cPq9nmJb0oPejBxmoycvcrSC3imIl1W2Z3ITJqWJgU
This article delves into the history of Surgisphere. Quite the read. They provided data for a study in the NEJM as well. And they are working on a third HCQ study.
I’m a physician board certified in General Preventive Medicine and Public Health- and I’m in contact with a number of physicians who think HCQ should be used for COVID early in disease.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/disputed-hydroxychloroquine-study-brings-scrutiny-to-surgisphere-67595
I guess you missed the reference. Lloyd Blankfein made the statement that he was doing god’s work at Goldman Sachs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5djoibYRn8
Nope, did not miss that Mohammed. I do not doubt there are MANY especially in the 1% who think they are doing god’s work. That was more about money though. The one’s I am talking about are the ones like Bill Gates and his merry band of colluding partners who are playing around nefariously with ‘life’ itself. That, in my mind, is far, far more concerning than the bunch believing they are doing god’s work by plundering and stealing. They are all evil, but some much more so than others.
My brother-in-law, as well as another male friend, took the Z-pac for infection and one year later developed Aortic Aneurysms that required surgery to repair. I wonder how many of the cardiac or vascular issues from the HCQ/Azithromycin combo were actually caused by the antibiotic??? Granted this is anecdotal but I live in a Very rural area and these are the only two people I personally know who had this happen. Is this possibly an issue?
So, what lies ahead for this virus? Lockdowns are a short term tactic. Face-masks can slow the spread. Drugs may have a role but not everyone will want to be on drugs long term. We don’t know if contracting the virus yields more than short term immunity, or if a vaccine can be developed.
I know Chris has stated many times that he doesn’t want to catch the virus but is there a high chance that any of us will become infected over the next few years?
Few people want the economy to close permanently or borders to remain largely closed.
Personally, at the moment, I think we need to allow the virus to spread but slowly, so health systems don’t get overwhelmed. It’s unlikely that the virus can be eradicated so we really have to accept some kind of spread and hope the infected to become immune, at least for a period that assists the slow spread. Should we wear masks for ever, and keep our distance as much as possible?
Chris has stated that better times will come out of this, though he hasn’t said much about that. I can’t see much good coming out of it, myself, but it would be nice to have some hope. And this is from a New Zealander who has seen his country virtually eliminate the virus for now.
I would say its very bleak. We have one two options.
- This circulates for years, everyone eventually gets it 1,2 or more times. It is hell and not pleasant. It causes permanent damage if you get it and are not in tip-top health. Ultimately, there will be more viruses that it activates as your immunity retracts. LIKE CFS with XMRV. And we all are on disability or dead. We force a quick and dirty vaccine, that offers some protection, but has long-last additional consequences; It’s a global killer. ( including irreparable social-economic damage )
- We all learn disease hygiene and etiquette. We adjust our life-style. We let the hydroxychloroquine flow freely. and develop a rapid test, and put everyone on HCQ prophylactically at the first sign of illness, giving us time to slow it down - push it back -and develop a proper vaccine. We go back to work immediately and live our new lives.
Which one do you think will be done… when given only the two options as I see it?
I would highly doubt there was any connection between azithromycin and the aortic aneurysms. Azithromycin is one of the most commonly prescribed antibiotics, if not the most common. I don’t think there is any relationship with aortic aneurysms. Having said that, azithromycin can also prolong the QTc interval on the EKG. This prolonged QTc is what increases one’s risk of lethal cardiac arrhythmias. The prolongation of the QTc tends to be additive meaning adding a second or third QTc prolonging medication increases the risks. Thus, some of the relative contraindications for giving HCQ include those with known cardiovascular disease…and those who are taking other medications which are known to prolong the QTc. Personally, I would not take (or prescribe) HCQ in conjunction with azithromycin unless there was clear evidence the potential benefits of azithromycin exceeded the risks and I haven’t seen enough current evidence for this. However, I would not have any reservations about taking HCQ with zinc early in infection, or even prophylactically, given my risks factors of being 54 years old and having hypertension. That’s not medical advice as each individual has different risk/benefit profiles.
Well, letting HCQ flow freely might stretch resources, if tens or hundreds of millions get it each year. A proper vaccine might never be developed. To keep up good hygene, everyone needs access to soap and clean water, or plentiful sanitiser.
So of your options, option 2 seems more likely but there isn’t enough information yet, on the virus, to know its long term or permanent impacts on sufferers. I’m not sure we’d be allowed to get hold of good information now - look at the lack of proper studies on HCQ when that would have been simple.
So, still at a loss about the future of this.
This can be synthetically manufactured , I think based on its global use for Malaria , it could probably be scaled fairly easily. I think the dosing is rather short and minimal - its like 400mg twice daily day 1, and then 200mg til day 5. Its not a lot of stuff… You dont need to live on it … just take at first symptoms. Probably need about 1/100 of the production amount of over-the-counter fever/anti-inflammatory meds So, its not like you cant produce meds in the volume… It would certainly be easier than manufacturing a vaccine in the same volume. So i dont think there is any resource issue there.
When I mean good hygiene, i dont mean just washing hands… It involves going out when sick and touching things people use when sick… and coughing out in public … without mask… and pick your nose and touching eyes etc… there are a lot things far beyond washing and sanitizing. I truly belive HCQ is safe enough to be sold over-the-counter. Of course its toxic at high levels… but trust me you can OD on almost all over-the-counter stuff.
This would double your risk of having an aneurysm. If you have a genetic or family history… Id avoid this stuff like the plague. ( aneurysm is hereditary heart disease ) a lot of time its dismissed. because you don’t see it like other heart conditions.
Never the less, Zpak is a nasty antibiotic… Yes take if you must. But I agree dont take prophylatically with HCQ. Not saying dont add it if you get bacterial pneumonia. But even though it does cause prolonged QT syndrome, as does many other meds, Its not likely to cause you cardiac death neither will most the other meds/. But stacking these meds with the heart issues caused by covid ( late in the game ) along with a history of heart disease - is a recipe for disaster. ( i wouldnt give this stuff with HCQ to hospitalized patients ) Again, take the stuff early , before you get into trouble.
Hi Nordicjack,
I would prefer option 2. But as I’m rather cynic about TPTB, including the pharma industry, I think that option 1 will be pushed.
It’s just a matter of money and control. The monetary stakes are extremely high.
Just to get an idea about the order of magnitude of the money involved, assume that on average 10 million persons will get it once per year till herd immunity in the First World (population~1.4 billion) . Lets also assume that HCQ protocol in total costs 10 USD, and “vaccin” between 1000 and 10.000 USD dollars.
revenues option1:
- 10 to 100 billion USD per year till herd immunity ,
- total (70% herd) revenue: between 1 to 10 trillion USD.
revenues option2: - 0.1 billion USD/yr,
- total (70% herd) revenue: 10 billion USD.
So, to saveguard future income, I expect a big push for one global approach. The “hearts and the minds” of the First Worlds leaders have to be won. Uptill now, MSM, scientists, and reputed journals faithfully play their part in this game. Why? I believe that psychopathy plays a role: psychopathy is all about control and self-interest. Only 1% of the population can be classified as psychopath (source), while higher up the hierarchy this percentage increases (source):
According to British psychologist Kevin Dutton, the top four career choices for psychopaths are CEO, attorney, media personality and salesperson. (source)Although not many psychopaths are interested in harming others, they operate outside of morality. History teaches that you only need a few manipulative, amoral persons with twisted ideas in influential positions to control a whole nation. The majority of the populace will follow obediently because we are evolutionary wired to do so. So, I hope it will be option2, I’m afraid it will be option 1. Best to prepare for that scenario.
The giant virus in the room
https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/Corporate-Vaccine-Makers-Need-More-Pandemics-to-Grow-20200524-0009.html
There are two articles I’ve seen recently that seem to suggest that the highest risk for infection is by being in an enclosed space for long periods of time with an infected person, not from touching surfaces and then your face.
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them
In the first article, it explains that the risk is exposure to virus (load) x time. So in terms of a trip to a grocery store, the load would be low in a large store and the time would be short. Which is lower risk than being in an office with a heating system running for an entire day. That’s higher risk because of the time in the enclosed space, even if initially the load was low.
https://www.mcall.com/coronavirus/sns-nyt-coronavirus-risk-surface-20200529-nduhgwuja5bz5m7h6ymbqwzzya-story.html
Then in this second article, it talks about how the CDC recently downgraded their warnings that surface transmission (fomite transmission) as a cause for concern. (They came back and issued a statement that it is still a “potential risk.”) But the article explains that it is a long chain of transmission to contract Covid from a surface, presumably because the load is lower than what you’d get from direct contact with an infected person. Again, via air.
So I wanted to check if anyone here has updated your thinking in regards to surface contact and what protocols you either are or are no longer taking in regards to groceries, mail, etc… I know that a while ago the standard was 9 days for rotating masks, because it was thought that the longest the virus could survive on a surface was 9 days. I also know that the NEJM came out with this study in mid-April with estimates for how long the virus can last on different surfaces. If the primary way of getting infected is by prolonged periods of time in an enclosed space with an infected person, how has this affected people’s day-to-day protocols for handling surface transmission?