Jump to content

Co-vid 19: What Is and Isn't Known, Discussion and Debate


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

One of the doctors in that video, Stella Immanuel, believes this:

I don't think I'd take a doctor seriously about much of anything medically who believes that ovarian cysts are caused by sperm ("evil deposits") from demons who you have sex with in your dreams...

It seem even a stretch for a group like this...why wouldn't they know better not to include a doctor this far from the mainstream, but it appears to be accurate.  The Daily Beast (not an unbiased source, I know) has an article with other of her claims as well that includes a link to an archive site.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/stella-immanuel-trumps-new-covid-doctor-believes-in-alien-dna-demon-sperm-and-hydroxychloroquine

Her latest vclaim is Facebook will be destroyed if her videos are not put back up, so if someone feels we should look at the message rather than the messenger, this allows them a way to test the reliability of her claims.

Relying on anecdotal personal evidence ('I don't know anyone who has had it, so it can't be as even close to as bad as it is claimed by most medical professionals) seems so strange to me in a day and age where we have easy access to video records of what is going on in hospitals.  Unless someone thinks there is a massive conspiracy, what other explanation works?

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3
Link to post
57 minutes ago, Calm said:

It seem even a stretch for a group like this...why wouldn't they know better not to include a doctor this far from the mainstream, but it appears to be accurate.  The Daily Beast (not an unbiased source, I know) has an article with other of her claims as well that includes a link to an archive site.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/stella-immanuel-trumps-new-covid-doctor-believes-in-alien-dna-demon-sperm-and-hydroxychloroquine

Her latest vclaim is Facebook will be destroyed if her videos are not put back up, so if someone feels we should look at the message rather than the messenger, this allows them a way to test the reliability of her claims.

Relying on anecdotal personal evidence ('I don't know anyone who has had it, so it can't be as even close to as bad as it is claimed by most medical professionals) seems so strange to me in a day and age where we have easy access to video records of what is going on in hospitals.  Unless someone thinks there is a massive conspiracy, what other explanation works?

My sister is believing this video and mad that it was taken down from FB, after she watched it. Is there a way to get through to her that it isn't reputable? A site that will convince her?

Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

My sister is believing this video and mad that it was taken down from FB, after she watched it. Is there a way to get through to her that it isn't reputable? A site that will convince her?

What will she believe?  Studies that show the drug isn’t effective?

Studies that show kids pass it around?  Or will she just look at the risk numbers and say that it is blown out of proportion?

You could show her the website of the one doctor, but she might just say the other doctors aren’t like that.

Probably best to wait for a day or two or three for some fact checking organization to review it so as to get up to date studies as well as a description on why the studies they use have a problem with them (iirc they weren’t able to isolate the use of the drug, so any improvement could have been due to other treatments at the same time).

Edited by Calm
Link to post
3 minutes ago, Calm said:

What will she believe?  Studies that show the drug isn’t effective?

Studies that show kids pass it around?  Or will she just look at the risk numbers and say that it is blown out of proportion?

You could show her the website of the one doctor, but she might just say the other doctors aren’t like that.

Probably best to wait for a day or two or three for some fact checking organization to review it so as to get up to date studies as well as a description on why the studies they use have a problem with them (iirc they weren’t able to isolate the use of the drug, so any improvement could have been due to other treatments at the same time).

Sounds good, it started with her best friend posting the video and then my sister saying she watched the whole thing and then it disappeared, and her saying "ummmm". So I may be jumping to conclusions. So I was possibly going to offend both my sister and her best friend, and a close family friend. So good idea to let it wait for a day or two.

Link to post

See the link I just posted from politifact.  You might want to wait for others to see if there is a better fit. Does she use any fact check website herself?

Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Thanks Calm!

Earlier today I had to correct my aunt about this one on FB. 

https://bustatroll.org/2020/01/21/satiiri-of-epstein/?fbclid=IwAR38cIPwOC7rMJ75XODWxmPJwJZGpi4GgUqQiwwAP3R1mcREC_yyfGsJV_8

 

Then I politely shared this Snopes article on it. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-epstein-medal-freedom/?fbclid=IwAR3ijapV6hyHscxVgWKxDi-X6BSqG9zsTm1P0fj0mlK5THM4zX0ZPs4JMyc

@Calm Now my other sister, I have three, posted the same video, I finally put my foot down and posted the politifact link on her FB and crossing my fingers I don't offend anyone. Can you see what I'm up against?  ETA: my sister immediately took it down. :) I believe the video is dangerous, because Stella says that a mask isn't needed!! So does she think we should get the virus just to be able to use the Hydroxychloroquine? Crazy!

Edited by Tacenda
Link to post
2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks Calm!

Earlier today I had to correct my aunt about this one on FB. 

https://bustatroll.org/2020/01/21/satiiri-of-epstein/?fbclid=IwAR38cIPwOC7rMJ75XODWxmPJwJZGpi4GgUqQiwwAP3R1mcREC_yyfGsJV_8

 

Then I politely shared this Snopes article on it. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-epstein-medal-freedom/?fbclid=IwAR3ijapV6hyHscxVgWKxDi-X6BSqG9zsTm1P0fj0mlK5THM4zX0ZPs4JMyc

@Calm Now my other sister, I have three, posted the same video, I finally put my foot down and posted the politifact link on her FB and crossing my fingers I don't offend anyone. Can you see what I'm up against?  ETA: my sister immediately took it down. :) I believe the video is dangerous, because Stella says that a mask isn't needed!! So does she think we should get the virus just to be able to use the Hydroxychloroquine? Crazy!

I see a lot of stuff on Facebook that people obvious don't fact check at all...but I don't rely on fact checking sites. They are helpful sometimes (such as your obvious fake Epstein medal of honor) but at other times they too spin or give half the facts. Original sources are best.

I also don't really like the fact Facebook, Twitter and Google get to decide what people can 'see' and what is hidden. What gets taken down and what stays up. I don't like social media 'approved narratives.' And while Stella and her opinions are controversial, I find the attack on her ministerial opinions by the Daily Beast distasteful. It's fine they report on her fully and it will help people determine her reliability but as a member of this church, I've seen the media make our beliefs seem crazy and cuckoo. Should our leaders and experts in some of their fields be discounted because of their religious beliefs? I find it a dangerous road to go down. I have no idea if she is a good doctor or not.

I've read some studies that suggest the drug helps. Some that say it is dangerous have gotten retracted. If it is hard to isolate what has increased survival rates because of multiple protocols, lets use them if they are safe. Hydrochloroquine is safe. News reporters saying you will die if you take it should also be censored for their hyperbolic, ridiculous rhetoric too if this is the standard. Let doctors screen out patients or monitor them closely if they are at risk for the Qt interval issue. They give this drug to pregnant women and it has been prescribed for decades.

Should this doctor also be censored? https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535

Link to post
9 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Should our leaders and experts in some of their fields be discounted because of their religious beliefs? I find it a dangerous road to go down. I have no idea if she is a good doctor or not.

If their religious beliefs interfered with best practice medicine, yes, they should be discounted.  

When your practice of medicine is based on your controversial religious beliefs instead of data, science, and best practice medicine, it can be extremely problematic.  If you watch the video, this doctor actually tells all the other "fake" doctors (you know, the ones who don't believe that demon semen is a cause of disease) that it is unethical to wait for "data" and "double blind studies" before they treat their patients with a controversial medication.  You can see the problem when your religious beliefs replace data and double blind studies in your treatment of disease.  She is a dangerous doctor.  This kind of stuff falls outside of general medicine and belongs in alternative medicine.  I have no problem if she acknowledges that she practices alternative medicine, but this crap does not belong in the medicine.    

She is discouraging the use of masks and promoting hydrochloroquine for prevention.  There is simply NO evidence for that.  It is dangerous.  There is some limited evidence that hydroxychloroquine can be effective as a treatment, but that evidence is preliminary and needs further study.  This is from the Ford study:

Quote

"Zervos cautioned against extrapolating the results for treatment outside hospital settings and without further study."

In other words, this study does not support chloroquine for prophylaxis with Covid.  It aslo acknowledges that "further study" is needed.  

This is what I said about this study previously:

On 7/3/2020 at 12:00 PM, pogi said:

Great news, but it is still preliminary and there is a lot of unanswered questions after reading the article.

They attributed the findings which differed from other studies which found hydroxychloroquine ineffective, in part to a "combination of interventions" that were done in supportive care patients.  In other words, the results can't necessarily be attributed to Hydroxychloroquine alone.  They also stated that they found that steroids helped. Were they using a combo of steroids and hydoxychloroquine?

Of note:

In other words, don't be an idiot and take it preventively, it still needs further study. 

Just to be clear, the FDA never said it didn't work for treatment of Covid.  They revoked the fast push of the emergency authorization of the drug for use with Covid.  There simply was not enough evidence to support it.  They stated back in early June, before this study was published,  “We’ve made clear throughout the public health emergency that our actions will be guided by science and that our decisions may evolve as we learn more about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, review the latest data, and consider the balance of risks versus benefits of treatments for COVID-19."

I am only pointing this out because I can foresee people making accusations of contradiction, when there isn't any. 

 

9 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Hydrochloroquine is safe. News reporters saying you will die if you take it should also be censored for their hyperbolic, ridiculous rhetoric too if this is the standard. Let doctors screen out patients or monitor them closely if they are at risk for the Qt interval issue. They give this drug to pregnant women and it has been prescribed for decades.

Should this doctor also be censored? https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535

I agree that Chloroquine is getting a bad rap in general. People are overly afraid of it.  I have mostly been miffed at politicians pushing meds for prevention against the recommendation of their own medical team and without any evidence whatsoever. But it is not entirely "safe" either.  I have been prescribing Chloroquine for years for malaria prevention.  However, the dose we use is very low (500mg once/week).  The problem with treating Covid with Chloroquine is that nobody really knows what the appropriate dose is to use.  All they are saying is that it is a much higher, daily dose.  How do we know that higher dose is safe and wont dramatically increase the risk for Qt prolongation in vulnerable populations?  We use Chloroquine with extreme precaution because of the risks, and only after a full medical review of pre-existing conditions and travel itinerary/risks.  Should everyone take it for prevention as this witch doctor is promoting instead of wearing masks?  Heaven's no!    

I hold out hope that it will be found to be an effective treatment, but there are still a lot of unknowns.  We have zero double blind studies.  In fact one attempted study in Brazil had to be stopped early because the high dose was leading to heart complications: https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-chloroquine-study-stopped-early.html

I wouldn't feel safe, as a medical provider to prescribe this medication without any double blind studies and no clear guidelines and screening tools.  However I feel totally confident prescribing it as a preventative for malaria.  You see, you can't just say "it's safe" without contextualizing it's use and acknowledging its risks.

Edited by pogi
  • Like 3
Link to post
9 hours ago, bsjkki said:

I've read some studies that suggest the drug helps. Some that say it is dangerous have gotten retracted. If it is hard to isolate what has increased survival rates because of multiple protocols, lets use them if they are safe. Hydrochloroquine is safe. News reporters saying you will die if you take it should also be censored for their hyperbolic, ridiculous rhetoric too if this is the standard. Let doctors screen out patients or monitor them closely if they are at risk for the Qt interval issue. They give this drug to pregnant women and it has been prescribed for decades.

It is not safe. It is safer than the thing it is being used to treat. Taking it for something it does not help with is less safe than not taking it.

Link to post
1 hour ago, pogi said:

If their religious beliefs interfered with best practice medicine, yes, they should be discounted.  

When your practice of medicine is based on your controversial religious beliefs instead of data, science, and best practice medicine, it can be extremely problematic.  If you watch the video, this doctor actually tells all the other "fake" doctors (you know, the ones who don't believe that demon semen is a cause of disease) that it is unethical to wait for "data" and "double blind studies" before they treat their patients with a controversial medication.  You can see the problem when your religious beliefs replace data and double blind studies in your treatment of disease.  She is a dangerous doctor.  This kind of stuff falls outside of general medicine and belongs in alternative medicine.  I have no problem if she acknowledges that she practices alternative medicine, but this crap does not belong in the medicine.    

She is discouraging the use of masks and promoting hydrochloroquine for prevention.  There is simply NO evidence for that.  It is dangerous.  There is some limited evidence that hydroxychloroquine can be effective as a treatment, but that evidence is preliminary and needs further study.  This is from the Ford study:

In other words, this study does not support chloroquine for prophylaxis with Covid.  It aslo acknowledges that "further study" is needed.  

This is what I said about this study previously:

 

I agree that Chloroquine is getting a bad rap in general. People are overly afraid of it.  I have mostly been miffed at politicians pushing meds for prevention against the recommendation of their own medical team and without any evidence whatsoever. But it is not entirely "safe" either.  I have been prescribing Chloroquine for years for malaria prevention.  However, the dose we use is very low (500mg once/week).  The problem with treating Covid with Chloroquine is that nobody really knows what the appropriate dose is to use.  All they are saying is that it is a much higher, daily dose.  How do we know that higher dose is safe and wont dramatically increase the risk for Qt prolongation in vulnerable populations?  We use Chloroquine with extreme precaution because of the risks, and only after a full medical review of pre-existing conditions and travel itinerary/risks.  Should everyone take it for prevention as this witch doctor is promoting instead of wearing masks?  Heaven's no!    

I hold out hope that it will be found to be an effective treatment, but there are still a lot of unknowns.  We have zero double blind studies.  In fact one attempted study in Brazil had to be stopped early because the high dose was leading to heart complications: https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-chloroquine-study-stopped-early.html

I wouldn't feel safe, as a medical provider to prescribe this medication without any double blind studies and no clear guidelines and screening tools.  However I feel totally confident prescribing it as a preventative for malaria.  You see, you can't just say "it's safe" without contextualizing it's use and acknowledging its risks.

I read about the Brazil study.  The dosage he gave was enormous. I think it sad this has become political. At high doses the drug is toxic. I would say, that goes for most meds. Let’s study it but let’s also acknowledge there is some over the top fear mongering too. 

“The drug’s safety has been a major point of contention during the pandemic. Lovat points to a 2017 report from WHO that assesses chloroquine’s cardiotoxicity risks and concludes that there are no reports of “sudden unexplained deaths” linked to the drugs. The Brazilian study that linked the drugs to an increased risk of death early in the pandemic used a “huge” dose of 1,200 mg per day, he says. In the Crown Coronation study, participants will receive much smaller doses: 300 mg weekly, 300 mg twice weekly, or 150 mg daily. “We wouldn’t do it if we thought it was risky,” he says.”

Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

It is not safe. It is safer than the thing it is being used to treat. Taking it for something it does not help with is less safe than not taking it.

It is safe, it is routinely used throughout the world for a variety of conditions. The idea that it is not safe is absolutely misinformation and should be censored according to social media companies own guidelines. But of course it isn’t. Wonder why?

Link to post
Posted (edited)
Quote

Margaret Harris repeated that message in a virtual briefing in Geneva. “We are in the first wave. It’s going to be one big wave. It’s going to go up and down a bit. The best thing is to flatten it and turn it into just something lapping at your feet,” she said. 

Pointing to high case numbers at the height of the U.S. summer, she urged vigilance in applying measures and warned against mass gatherings....

However, she expressed concern about COVID-19 cases coinciding with normal seasonal influenza cases during the southern hemisphere’s winter, and said the Geneva-based body was monitoring this closely. 

So far, she said, laboratory samples are not showing high numbers of flu cases, suggesting a later-than-normal start to the season. 

“If you have an increase in a respiratory illness when you already have a very high burden of respiratory illness, that puts even more pressure on the health system,” she said, urging people to be vaccinated against flu.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who/who-says-covid-19-pandemic-is-one-big-wave-not-seasonal-idUSKCN24T16U

Edited by Calm
Link to post
On 7/19/2020 at 1:11 PM, Rain said:

I wonder about it.  My trainer is coming to our house to train me.  We are her only clients right now and she stays home except for groceries and outdoor activities because her husband is immunocompromised as well. We all wear masks. ...

 

Sorry! :D  Couldn't resist! :unknw:

Link to post
Quote

In April, its aggressive and successful approach to beating the coronavirus was spotlighted by NBC News. 

“We are very proud at this point that our numbers are very low, considering we are an at-risk population and the disparity in medical services and our low socio-economic population,” Joel Villareal, mayor of county seat Rio Grande City, told NBC News. “We rank as one of the poorest counties in the nation. However, that does not deter us.”

But after Gov. Greg Abbott issued orders for the reopening of the state, overriding local control and decision-making, COVID-19 cases surged.

Now Starr County is at a dangerous “tipping point,” reporting an alarming number of new cases each day, data show. Starr County Memorial Hospital — the county’s only hospital — is overflowing with COVID-19 patients.

The county has been forced to form what is being compared to a so-called “death panel.” A county health board – which governs Starr Memorial – is set to authorize critical care guidelines Thursday that will help medical workers determine ways to allocate scarce medical resources on patients with the best chance to survive.

A committee will deem which COVID-19 patients are likely to die and send them home with family, Jose Vasquez, the county health authority, said during a news conference Tuesday.

 

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/coronavirus/article244443257.html#storylink=cpy

Link to post
1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

I read about the Brazil study.  The dosage he gave was enormous. I think it sad this has become political. At high doses the drug is toxic. I would say, that goes for most meds. Let’s study it but let’s also acknowledge there is some over the top fear mongering too. 

“The drug’s safety has been a major point of contention during the pandemic. Lovat points to a 2017 report from WHO that assesses chloroquine’s cardiotoxicity risks and concludes that there are no reports of “sudden unexplained deaths” linked to the drugs. The Brazilian study that linked the drugs to an increased risk of death early in the pandemic used a “huge” dose of 1,200 mg per day, he says. In the Crown Coronation study, participants will receive much smaller doses: 300 mg weekly, 300 mg twice weekly, or 150 mg daily. “We wouldn’t do it if we thought it was risky,” he says.”

I think it is sad that it has become political too.  We probably blame different people for that. 

300 mg/week to 1,200 mg/day, with mixed study results and no double blind studies to date.  You can see why doctors might feel unsure about this medicine because it is definitely not without risk.  There is no clear established guidelines based on double blind studies.  It is basically guess work at this point.   

By the way, in the Crown Coronation study all participants will be receiving an "induction dose of 1200 mg", it will be over a 4 day period, but definitely not without risk at that dose.   It will be interesting to see the results of that study, and I remain hopeful that we will have some good news.  It will give us some more solid ground to judge the efficacy and safety of different doses.  Until then, we can't assume that it is safe and effective at these doses. It is premature.  Patience.  People/politicians are pushing faster than science can deliver. 

 

Link to post
Posted (edited)

A friend came across a just released study in her country that suggests it may suppress the immune response, so makes things worse, not better.  I have asked her for a link. 
 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.08.20122143v1?fbclid=IwAR1ul6K_C9DjjlcfHW-MOdokG71mBwtirmfQqK57raLA5GfaX8Q86E9w6d4

Quote

SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause severe disease for which currently no specific therapy is available. The use of hydroxychloroquine to prevent or treat SARS-CoV-2 infection is controversial and its mode of action poorly understood. We demonstrate that hydroxychloroquine inhibits trained immunity at the functional and epigenetic level and is accompanied by profound changes in the cellular lipidome as well as reduced expression of interferon-stimulated genes. Trained immunity comprises a functional adaptation induced by epigenetic reprogramming which facilitates the anti-viral innate immune response. Our findings therefore suggest that hydroxychloroquine may not have a beneficial effect on the anti-viral immune response to SARS-CoV-2.

 

Edited by Calm
Link to post
1 hour ago, 10THAmendment said:

If you want the truth always listen to those who are not allowed to speak. 

So the virulent antis that were banned from this site long ago were all right? Uh-oh!

1 hour ago, 10THAmendment said:

It is safe, it is routinely used throughout the world for a variety of conditions. The idea that it is not safe is absolutely misinformation and should be censored according to social media companies own guidelines. But of course it isn’t. Wonder why?

Did you miss the vision damage? It is safe in the sense that it is approved for prescription use because the alternative is sometimes worse but it is not safe in the sense that you should consume it for no reason.

If you need a magic medication to feel like you are taking charge there are plenty of placebos out there.

 

Link to post
16 hours ago, Tacenda said:

My sister is believing this video and mad that it was taken down from FB, after she watched it. Is there a way to get through to her that it isn't reputable? A site that will convince her?

Tacenda, this Facebook page has some good info and possible important info (not linked, but sourced) about actual credentials of some of the doctors involved...they would not actually be working with covid patients most likely (eye doctors):

Quote

#1: Dr. Stella Immanuel practices in Texas. Looking up her TX medical license (which she has had for only 9 months), she has no hospital privileges in the city. She is the medical director of an urgent care clinic with one review on Google. She completed a pediatrics residency in 1998 but has no board certification. How is she seeing adult/geriatric COVID patients? Where did she see a 92 year old as a pediatrician? Where did she treat 350 hospitalized COVID patients without hospital privileges? Also, she seems to have a problematic record of vocalizing falsehoods – you can find some of them on a quick google search.

#2: The other "ER" doctor in the video is not board certified, and we cannot find where she completed residency, which is concerning.

#3: Several other physicians in the video are ophthalmologists - eye surgeons. My Ophthalmology colleagues will be the first to tell you they are not "front line" doctors caring for COVID patients.

#4: These doctors belong to the AAPS, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. They are NOT a medical board. They are a small non-profit with 5,000 members and have a problematic track record of attempting to validate debunked medical claims (such as, HIV does not cause AIDS, abortions are the cause of breast cancer, etc.)

#5: Reconsider your trust in any doctor in July of 2020 not social distancing or wearing masks.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10106238615671073&id=9206583

Link to post
2 hours ago, 10THAmendment said:

It is safe

Let's put everyone on a daily dose for prevention then!  We have no idea if it will work or what dose is effective, and people will absolutely die from it, but hey...

Safety is always a relative issue in medicine.  Risk vs benefit.  Proper dosage and health condition of patient matters.  Blanket statements are not helpful.  Proven deadly side effects with unproven and preliminary results is not what I would consider "safe" use of a medicine. That is not to say that it is not relatively safe for use in other applications with proven efficacy against highly deadly diseases in high risk areas. 

Edited by pogi
  • Like 1
Link to post

It will be really interesting to see how things go when the Travel Clinic opens again.  I wonder how people are going to react when I prescribe them Chloroquine for malaria prevention after all of this.  I am afraid the drugs reputation has been completely tarnished by reckless politicians and media accounts on both sides, and people are going to be either highly skeptical or over-joyed to get a prescription for it.  I am guessing that I will be prescribing a whole lot more Malarone where I would have prescribed Chloroquine before.  

Link to post
44 minutes ago, pogi said:

Let's put everyone on a daily dose for prevention then!  We have no idea if it will work or what dose is effective, and people will absolutely die from it, but hey...

Safety is always a relative issue in medicine.  Risk vs benefit.  Proper dosage and health condition of patient matters.  Blanket statements are not helpful.  Proven deadly side effects with unproven and preliminary results is not what I would consider "safe" use of a medicine. That is not to say that it is not relatively safe for use in other applications with proven efficacy against highly deadly diseases in high risk areas. 

Why stop there?  Let's put everyone on a daily dose of every medical drug approved for any disease.  They are all approved safe right?  No need to go through the troublesome double blind tests.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
43 minutes ago, pogi said:

It will be really interesting to see how things go when the Travel Clinic opens again.  I wonder how people are going to react when I prescribe them Chloroquine for malaria prevention after all of this.  I am afraid the drugs reputation has been completely tarnished by reckless politicians and media accounts on both sides, and people are going to be either highly skeptical or over-joyed to get a prescription for it.  I am guessing that I will be prescribing a whole lot more Malarone where I would have prescribed Chloroquine before.  

Place the blame where it belongs. On the people who should have known better who touted it as a miracle drug based on an initial misrepresented and very small study. If correcting the record and telling people not to take it if they do not need it means people later refuse to take it well.....we don't have a cure for stupid. Wait? Have we ever had a stupid person take hydrochloroquine for no medical reason and see if it made them not stupid? Oh, we did. How did it go? Oh, that is too bad. Just a passing thought.

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...