Hydroxyurea

[Budge]

Nothing to see here, only a medicine used to treat sickle cell and some cancers that costs about $0.54 a pill was used in the protocol to treat COVID patients in 2020 and appeared to work:

"Introduction
The rapid worldwide spread of COVID-19 motivated medical professionals to pursue and authenticate appropriate remedies and treatment protocols. This article aims to analyze the potential benefits of one treatment protocol developed by a group of care providers caring for severe COVID-19 patients.

Methods
The clinical findings of COVID-19 patients who were transferred to a specialized care hospital after unsuccessful treatment in previous institutions, were analyzed. The specialized care hospital used a treatment protocol including hydroxyurea, a medication commonly used for sickle cell treatment, to improve respiratory distress in the COVID-19 patients. None of the COVID-19 patients included in the analyzed data were diagnosed with sickle cell, and none had previously taken hydroxyurea for any other conditions.

Results
In all presented cases, patients reverted to their baseline respiratory health after treatment with the hydroxyurea protocol. There was no significant difference in the correlation between COVID-19 and hydroxyurea. However, deaths were extremely low for those taking hydroxyurea.

Conclusions
Fatality numbers were extremely low for those taking hydroxyurea; death could be attributed to other underlying issues."

" All of these patients had been referred to palliative treatment with a prognosis of little to no chance of improvement from the referring hospitals. However, the patients and patient advocates wanted to continue looking for facilities that would offer curative treatment with the hopes of improvement. That led to their care being transferred to the specialized care hospital. None of the patients observed had been diagnosed with sickle cell disease or had any other prior treatment involving hydroxyurea.....

Nine patients were observed, both male and female, ranging in age from 51-76. All patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 and had moderate to severe hypoxemia.. Eight of the nine patients were intubated prior to admission to the specialty hospital; one of the eight intubated patients had the tube removed prior to being transferred to the specialty hospital. All seven of the observed intubated patients had their tubes after starting the hospital’s COVID-19 treatment protocol. The average number of days on the COVID-19 treatment protocol before tube removal was 14 days.

All nine patients improved sufficiently to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility. Upon discharge, all patients had returned to their respiratory health status prior to their COVID-19 diagnosis. The average number of days on the COVID-19 treatment protocol until discharge was 19 days."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647674/

Any thoughts from our resident doc(s)?

N.B. I did write a few more comments but, on reflection, deleted them so as not to offend. I know, I know, it's never stopped me in the past.

[Yodean]

Any thoughts from our resident doc(s)?

I'll throw a quick 2c in here ... yeh, prolly works, but I don't particularly really love the hydroxyurea, ivermectin, HCQ, vitamin D/zinc/etc. discussions in the _specific context_ of cv19.

Do they work for cv19? Yes, most likely.

But then we're really playing the PTBs' game, and surrendering to becoming "controlled opposition," in a sense.

By discussing various potential therapies for cv19, from a certain perspective, we're indirectly legitimizing what the PTBs did - i.e. that cv19 is somehow a legitimate threat that justifed (even to a small extent) lockdowns, masking, jabs, physical distancing, etc. In the young as well as several other age groups, cv19 is actually much less dangerous than the common cold or flu.

At the end of the day, the PCR test for cv19 is complete bogus, as you know, most of the cv19 numbers regarding cause of death, etc., are dubious at best, etc.

Even assuming PCR testing is somehow accurate (it's not), the actual dying from cv19 (also bogus stats) is no worse than a bad cold or flu season, and mostly occurs in the really old, and those with a ton of co-morbidities.

https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/

*****

Chomsky said it well: “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

This preserves the illusion of free speech.

So, I don't really like being Big Pharma's or the PTBs' "controlled opposition," although to some extent I do play that role to the TIT here on this forum.

[Budge]

Any thoughts from our resident doc(s)?

I'll throw a quick 2c in here ... yeh, prolly works, but I don't particularly really love the hydroxyurea, ivermectin, HCQ, vitamin D/zinc/etc. discussions in the _specific context_ of cv19.

Do they work for cv19? Yes, most likely.

But then we're really playing the PTBs' game, and surrendering to becoming "controlled opposition," in a sense.

By discussing various potential therapies for cv19, from a certain perspective, we're indirectly legitimizing what the PTBs did - i.e. that cv19 is somehow a legitimate threat that justifed (even to a small extent) lockdowns, masking, jabs, physical distancing, etc. In the young as well as several other age groups, cv19 is actually much less dangerous than the common cold or flu.

At the end of the day, the PCR test for cv19 is complete bogus, as you know, most of the cv19 numbers regarding cause of death, etc., are dubious at best, etc.

Even assuming PCR testing is somehow accurate (it's not), the actual dying from cv19 (also bogus stats) is no worse than a bad cold or flu season, and mostly occurs in the really old, and those with a ton of co-morbidities.

https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/

*****

Chomsky said it well: “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

This preserves the illusion of free speech.

So, I don't really like being Big Pharma's or the PTBs' "controlled opposition," although to some extent I do play that role to the TIT here on this forum.

Ha, ha, I see what you're doing: an excellent demo of gaslighting.

What you say? You mean it? Time to get out of the Cave!

[Eric]

Any thoughts from our resident doc(s)?

I'll throw a quick 2c in here ... yeh, prolly works, but I don't particularly really love the hydroxyurea, ivermectin, HCQ, vitamin D/zinc/etc. discussions in the _specific context_ of cv19.

Do they work for cv19? Yes, most likely.

Here's a little peer reviewed study you might find interesting: https://www.cureus.com/articles/111851/metrics

Regular Use of Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner: Results of a Prospective Observational Study of a Strictly Controlled Population of 88,012 Subjects

That jives almost perfectly with another earlier study I heard about coming out of Asia(?) that said early treatment with the devil drugs (ivermectin or HCQ) would have prevented 85% of COVID-deaths. I'm sure that study meant REAL COVID deaths and not the BS numbers governments put it by calling every death for any reason a COVID death if they also tested positive for 'rona. George Floyd was counted as a "COVID death".

Even though I would argue with you that I believe for people over 40 years old untreated COVID is slightly more dangerous than flu, I think that's splitting hairs.
Even assuming a flu like 0.1% infection fatality rate, when 60-70% of the world population has had or is going to have COVID even a 0.1% IFR starts to add up to real numbers. Saving 92% (or 85%) of those people with drugs have decades long safety records and that cost a few cents a dose is a metric shitload of people.

In no way do I think that discussion in any way justifies any of the BS masks and lockdowns that were used to scare the world into taking the poison jabs. Those were straight up grooming to make people believe they do not have bodily autonomy.

[SOL]

I might add that this is a very interesting rolling slow played discussion, albeit immensely interesting. However, let's try an experiment. Assume you are not from this planet, and you had the ability to go over 100 years' worth of history from any point in time; what would be the prevailing theme? Regardless of the medium used to convey the message, the masses gave into fear, which means that to some degree, "the controlling the narrative directive" is Rubbish. Why? well, 1000 years ago, the means of transmitting information was mostly gossip and rumour; it slowly spread to using pigeons, small printing presses, etc.

The recurring theme is the same, the masses love misery; they are hard-wired to give into fear, and as such, nothing can save them. So if you were a completely logical being with no emotion, would you really think the PTB are doing something bad? Maybe the PTB are like the lions in the wild; When the deer population rises dramatically, more deer have to be slaughtered to maintain equilibrium. If there are too many lions, many will have to starve to death as there won't be enough meat for them.

I mean, think about it, through the millennia, the masses have learned absolutely nothing. Has anything changed since Plato's allegory of the cave was published? I am not stating I support the PTB but looking at the situation from a different angle; it provides some interesting but potentially disturbing perspectives. A logical being could potentially argue that the masses get exactly what they secretly seek.

[Yodean]

Here's a little peer reviewed study you might find interesting: https://www.cureus.com/articles/111851/metrics

Regular Use of Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner: Results of a Prospective Observational Study of a Strictly Controlled Population of 88,012 Subjects

That jives almost perfectly with another earlier study I heard about coming out of Asia(?) that said early treatment with the devil drugs (ivermectin or HCQ) would have prevented 85% of COVID-deaths. I'm sure that study meant REAL COVID deaths and not the BS numbers governments put it by calling every death for any reason a COVID death if they also tested positive for 'rona. George Floyd was counted as a "COVID death".

Even though I would argue with you that I believe for people over 40 years old untreated COVID is slightly more dangerous than flu, I think that's splitting hairs.
Even assuming a flu like 0.1% infection fatality rate, when 60-70% of the world population has had or is going to have COVID even a 0.1% IFR starts to add up to real numbers. Saving 92% (or 85%) of those people with drugs have decades long safety records and that cost a few cents a dose is a metric shitload of people.

In no way do I think that discussion in any way justifies any of the BS masks and lockdowns that were used to scare the world into taking the poison jabs. Those were straight up grooming to make people believe they do not have bodily autonomy.

Good study you mentioned. However, I would also argue, for the sake of intellectual fun, that the same (or superior results) would have been garnered, if one had used high dose vitK/vitD, or MB, or high dose quercetin/zinc/vitC combo - for prophylaxis of cv19 - instead of ivermectin, or HCQ, or hydroxyurea, etc.

As you know, the PCR tests for cv19 are flawed and heavily skewed towards false positives, so any study utilizing them has to be viewed with a high degree of skepticism.

[Yodean]

I mean, think about it, through the millennia, the masses have learned absolutely nothing. Has anything changed since Plato's allegory of the cave was published? I am not stating I support the PTB but looking at the situation from a different angle; it provides some interesting but potentially disturbing perspectives.

From a certain perspective, all very true, but the Herd is not ready for this type of lens.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

I tried with the Rothschilds, but failed. I did try, a little.

Hmmm, mayhaps I will start a li'l Grey WISC Club.

Enjoy the Mass Menticide, enjoy the slaughter.

[Eric]

Good study you mentioned. However, I would also argue, for the sake of intellectual fun, that the same (or superior results) would have been garnered, if one had used high dose vitK/vitD, or MB, or high dose quercetin/zinc/vitC combo - for prophylaxis of cv19 - instead of ivermectin, or HCQ, or hydroxyurea, etc.

As you know, the PCR tests for cv19 are flawed and heavily skewed towards false positives, so any study utilizing them has to be viewed with a high degree of skepticism.

For prophylaxis C,D,Q,Z vitamin supplements probably would have shown a HUGE level of protection and better outcomes. for treatment probably not as good. According to Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, the reason he started using quercetin was the war/ban on HCQ. He went digging through NIH/CDC data on SARS1 and found quercetin which works on the exact same principle as HCQ, but in his words (quoting from memory from an interview) "quercetin is like a .22 pistol vs HCQ which is like a .50 caliber"

The PCR tests themselves aren't inherently flawed, it's the application of them in running 40-45 cycles in an attempt to obtain the desired "positive" when truth& science motivated experts were arguing from 19-23 cycles is the limit of transmissible level infection.

[Budge]

Good study you mentioned. However, I would also argue, for the sake of intellectual fun, that the same (or superior results) would have been garnered, if one had used high dose vitK/vitD, or MB, or high dose quercetin/zinc/vitC combo - for prophylaxis of cv19 - instead of ivermectin, or HCQ, or hydroxyurea, etc.

As you know, the PCR tests for cv19 are flawed and heavily skewed towards false positives, so any study utilizing them has to be viewed with a high degree of skepticism.

For prophylaxis C,D,Q,Z vitamin supplements probably would have shown a HUGE level of protection and better outcomes. for treatment probably not as good. According to Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, the reason he started using quercetin was the war/ban on HCQ. He went digging through NIH/CDC data on SARS1 and found quercetin which works on the exact same principle as HCQ, but in his words (quoting from memory from an interview) "quercetin is like a .22 pistol vs HCQ which is like a .50 caliber"

The PCR tests themselves aren't inherently flawed, it's the application of them in running 40-45 cycles in an attempt to obtain the desired "positive" when truth& science motivated experts were arguing from 19-23 cycles is the limit of transmissible level infection.

PTB had no interest in discrediting vitamins. They had to discredit prescribable drugs because only then could Emergency Use Authorisation be used.