Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Mainecoons

Members
  • Content Count

    11,275
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    231

Everything posted by Mainecoons

  1. That is correct, hence imprisoning them in their homes is about as dumb as it gets. Of course people are going in and out, believe it or not there are people here who have to make a living to survive.
  2. Brazil found the Chinese vaccine to be only about 50 percent effective.
  3. So let's lock the seniors in their homes where they are the most exposed. How stupid can you get?
  4. People over 60 should stay at home where most get covid now. And good luck if they need food or medicine. Brilliant, just brilliant. Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
  5. Anything new here? She is our vet too.
  6. I waded through it, Alan. The citations are selective. The publication hardly qualifies as a credible medical journal. Once again, if you like it, go with it.
  7. An op ed piece in a publication that hardly rises to the level of the American Journal of Medicine. But go with it if you buy it.
  8. So why do you think it has been brought up again in this very credible main line medical journal? There has been more than enough time for it to be negated. You should be able to find and cite. I didn't post this for any reason other than the significance of the source and the information therein. Do with it what you like. Our family has had this information since Dr. Zalenko published it, a family member who is a medical doctor has used it with success and some of us, including me, also have.
  9. You're repeating your incorrect statement. I stated it was withdrawn because the data couldn't be verified and now I have cited a verification that was the reason. Sheesh, learn how to read with comprehension. Bond and underline mine.
  10. I follow it. It is more civil because they have driven off anyone who does not agree with the group think. I continue to recommend it for people who just can't handle opinions that differ from their own.
  11. Don't make stuff up about what I posted. It was pulled because it could not be properly verified as I so stated. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200605/lancet-retracts-hydroxychloroquine-study
  12. The Lancet paper on this topic was withdrawn because it was unverifiable. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200605/lancet-retracts-hydroxychloroquine-study
  13. True. That is why Zalenko's experience is much more germane as is the work I cited.
  14. Suggest you get some experience on local boards Brian the Newbie. Specifically please visit Inside Lakeside to see that it is usual for moderators to post their own opinion and there they don't even use a separate handle. Compared to what goes on there I was quite gentle and I won't bother to try and educate you by dredging up some of Angus's gems. Suffice to say he gives as good as he gets and then some. He's quite capable of sticking up for himself without your help. But of course we both know these criticisms come from people who want to censor those whom they don't agree with.
  15. Tested after recovery and all had the markers. One had to go to the hospital to get oxygen, the one who started too late. All had the primary symptoms, high fever, all over body pain, loss of taste and smell. Didn't get to the dry cough stage except the one who went to the hospital.
  16. Well the first part is obvious. I wonder if the American Journal of Medicine knows how you view them. Feeling a little silly right now? Maybe this will help you next time. https://www.lifewire.com/web-search-tricks-to-know-4046148
  17. I've given it to you a number of times. Maybe if you knew better how to search the web you would have found it by now. Here is the direct link. Just published this week in their January issue. https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(20)30673-2/fulltext I'd like to continue to engage in a battle of wits with you but that would be taking unfair advantage. Touted is not the same as mentioned. Touted is one of those semantically loaded words used by biased sites. Let me know if you'd like some help reading and understanding the paper. I have a doctor friend who can help
  18. Tin Eye is a reverse search tool used by photographers to see if their images have been stolen or misused. It is not intended for medical searches. TinEye was the first website to ever use image identification technology and to this date is still one of the most popular and widely used reverse search engines out there. It’s great for professional photographers or creatives who have worked online and want to see if any of it has been stolen or modified and reused. At the time this article was written, TinEye boasted 14.7 billion indexed images. In case you’re skeptical, TinEye makes its r
  19. Once again for the slower folks: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002934320306732 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7534595/citedby/
  20. That's probably why it is called tin eye. Blind. Like its users. Once again: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002934320306732 And: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7534595/ No doubt you didn't check the source or read the piece. It shows in the junk reference you posted. Feel free to continue to ignore the mounting evidence this works. BTW it was used in 5 instances in our family and worked perfectly in four, the fifth didn't start it soon enough and their recover was was slower than the less than one week of the rest. Please rush o
  21. FYI from the American Journal of Medicine. Published January 26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002934320306732
×
×
  • Create New...