instead, look at this vast studies about the effectiveness of HCQ. BTW, the paper you cited was listed there as well. That is the "true science", encourage challenge. MSM "fake science" is propaganda. -headbig(Let's Rock！) @佛州华人论坛:佛州枫下论坛 The Rolia Forum of Florida

枫下家园 / 医药保健 / 家里人都传遍了，实例证明疫苗管用。我家除了老二都打了三针疫苗，结果只有他发病最严重，发烧4天，愣是玩不下去游戏了。家里老人都仅有轻症，不妨碍做家务的那种。 -vega_lee(天津包子-就不改); 2022-4-4 (#14483736@0) +15

老二打了几针？ -thegirlbefore(Jane); 2022-4-4 (#14483740@0)

一针都没打，我对疫苗采取存疑态度，反正病毒会痊愈，对孩子比较轻。他年龄还小不想疫苗给他后遗症 -vega_lee(天津包子-就不改); 2022-4-4 (#14483744@0) +1

怀疑态度都猛来三针啊 -gugu(GuGu); 2022-4-4 (#14483759@0) +5

我们老了无所谓了，顾眼前了 -vega_lee(天津包子-就不改); 2022-4-4 (#14483766@0) +1

当然有用。即使不能防感染，也能防重症死亡 -newsky(Newsky); 2022-4-4 (#14483761@0) +13
如果说防感染还有个2月的双盲，防重有双盲实验吗?做事不能双标是不是，对hcq, ivm啥的一句没双盲所以没效果，咋到疫苗就反过来了呢? 另外，疫苗副作用有研究吗?今天政治化这么严重光说你们家个例没说服力的。另外，你得病了，还打4针吗? -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14483784@0) +12

如果是心理作用，那也是有作用，对于普通病人能治病还管原理？我都得过了，如果没有新变种大规模反复，我就不用再打疫苗咯。有的话，再看，正常疫苗经过几年检验也该成熟了，具体到时候再说，不是算命的 -vega_lee(天津包子-就不改); 2022-4-4 (#14483789@0) +7

你家谁是第一个染上的啊？ -olay123(olay); 2022-4-4 (#14483794@0) +3
Recognize natural immunity is the first step. Good for you! This vaxx is just too new to know its full impact. Some sign lead to positive result like what your family just experienced, while other sign like Miami Open 15 athletes drops just not so good. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14483813@0) +3

柳叶刀上有很多有关疫苗的论文，你对疫苗这么感兴趣为啥不去看一看呢？读一读summary 也好啊。另外，最新发表的一个大型双盲试验，结果表明HCQ 对于预防重症方面根本无效 -ingale(英格儿); 2022-4-4 (#14484201@0) +6

None of those hit job use combination of medication in early stage. Just like the earliest paper in Lancet using data of HCQ in late stage patient then disqualify its usage for all patients. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14484242@0) +3

In outpatients with mild or moderate forms of COVID-19, -ingale(英格儿); 2022-4-4 {224} (#14484253@0) +1
the use of hydroxychloroquine did not reduce the risk of hospitalisation compared to the placebo control. Our findings do not support the routine use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanam/article/PIIS2667-193X(22)00060-6/fulltext

What a time we are in. You can't publish a paper if you don't lie -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 {503} (#14484273@0) +5
Wow. Look at the result, HCQ group has 20% less hospitalization,
37% less pneamonia, and others. and this is "not" significant.
I thought they were saying if vaxx children can save one elder is worth it.
BTW, this study did not use other medications like Zinc, VC, etc.
instead, look at this vast studies about the effectiveness of HCQ. BTW, the paper you cited was listed there as well. That is the "true science", encourage challenge. MSM "fake science" is propaganda. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 {310} (#14484290@0) +3

HCQ for COVID-19: real-time analysis of all 405 studies

Full Story:
https://c19hcq.com/

你这个是什么网站？推HCQ的吗？😅 -ingale(英格儿); 2022-4-4 (#14484676@0) +1

Regardless, it does list your paper, not like those propaganda machine ignore all positive study of hcq. You dont need to be scientist to know the difference. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14484732@0) +2

论文说用HCQ的住院率从7.4%降到5.6%，如果这个算无效，那么，加拿大2月21日到3月13日的新冠死亡，没打针的73人，打三针的208人，打3针疫苗算有效吗？ -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-4-4 (#14484299@0) +3

真服了你们，整篇论文通过严格的统计学分析得出的结论不理，自己摘出几个数字就下结论 -ingale(英格儿); 2022-4-4 (#14484673@0) +4

论文结论是HCQ把住院率从7.4%降到5.6%，你非说无效。默克的新冠药住院率是 6.8%, 又贵，FDA却批准了。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-4-4 {1147} (#14484694@0) +4

Merck & Co said on Friday updated data from its study of its experimental COVID-19 pill showed the drug was significantly less effective in cutting hospitalizations and deaths than previously reported.

Full Story:
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/merck-says-covid-19-pill-cuts-hospitalization-death-risk-by-30-2021-11-26/#:~:text=The%20molnupiravir%20arm%20of%20the%20study%20had%20a%20hospitalization%20and%20death%20rate%20of%206.8%25%2C%20according%20to%20the%20updated%20data.
不怕眼瞎，就怕心瞎。 -retirecat(总有刁民想害朕); 2022-4-4 (#14484698@0) +5

把有效的药说成无效，把人吃的药说成兽药的那些砖家媒体确实是心瞎了。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-4-4 (#14484905@0) +9

我理解的是打针对短期能防重症死亡，但长期有可能更糟。 -bumblebees(bumblebees); 2022-4-4 (#14483878@0) +5

I honestly question everything about this vaxx, even the "short" term effectiveness. How is "short"? against which variant? Even those "mild side effective", r they really mild? too many unknown. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14484037@0) +4

Yea, -bumblebees(bumblebees); 2022-4-4 {315} (#14484099@0) +1
I understand. Who knows? In fact, right after the vax it also is negative efficacy, that's why it doesn't count as vaxed until 2 weeks later. But since I wasn't sure, I just gave the benefit of the doubt. Also, eventually there may be a variant that will completely escape and cause more trouble than doing nothing.

Latest pfizer doc says white blood decreases within 7 days of vaxx. No wonder they want this 14 days after cut off line. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14484232@0) +1

个案也不能算，我公司那个人打了三针死了，其他人还有没有打的还有打两针的一大把都活的好好的 -sammywang(地主管家); 2022-4-4 (#14483895@0) +12

比率非常重要：没打针死亡（重症）/没打针人数 VS 打针死亡（重症）/打针人数 -guanshui88(约定); 2022-4-4 (#14483949@0) +1

have to add side effect of vaxx into consideration, and the effective medication. This is an overall judgement needs to leave to professionals. But the first step is to break the censorship. Science without challenge is propaganda. -headbig(Let's Rock！); 2022-4-4 (#14483958@0) +5
对，政府全国统计数据有些意义，个人基本都不算，除非和政府大数据吻合 -sammywang(地主管家); 2022-4-4 (#14483986@0) +1

看一下数据，2月21日到3月13日，加拿大新冠死亡没打针的73人，打2针的128人，打3针的208人。 -blueskygg(Grass); 2022-4-4 {453} (#14484255@0) +2

:
:

我家，我同事家也是 -green234(靠后); 2022-4-4 (#14483902@0) +6
症状严重不等于重症吧，打完疫苗对疫苗的反应也可能症状严重，没发展成重症，就个例来看，是不是该推出打和没打差别不大? -newvest1(新衣); 2022-4-4 (#14483919@0) +10
没有打疫苗前，几乎没有听说我周边的人得过新冠。最近几个月，很多人得了。都是打过疫苗的，基本上就是和感冒一个样，甚至还要更轻一些。 -coolrock(coolrock); 2022-4-4 (#14483953@0) +9
我家三娃，老大老二打完两针疫苗，感染病毒就喊了一天喉咙痛，第二天就好了。老三是六岁没有打疫苗，因为看到一个疫苗引起白血病帖子，就犹豫不决不敢去打疫苗。这次老三感染咳嗽了两个星期还没好。 -343(坨坨); 2022-4-4 (#14483969@0) +13

你自己看了个帖子，做了选择，现在来诅咒反疫苗的早点下地狱，人性去了哪里？ -guanshui3000(灌水); 2022-4-4 (#14484044@0) +9

我说的没有亲身体验，就反疫苗的人。这群人干的事，你们自己心里清楚。 -343(坨坨); 2022-4-4 (#14484057@0) +12

怎样才算亲身体验的？是打了疫苗以后死了的还是没打疫苗死了的？你有亲身体验吗？ -guanshui3000(灌水); 2022-4-4 (#14484065@0) +11

你得过COVID吗？你家谁打了疫苗有后遗症了？我家全部感染，就老三没有疫苗现在还在咳嗽，其他人都是三天左右痊愈，算不算亲身体验? -343(坨坨); 2022-4-4 (#14484077@0) +9

昨天就回你帖了，我家有人没打，有人两针，有人三针，就三针的中招了，其他人都没事。我理解你因为孩子生病着急，但诅咒别人早点下地狱就过分了。 -guanshui3000(灌水); 2022-4-4 (#14484092@0) +12

人在做，天在看。你可以不打疫苗，但是不要在网上撒播谣言，鼓动歧视打疫苗。 -343(坨坨); 2022-4-4 (#14484095@0) +25

你以为老天只看别人做的事，不看你做的事？不说别人是不是真歧视你了，就凭你诅咒别人下地狱，老天先看见的也是你。 -guanshui3000(灌水); 2022-4-4 (#14484141@0) +11
打不打疫苗不是自己负责吗？恼羞成怒、怨别人算怎么回事。 -wonder99(Wonder); 2022-4-4 (#14484147@0) +11

说实在的，就是咳嗽而已，哪个小孩在疫情前不咳嗽上一段时间的？如果让你重新选择是挑咳嗽还是可能得白血病？我家两个孩子都没打疫苗，喉咙痛发烧三四天，比你家的是要厉害一点，但是他们体内没有疫苗这个定时炸弹，做父母的头脑一定得清醒，面对奥秘病毒不需要那么害怕 -whiteblacktea(黑白茶); 2022-4-4 (#14484313@0) +9

三针疫苗还中招了，不是该质疑疫苗吗？ -wonder99(Wonder); 2022-4-4 (#14484152@0) +13

有啥100%有效的药，你给说说看，举一个例子就好。 -coolrock(coolrock); 2022-4-4 (#14484186@0) +10

既然不是100%，就别把疫苗捧那么高，小心摔死下不来。每个人做对自己有利的选择，愿赌服输。打针和不打针的，理想状态就是相安无事，各安天命。 -wonder99(Wonder); 2022-4-4 (#14484336@0) +13

现在打了疫苗的人有种心态，随着披露的副作用越来越多，心里有点不舒服，但是打都打了怎么办？为了给自己加油，反而会更加支持疫苗，同时又会找各种理由说服自己不去打第三针或者第四针 -whiteblacktea(黑白茶); 2022-4-4 (#14484364@0) +12

疫苗的保护作用在肉联不能说的，等着被拍死吧😂 -piglet(小猪); 2022-4-4 (#14484179@0) +12

就那几个法轮功信仰者而已。他们本来就靠念经治病，不吃药的。当然更不会打疫苗 -everynight(无涯星海); 2022-4-4 (#14484304@0) +13

疫苗管用了的话就不会感染了！ -nopush(nopush); 2022-4-4 (#14484321@0) +13
既然你用个例来证明，那好，我用自己的个例证明，完全不必打疫苗，发烧两天，除第一天比较严重（也是我自己退烧药吃晚了）,第二天现在基本没有什么事了，除了退烧药什么都没有吃。 -doris99(欢喜心); 2022-4-4 (#14484935@0) +5

@Florida

instead, look at this vast studies about the effectiveness of HCQ. BTW, the paper you cited was listed there as well. That is the "true science", encourage challenge. MSM "fake science" is propaganda.

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics