Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

medcram guy getting slightly irked with Youtube censorship.


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Noticed the other day when he was talking about HCQ that he was getting annoyed that all the context had been removed from the study slagging off HCQ in the trials.

He has now done a vid rebutting criticism of Vit D as prophylaxis and Youtube censorship.

This guy is as straight as they come in my view, and if he is getting fucked off with Youtube then we are obviously through the round window here. He's a professional guy from California, hardly in trumps demographic, yet he clearly sees something is very awry here, and he says as much in his closing remarks in this video.

I posted the other day how some study was flagged up on my Google news feed on my phone. University of Surrey and Birmingham came out with a hit piece on Vit D offering no protecion.

A quick Google produced articles suggesting much funding from the Gates freak show for both Universities.

 

He's actually having to refer the fuckin Lancet to rebuff this Gates funded filth. The fucking Lancet laydeez n gennulmun.

Not all heroes etc....

Great job Doc.

 

Edited by Bus Stop Boxer
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Bus Stop Boxer said:

University of Surrey

https://www.surrey.ac.uk/mediacentre/press/2018/worldwide-health-authorities-urged-rethink-vitamin-d-guidelines-following

https://www.surrey.ac.uk/news/high-doses-vitamin-d-supplementation-has-no-current-benefit-preventing-or-treating-covid-19

Don't know why they'd bother studying the different forms of a vitamin that doesn't matter...

Follow the money

Edited by Loki
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Bus Stop Boxer said:

Noticed the other day when he was talking about HCQ that he was getting annoyed that all the context had been removed from the study slagging off HCQ in the trials.

He has now done a vid rebutting criticism of Vit D as prophylaxis and Youtube censorship.

This guy is as straight as they come in my view, and if he is getting fucked off with Youtube then we are obviously through the round window here. hes a professional guy from Claifornia hardly in trumps demographic yet he clearly sees something is very awry here and he says as much in his closing remarks in this video.

I posted the other day how some study was flagged up on my Google news feed on my phone. University of Surrey and Birmingham came out with a hit piece on Vit D offering no protecion.

A quick Google produced articles suggesting much funding from the Gates freak show for both Universities.

 

He's actually having to refer the fuckin Lancet to rebuff this Gates funded filth. The fucking Lancet laydeez n gennulmun.

Not all heroes etc....

Great job Doc.

 

A lot could be big pharm Vit d seems to reduce the risk of many ailments that require expensive drugs to treat them 

And then again i could be a one stop algorithm,feck i seen a adopt a panda for X£ a month  site flagged up as an officially recognised covid information source  

Edited by Long time lurking
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

On a more serious note, they don't want doctors going off and speaking using journals and reviews, UNLESS they are approved by the FDA, CDC, WHO or whatever body that is in charge. He's getting the same treatment as Dr John for criticising the WHO.

We don't care how qualified you are, or how much research you have done using facts, or how far up the chain of command you are - WE DON'T PAY YOU TO THINK.

hqdefault.jpg

Edited by 201p
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think we need to be slightly open minded to the idea that vitamin D and Chloroquine treatments may be entirely ineffective.

In moderate doses there’s probably nothing to lose by trying them.. I think the jury is still out to a degree,  but there’s no point clinging to the idea if enough trials do come out and disprove them.

Government doesn’t always bail out vested interests..  look at all the companies who invested in emergency ventilator production in the run up to lock-down.  None of them were paid for their troubles as far as I know.

25qkjk.jpg

Edited by Libspero
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bus Stop Boxer said:

Noticed the other day when he was talking about HCQ that he was getting annoyed that all the context had been removed from the study slagging off HCQ in the trials.

He has now done a vid rebutting criticism of Vit D as prophylaxis and Youtube censorship.

This guy is as straight as they come in my view, and if he is getting fucked off with Youtube then we are obviously through the round window here. hes a professional guy from Claifornia hardly in trumps demographic yet he clearly sees something is very awry here and he says as much in his closing remarks in this video.

I posted the other day how some study was flagged up on my Google news feed on my phone. University of Surrey and Birmingham came out with a hit piece on Vit D offering no protecion.

A quick Google produced articles suggesting much funding from the Gates freak show for both Universities.

 

He's actually having to refer the fuckin Lancet to rebuff this Gates funded filth. The fucking Lancet laydeez n gennulmun.

Not all heroes etc....

Great job Doc.

 

Respect to this guy who has probably posted the most interesting, informative and intellectually honest videos about the virus. With regard to Vitamin D I would have thought that evolution has proved its importance to human health otherwise why would human skin have adapted to capture it.

Edited by Virgil Caine
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Libspero said:

I think we need to be slightly open minded to the idea that vitamin D and Chloroquine treatments may be entirely ineffective.

In moderate doses there’s probably nothing to lose by trying them.. I think the jury is still out to a degree,  but there’s no point clinging to the idea if enough trials do come out and disprove them.

Government doesn’t always bail out vested interests..  look at all the companies who invested in emergency ventilator production in the run up to lock-down.  None of them were paid for their troubles as far as I know.

25qkjk.jpg

Vitamin D is a generalised anti inflammatory. I doubt it's going to hurt.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Virgil Caine said:

Respect to this guy who has probably posted the most interesting, informative and intellectually honest videos about the virus. With regard to Vitamin D I would have thought that evolution has proved its importance to human health otherwise why would human skin have adapted to capture it.

There's a trade off between vitamin D production and skin protection. If we don't get enough vitamin D, bones go soft which causes women to die in childbirth. That's a very powerful selective pressure. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Libspero said:

I think we need to be slightly open minded to the idea that vitamin D and Chloroquine treatments may be entirely ineffective.

 

Vit D is about not being Vit D deficient*, hardly controversial, nobody would suggest being deliberately deficient in any vitamin. Peer reviewed science backing this, those deficient in vit D are 70% more likely to have a respiratory infection.

the definition may vary, but even so, anyone living in northern latitudes should be taking vit D in winter, and those with dark skin, all year. That's even PHE advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Libspero said:

 

In moderate doses there’s probably nothing to lose by trying them.. I think the jury is still out to a degree,  but there’s no point clinging to the idea if enough trials do come out and disprove them.

 

 

The point is that the unsupportive trials seem to be selectively omitting certain elements. The analysis quoted from The Lancet yesterday only mentioned tests that omitted Zinc. The whole point of Hydroxychloroquine is to allow zinc to be absorbed by the cell. If you don't have zinc in the therapeutic treatment then it is pointless. I recall in one of Dr Seheult's videos that he explained how zinc inhibited the virus replicating.

I'm no chemist or doctor but that is what every successful trial I read about used all three elements not one or two. I can only conclude that the media are deliberately trying to undermine the treatment. 

Even the first test the media seized on was the US veterans who were all seriously ill from Covid-19 when the initial tests mentioned that it was only effective if taken early in the illness. 

I wonder whether the medical profession are conducting realistic tests and it is the media that are doing their best to hide the effectiveness of the treatment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

The point is that the unsupportive trials seem to be selectively omitting certain elements. The analysis quoted from The Lancet yesterday only mentioned tests that omitted Zinc. The whole point of Hydroxychloroquine is to allow zinc to be absorbed by the cell. If you don't have zinc in the therapeutic treatment then it is pointless. I recall in one of Dr Seheult's videos that he explained how zinc inhibited the virus replicating.

I'm no chemist or doctor but that is what every successful trial I read about used all three elements not one or two. I can only conclude that the media are deliberately trying to undermine the treatment. 

Even the first test the media seized on was the US veterans who were all seriously ill from Covid-19 when the initial tests mentioned that it was only effective if taken early in the illness. 

I wonder whether the medical profession are conducting realistic tests and it is the media that are doing their best to hide the effectiveness of the treatment. 

Not only that im fairly sure they were afro caribbean americans.

So:

Old people.

Most susceptible ethnic group.

Already very ill.

No zinc or azythromicin.

 

Made every news channel that it failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Bus Stop Boxer said:

This guy is as straight as they come in my view, and if he is getting fucked off with Youtube then we are obviously through the round window here. He's a professional guy from California, hardly in trumps demographic, yet he clearly sees something is very awry here, and he says as much in his closing remarks in the

 

he's being red pilled, as will his audience, the more the media censor moderate material, the greater the awakening. It will help Trump rather than harm him.

Edited by snaga
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dgul said:

That's a bizarre article.  They say many things that aren't relevant, and quote their linked paper in a highly selective manner.

 

Isn't it.  The RDA is pitiful anyway.  I take 10,000 IU daily (When I remember).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its bizarre but its well funded.

 

I think we are going to see more and more open disagreement in medical circles over this.

Dr Seheult has been kitting up and treating covid patients for weeks. Hes been posting high quality, refernced,fear free, calmly delivered content for weeks now.

Hes not going to enjoy being cast as a denier conspiraloon by some thick tart at Youtube.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Loki said:

The RDA is pitiful anyway.  I take 10,000 IU daily (When I remember)

On the assumption that you are white and live in the UK it seems likely that from April to September you probably make enough Vit D if your skin sees a reasonable amount of sunlight.

I only take a supplement October - March when we don't get enough sun.

10,000 per day (most days) is quite possibly too much.

Memory says the maximum normal dose should be 4000iu/day

It seems that you should only be taking that (10000iu/day) kind of quantity if testing says you need it.

You can have too much of a good thing.

But before you say (or at least think it)  it, you are correct, it is none of my fucking business....:)

 

 

 

Edited by Bornagain
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Bornagain You are right, I should get it tested again - on the medium-high side the last time I did, but stores are probably fuller now.  Easier at the moment to get some sun and forego the supp for a bit.

Edited by Loki
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that escalated quickly.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-who-suspends-study-of-trumps-anti-covid-drug-hydroxychloroquine-over-safety-fears-11994657

The World Health Organisation is removing hydroxychloroquine from its global study of potential COVID-19 treatments while it carries out a review of its safety.

Last week, Donald Trump said he was taking the anti-malarial drug, which he has promoted as providing possible protection from coronavirus, despite warnings from health officials that it could cause heart problems.

The decision by the WHO to temporarily suspend hydroxychloroquine from its study follows a paper published in The Lancet last week which suggested it might actually increase the risk for COVID-19 patients.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 201p said:

Well that escalated quickly.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-who-suspends-study-of-trumps-anti-covid-drug-hydroxychloroquine-over-safety-fears-11994657

The World Health Organisation is removing hydroxychloroquine from its global study of potential COVID-19 treatments while it carries out a review of its safety.

Last week, Donald Trump said he was taking the anti-malarial drug, which he has promoted as providing possible protection from coronavirus, despite warnings from health officials that it could cause heart problems.

The decision by the WHO to temporarily suspend hydroxychloroquine from its study follows a paper published in The Lancet last week which suggested it might actually increase the risk for COVID-19 patients.

it is a tainted study, quite possibly positioned to downplay /destroy the use of HCQ.

Did not include use with zinc.

Data selectively  removed.

Other data - where Brazil had basically poisoned patients with overdose levels of Chloroquine. Chloroquine is not the preferred drug,  HCQ is a less toxic drug. This data was included.

Also study again concentrates on those already critically ill.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...