[W:220] YOUTUBE totalitarianism even against a Senator may result in deaths

[Paradoxical]

YouTube Suspends Sen. Johnson for Touting Non-Traditional COVID Treatment

YouTube has suspended GOP Sen. Ron Johnson from its video platform for one week after he posted videos of himself during a Senate hearing touting experimental treatments for COVID-19, including ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, a YouTube spokesperson told The Hill. "We...

www.newsmax.com

A study released Thursday, though, shows that hydroxychloroquine, also touted by former President Donald Trump, increased the survival rate of severely ill coronavirus patients.

''We found that when the cumulative doses of two drugs, HCQ and AZM, were above a certain level, patients had a survival rate 2.9 times the other patients,'' a study published by medRxiv states.

Trump took hydroxychloroquine despite pushback from medical experts, including his White House coronavirus team member Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Is THIS the way America is supposed to be folks? Are we that stupid that we need some twentysomethings at YouTube to shut down a SENATOR? Deaths could result from this. India is still having major problems. How long will we put up with this censorship befitting of a Communist regime rather than America? Do we have too many people of Chinese dissent running corporate America now?

 

[swing_voter]

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19​

A National Institutes of Health clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has formally concluded that the drug provides no clinical benefit to hospitalized patients.

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19

The trial began after lab studies and preliminary reports suggested that hydroxychloroquine might have promise in treating SARS-CoV-2.

www.nih.gov

And it can cause heart attacks in people with heart conditions.



.

 

[Paradoxical]

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19​

A National Institutes of Health clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has formally concluded that the drug provides no clinical benefit to hospitalized patients.

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19

The trial began after lab studies and preliminary reports suggested that hydroxychloroquine might have promise in treating SARS-CoV-2.

www.nih.gov

And it can cause heart attacks in people with heart conditions.



.

Why should I believe the NIH who have been wrong more than a broken rather than ACTUAL clinical trials? Who decides which expert is correct. A pimply-faced YouTibe employee who is a socialist still living with mommy?

 

[Hatuey]

Why should I believe the NIH who have been wrong more than a broken rather than ACTUAL clinical trials? Who decides which expert is correct. A pimply-faced YouTibe employee who is a socialist still living with mommy?

Lol, posts like this are so embarrassing. Newsmax.

Jeez you folks have lost your own thread.

 

[Paradoxical]

Lol, posts like this are so embarrassing. Newsmax.

Jeez you folks have lost your own thread.

LMAO. Because it is on Newsmax, that means YouTube did NOT suspend the Senator?

WHERE do you far-left zealots come up with your crap? It is beyond stupid to post that a story is false because it is on Newsmax when all you have to do is a Google search to see that the story is true.

Speaking of embarrassing, you should stop embarrassing yourself like this.

 

[TheParser]

How long will we put up with this censorship befitting of a Communist regime rather than America?

Heck!

You ain't seen nothing yet!

Wait until the Democrats ("democrats." my foot!) pack the Supreme Court.

First decision: outlawing FOX news.
Second decision: All conservatives banned from social media.

 

[Cameron]

I understand there was a study released two weeks ago which may support the idea that a combination of hydroxychloroquine and other drugs was effective. We'll see how that holds up. Assuming it does, does this mean that prior studies/data never existed, or that people were wrong to give guidance based on the studies/data that existed at the time they gave their guidance, or that the media was wrong to report on prior studies? I don't think so, but I understand the urge to rewrite history for political purposes.

If Youtube needs to now update it's policies that's one thing, but I'll let other doctors/scientists weigh in first. As a general matter, it's not a bad thing for Youtube to censor videos with misinformation. If people don't like it they can frequent DailyMotion or Vimeo or someplace else.

 

[Fishking]

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19​

A National Institutes of Health clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has formally concluded that the drug provides no clinical benefit to hospitalized patients.

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19

The trial began after lab studies and preliminary reports suggested that hydroxychloroquine might have promise in treating SARS-CoV-2.

www.nih.gov

And it can cause heart attacks in people with heart conditions.

It's not for use for those that are already hospitalized. Same with Ivermectin. It's an early treatment option.

 

[RealityChecker]

Lol, posts like this are so embarrassing. Newsmax.

Jeez you folks have lost your own thread.

Not sure who "you folks" includes but I am inclined to agree with your take on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). Certainly there are a lot anecdotal reports of HCQ being beneficial for treating CoVID-19 and many MDs based on their clinical experience are convinced it is efficacious for treating CoVID-19 patients. Some observational studies also suggest a benefit such as the one Paradoxical provided the link to. However, I believe Paradoxical and others who believe HCQ is an effective treatment for CoVID-19 patients who have been hospitalized proves it is effective are likely incorrect. I believe such preliminary evidence convinced Trump taking HCQ might be useful for preventing CoVID-19 are likely wrong.

I have been saying HCQ may well be ineffective for well over a year now and was called an "idiot" and far worse by mostly people on the political right in a FB group. The link Hatuey provided to the study published in JAMA by WH Self et.al. back in November 2020 was a well designed randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT). When weighing scientific evidence data to determine what is most like true or reality RCT are far more reliable in establishing causality compared to clinical observations, anecdotal reports, and observational studies. I actually posted this study in that FB group and sadly it did not appear to reduce the irrational exuberance for HCQ to treat CoVID-19. I am far more interested in determining what is and is not most likely true or false than it supporting some political ideology or agenda. While I am still pretty new to this group it appears to me most people who post here are driven more by ideological zeal and politics rather than by a real desire to align their opinions with the best available verifiable evidence critically and logically assessed. Hopefully, there are others here who are more interested in civil discussions and debates rather than posting strong opinions they have no interest in defending by providing credible evidence and logical arguments to back up their opinions.

Perhaps we can agree basing public policy on misinformation are questionable but strongly held opinions is not a great idea. The more confused the public is about a subject the easier it is to dupe them into voting for politicians who are corrupt and deceitful I believe we have far too many of those types of politicians in both political parties. Even worse, is that their appears to be a lot of top government workers who are more interested in what is best for them rather than for the USA. Food For Thought (FFT) Sincerely, RealityChecker

 

[bomberfox]

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19​

A National Institutes of Health clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has formally concluded that the drug provides no clinical benefit to hospitalized patients.

Hydroxychloroquine does not benefit adults hospitalized with COVID-19

The trial began after lab studies and preliminary reports suggested that hydroxychloroquine might have promise in treating SARS-CoV-2.

www.nih.gov

And it can cause heart attacks in people with heart conditions.



.

More specifically heart murmurs which are different from heart attacks even though the first can lead to the second

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Let me see if I get this right:

Conservatives are all about letting private businesses conduct business WITHOUT interference, so a baker doesn't have to bake a cake for a gay couple.

Conservatives are all about lessening government regulations, they get in the way of FREE enterprise.

BUT when a private enterprise like Youtube shuts down your favorite politician, SUDDENLY you want to take away their rights to conduct business as they feel like. MAYBE pass a few regulations that forbids them from shutting down certain politicians?

AM I READING THIS RIGHT?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

pimply-faced YouTibe employee who is a socialist still living with mommy?

maybe believe a loser Qanon type who spends their whole day reading rightwing news and listening to conspiracies?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

LMAO. Because it is on Newsmax, that means YouTube did NOT suspend the Senator?

WHERE do you far-left zealots come up with your crap? It is beyond stupid to post that a story is false because it is on Newsmax when all you have to do is a Google search to see that the story is true.

Speaking of embarrassing, you should stop embarrassing yourself like this.

Detailed Report​

Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, Propaganda, Fake News, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: RIGHT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
We rate Newsmax Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories and pseudoscience as well as numerous failed fact checks.

Newsmax - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[ClaraD]

LMAO. Because it is on Newsmax, that means YouTube did NOT suspend the Senator?

WHERE do you far-left zealots come up with your crap? It is beyond stupid to post that a story is false because it is on Newsmax when all you have to do is a Google search to see that the story is true.

Speaking of embarrassing, you should stop embarrassing yourself like this.

Newsmax is known for people that make crap up....for instance some nutcase claiming that it is illegal to say Allah in the pledge of allegiance.

 

[Paradoxical]

I understand there was a study released two weeks ago which may support the idea that a combination of hydroxychloroquine and other drugs was effective. We'll see how that holds up. Assuming it does, does this mean that prior studies/data never existed, or that people were wrong to give guidance based on the studies/data that existed at the time they gave their guidance, or that the media was wrong to report on prior studies? I don't think so, but I understand the urge to rewrite history for political purposes.

If Youtube needs to now update it's policies that's one thing, but I'll let other doctors/scientists weigh in first. As a general matter, it's not a bad thing for Youtube to censor videos with misinformation. If people don't like it they can frequent DailyMotion or Vimeo or someplace else.

Is YouTube our government now, or are they a platform that allows the FREE exchange of ideas? Who anointed them as the arbiters of truth?

What has changed since 2005 when the virology journal published this?:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Results​

We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.

Conclusion​

Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.

What has changed is that because TRUMP recommended it, he can never be right, even if their own agency touted it for Sars-Covid in 2005. And you don't think Fausi=ti is the devil incarnate??

 

[Paradoxical]

maybe believe a loser Qanon type who spends their whole day reading rightwing news and listening to conspiracies?

Your news sources have been discredited than Toobin, Stelter, and Cuomo.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Is YouTube our government now, or are they a platform that allows the FREE exchange of ideas? Who anointed them as the arbiters of truth?

What has changed since 2005 when the virology journal published this?:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Results​

We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.

Conclusion​

Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.

What has changed is that because TRUMP recommended it, he can never be right, even if their own agency touted it for Sars-Covid in 2005. And you don't think Fausi=ti is the devil incarnate??

My wife and I had both our doses of the vaccine, are doing just fine, so YOU go ahead and use Chloroquine if you prefer that over the vaccine, but we will stick with NOT using it. Fair deal?

 

[Paradoxical]

Detailed Report​

Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, Propaganda, Fake News, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: RIGHT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
We rate Newsmax Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories and pseudoscience as well as numerous failed fact checks.

Newsmax - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Who is mediabiasfactcheck?

Oh. WAIT!! Isn't it ONE person who is a notary or something like that?

Gotcha, snowflake. Keep em coming with not responding to the FACT that YouTube did in fact ban a senator because they imagine themselves as arbiters of what is truth. Good going.

 

[Paradoxical]

Newsmax is known for people that make crap up....for instance some nutcase claiming that it is illegal to say Allah in the pledge of allegiance.

lemme ask you Is it "made up" that YouTube banned a Senator for talking about the sound evidence that hydroxychloroquine works?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Your news sources have been discredited than Toobin, Stelter, and Cuomo.

you can play cute and go tit for tat, this one vs that one, but all media factchecking sites are unanimous in saying, YES - most of the MSM leans left, but those media outlets on the right are just plain wackadoodle.
besides, I know YOU know this. so you believe what you want to believe, I will believe what I want to believe, you will limit your sources to rightwing media and I will limit my sources to accredited soucres (NPR, Reuters, AP, the list goes on). Fair Deal?

 

[ClaraD]

lemme ask you Is it "made up" that YouTube banned a Senator for talking about the sound evidence that hydroxychloroquine works?

you are refusing to answer the question because you know that they make whatever crap up and hope something sticks....answer the damn question Paradoxical...why would we believe some source that claims it is illegal to say Allah in the pledge of allegiance and is calling for the person who did it to be criminally investigated? HMMM?

 

[Paradoxical]

My wife and I had both our doses of the vaccine, are doing just fine, so YOU go ahead and use Chloroquine if you prefer that over the vaccine, but we will stick with NOT using it. Fair deal?

Nooe. I am not a nail-biting snowflake nor is any member of my family or people I associate with. My daughter in law (a nurse) had it bad and her doctor was reluctant to prescribe hydroxy. After 9 days of misery, she insisted on Hydroxy and said she would report him if he didn't. He did and she was perfect the very next day. In the interim, she gave it to my son. He toughed it out like a man. Never went in and never took nothing. His anti-bodies now must be off the charts.

I never took the vaccine and never had a flu shot.

Does that answer your fretting?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Who is mediabiasfactcheck?

Oh. WAIT!! Isn't it ONE person who is a notary or something like that?

Gotcha, snowflake. Keep em coming with not responding to the FACT that YouTube did in fact ban a senator because they imagine themselves as arbiters of what is truth. Good going.

yes they did and I addressed THAT issue on this topic already. the point is, what is YOUR slant on that ban? and what media outlet are YOU using to back up YOUR slant.
read my comment on this topic already, what you are presenting is a nothing-burger. youtube can do whatever it wants, it is a private enterprise, something you folks on the right always back, except when YOU don't like how a private enterprise makes decisions.

Newsmax? giving you a slant you already have? I would have simply posted I am in disagreement with what youtube and state why, you didn't need newsmax as an example of an opinion we already know you possess.

SHEESH!

 

[Paradoxical]

you can play cute and go tit for tat, this one vs that one, but all media factchecking sites are unanimous in saying, YES - most of the MSM leans left, but those media outlets on the right are just plain wackadoodle.
besides, I know YOU know this. so you believe what you want to believe, I will believe what I want to believe, you will limit your sources to rightwing media and I will limit my sources to accredited soucres (NPR, Reuters, AP, the list goes on). Fair Deal?

Lemme ask YOU this too. Is it true that YouTube banned a senator for talking about the good results of hydroxychloroquine?

 

[Paradoxical]

you are refusing to answer the question because you know that they make whatever crap up and hope something sticks....answer the damn question Paradoxical...why would we believe some source that claims it is illegal to say Allah in the pledge of allegiance and is calling for the person who did it to be criminally investigated? HMMM?

You are too afraid of the truth to Google what they wrote and find that YouTube DID ban the senator so you attack the messenger. I am on to your crap.