One in the same.

SO TRUE.

They initially were on board with using it. Then banned it for use as a treatment because of the results of this paper, but this paper was RETRACTED due to the glaring errors, and the W.H.O. agreeded to do research allowing the use of hydroxychloroquine.

@DeplorableToo They haven't banned its use at all. The paper in the Lancet was retracted. WHO have resumed a study.

"On June 3, the World Health Organization (WHO) resumed a study looking into whether the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine could be effective in treating COVID-19.
Last week, the WHO temporarily stopped people from enrolling in the trial, part of a larger study called Solidarity that is investigating a number of different potential coronavirus therapies, over concerns about the hydroxychloroquine’s adverse effects on the heart."

[time.com]

@Lightman I just said that

@Lightman the concerns about heart problems were based on this paper, btw

@DeplorableToo Hydroxychloroquine cardiotoxicity presenting as a rapidly evolving biventricular cardiomyopathy: key diagnostic features and literature review.
The heart problems are a known issue not just mentioned in the retracted review.

@DeplorableToo [ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

@Lightman this is a 'rare' case involving a female, RA patient with a preexisting heart t condition and long term steroid use. Every doctor using hydroxychloroquine knows to monitor the heart health of their patients with pre-existing conditions. I think that this reported case made #5 who has ever experienced this condition.

@DeplorableToo no it is not.... btw the case report is just an example...

What is tragic is that the W.H.O. based their entire ""Orange Man Bad" don't take his drug of choice" stance, after this research paper was published. The falsified data and errors were so glaring that the fact it was published was shocking. At this point I wonder just what the hell people are trying to cover up?

@DeplorableToo they’re trying to get paid! No money in hydroxychloroquine. And doubleplusgood for them that President Trump endorsed it, because they could oppose it. Sad

@tonkotsu, I am very perplexed as to the rush on mRNA vaccines. mRNA is transcribed into the very same viral proteins that the virus makes. These have been scientifically shown to interact with cells during cell division and alter the G0 phase (the cell apoptosis phase), where damaged cells would normally be killed. Thus allowing the virus to take control of the cell cycle.

@DeplorableToo . My understanding is we have Never created a vaccine against any virus, that can eradicate it entirely. The vaccines are for the mutated virus, that must be done every year, for the new mutations. We have found drugs that counter the effects of the virus, but it's ability to become our cells and mutate make them impossible (so far) to actually kill off, the way we have done with bacterial diseases. Am I all wet?

@Machiavelliwar we have many vaccines against viruses (MMR vaccine, your annual flu shot, chicken pox, etc)

@DeplorableToo. Understood, but the virus is not eliminated, as the mutations mean the vaccines are forever having to be changed yearly, and it is always a guess as to the strain that will be present every year? I ask, because, I sense some of the information in the press, make people think, if they just stay masked and in their homes, the virus can be defeated, and then it will be safe for the people to live their lives. I have had conversations with some, who were willing to spend the rest of their life, trying to avoid being infected with this One virus. no one can correct this perception, now. And most do not want to give a clear explanation of the difference with viruses. The drugs to lessen symptoms for those infected and presenting real life threatening disease, then letting our own immune system work. It is the most effective way we have used with AIDS, and ebola, most recently, in other-wise healthy people. It would be nice to have proper numbers as well, for herd immunity to be calculated. Some one I heard said it is different for the different viruses, but 40% was the number I remember. So rather then becoming alarmed by all of the asymptomatic cases as testing numbers increases known, we should be relieved. And we are not! This is too long, sorry about that.