Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

The Lancet Study on hydroxychloroquine was completely fabricated.

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • theLBC
    CGN/CGSSA Contributor
    CGN Contributor
    • Oct 2017
    • 6588

    The Lancet Study on hydroxychloroquine was completely fabricated.

    if they say so, i believe it



    The co-authors of this study are all linked to the pharmaceutical industry.

    Mandeep Mehra, Frank Ruschitzka, Amit Patel and Sapan Desai



    This incident is worse than was reported by the liberal media.
    just speculation or "conspiracy theory"?

    The Lancet Study on hydroxychloroquine was completely fabricated.
    We now have proof that the entire study was a complete fraud.
    Sapan Desai, the CEO of Surgisphere and his co-authors made up the figures in the report. None of the data was based on hospital records. They have essentially foraged the numbers in the report and got published in major scientific journals like the Lancet without any peer review.

    The funding source for the paper was a major US based pharmaceutical.
    not exactly sure what this shows. anyone?

  • #2
    sigstroker
    I need a LIFE!!
    • Jan 2009
    • 19465

    Yup, Laura Ingraham had two prominent doctors on that said the same thing. Completely fraudulent data. Fauci signed onto it too, don't forget.

    Partly because they wanted big pharma to make money, they can't make money off a generic. And partly political, because, well Trump.

    It's now apparent Fauci is completely in big pharma's pocket. Hope he loses his 45 year govt job.

    Comment

    • #3
      theLBC
      CGN/CGSSA Contributor
      CGN Contributor
      • Oct 2017
      • 6588

      Originally posted by sigstroker
      Yup, Laura Ingraham had two prominent doctors on that said the same thing. Completely fraudulent data. Fauci signed onto it too, don't forget.

      Partly because they wanted big pharma to make money, they can't make money off a generic. And partly political, because, well Trump.

      It's now apparent Fauci is completely in big pharma's pocket. Hope he loses his 45 year govt job.
      see, and people don't realize they may tell you that you need it every year (the vaccine if they make one).
      and as i said, the cdc says the flu vaccine you take every year is only effective 20% of the time some years. $50 for something that might be worthless, year after year.

      Comment

      • #4
        SW1917
        Senior Member
        • Jul 2016
        • 791

        The Lancet has withdrawn the paper looking at hydroxychloroquine, the one that insisted that it increased, not reduced, the death rate. The problem is that no one can check the data. There’s suspicion – founded it appears – that some to much of that data was inaccurate, at best. OK, this is good. Sure, it’s […]


        "The study was withdrawn because the company that provided data would not provide full access to the information for a third-party peer review, saying to do so would violate client agreements and confidentiality requirements, The Lancet said in a statement.
        The study was published May 22, with researchers from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston using data and analysis provided by Surgisphere Corporation. The study was massive, with information coming from 671 hospitals around the world and the medical records of 96,000 patients.
        COVID-19 is a new type of coronavirus that causes mild to severe cases. Here’s a quick guide on how to spot symptoms, risk factors, prevent spread of the disease, and find out what to do if you think you have it.



        It would seem "peer review" worked as it should

        Kindly supply your source for "Fauci signed onto it too, don't forget." was he one of the researchers?

        Comment

        • #5
          theLBC
          CGN/CGSSA Contributor
          CGN Contributor
          • Oct 2017
          • 6588

          Originally posted by SW1917
          The Lancet has withdrawn the paper looking at hydroxychloroquine, the one that insisted that it increased, not reduced, the death rate. The problem is that no one can check the data. There’s suspicion – founded it appears – that some to much of that data was inaccurate, at best. OK, this is good. Sure, it’s […]


          "The study was withdrawn because the company that provided data would not provide full access to the information for a third-party peer review, saying to do so would violate client agreements and confidentiality requirements, The Lancet said in a statement.
          The study was published May 22, with researchers from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston using data and analysis provided by Surgisphere Corporation. The study was massive, with information coming from 671 hospitals around the world and the medical records of 96,000 patients.
          COVID-19 is a new type of coronavirus that causes mild to severe cases. Here’s a quick guide on how to spot symptoms, risk factors, prevent spread of the disease, and find out what to do if you think you have it.



          It would seem "peer review" worked as it should

          Kindly supply your source for "Fauci signed onto it too, don't forget." was he one of the researchers?
          Judge for yourself. The mortality in the control group was 9.3%. The mortality in the chloroquine group was 16.4%. The mortality in the chloroquine plus macrolide group was 22.2%. The mortality in the hydroxychloroquine group was 18%. And the mortality in the hydroxychloroquine plus macrolide group was 23.8%.
          lol

          Comment

          • #6
            sigstroker
            I need a LIFE!!
            • Jan 2009
            • 19465

            Originally posted by SW1917
            The Lancet has withdrawn the paper looking at hydroxychloroquine, the one that insisted that it increased, not reduced, the death rate. The problem is that no one can check the data. There’s suspicion – founded it appears – that some to much of that data was inaccurate, at best. OK, this is good. Sure, it’s […]


            "The study was withdrawn because the company that provided data would not provide full access to the information for a third-party peer review, saying to do so would violate client agreements and confidentiality requirements, The Lancet said in a statement.
            The study was published May 22, with researchers from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston using data and analysis provided by Surgisphere Corporation. The study was massive, with information coming from 671 hospitals around the world and the medical records of 96,000 patients.
            COVID-19 is a new type of coronavirus that causes mild to severe cases. Here’s a quick guide on how to spot symptoms, risk factors, prevent spread of the disease, and find out what to do if you think you have it.



            It would seem "peer review" worked as it should

            Kindly supply your source for "Fauci signed onto it too, don't forget." was he one of the researchers?
            He was constantly on tv referring to the study while talking down HCQ.

            A parallel investigation by the British daily The Guardian revealed that several of Surgisphere's employees had little or no data or scientific background; one employee appeared to be a science fiction author while another, listed as a marketing executive, was an adult model and events hostess.
            They only have 2 employees now besides the CEO. I heard somewhere one wanted to write comic books, the other was the "adult model", maybe working on a pole near you.

            Comment

            • #7
              SW1917
              Senior Member
              • Jul 2016
              • 791

              "He was constantly on tv referring to the study while talking down HCQ."
              Fauci and Brix haven't been on TV much since late April early May when they were sidelined by the Prez

              The study referred too was posted May 22 and was out 2 weeks before being retraced -

              Strangely - no search revels any reference to Fauci making comments about this study - no video appears to exists of same
              On May 22 he made a segment about opening for Memorial day etc but no comments on the study

              Any chance of confusion?
              Last edited by SW1917; 06-06-2020, 6:05 PM.

              Comment

              • #8
                newbutold
                Senior Member
                • Jan 2017
                • 1952

                Oh boy
                Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Robert J. Hanlon

                No more dems, rinos, commies, , pinkos, crooks, pedos, frauds, idiots, lunatics, wanna-be dictators, traitors, old fools, or kleptocratic thieves for President from any party.

                The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. Donald J. Trump 1/7/21

                Comment

                • #9
                  viet4lifeOC
                  Veteran Member
                  • May 2010
                  • 4887

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    viet4lifeOC
                    Veteran Member
                    • May 2010
                    • 4887

                    Originally posted by newbutold
                    Oh boy
                    Sexist lol

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    UA-8071174-1