schlafschaf

Bangladesch right? The one that showed that red masks (or was it purple) worked better. It's hard to get this stuff right but it's such a double standard. The hcq guys are morally condemmed while people eat up anything that looks good for masks no matter how shoddy. I get it, you all want to do something that helps and be seen doing it. But it aint masks. Dropping 10kg though...

Right, you could. For example you could "prove" that masks work by citing a single hairdresser that didn't spread covid while wearing a mask and so dilute decades of evidence against masks. Goes both ways, see?

It's one thing to debate the effectiveness of something and quite an other to declare that the only/main reason for a certain stance is moral deficiency.

Btw did you know that there were promising trails for using hcq against sars cov 1 and even hiv? https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

Turns out HCQ has antiviral properties. Hmmmm.

https://c19hcq.org/meta.html looks at 378 studies and finds

"Early treatment shows 62% [52‑70%] improvement with pooled effects in the 36 early treatment studies. Results are similar after exclusion based sensitivity analysis and after restriction to peer-reviewed studies. The 15 mortality results shows 72% [57‑81%] lower mortality, and the 15 hospitalization results shows 41% [28‑52%] improvement. •Late treatment is less successful, showing 19% [14‑23%] improvement from 247 studies. Very late stage treatment may be harmful, especially when using excessive dosages. •Randomized Controlled Trials show 17% [3‑29%] improvement, or 24% [8‑37%] when excluding late treatment studies."

I am sure the guys running this are Nazis and all 300+ studies are bunk or whatever but you do not get to claim that the only reason people said hcq works is because of moral deficiency.

Btw, where are the 300+ studies showing that masks work?