Ubiq wrote:
“but back to the subject at hand. medical decisions shouldnt (necessarily) be made based on anecdotal reports by one doctor with promise that data will come later. Especially when other doctors report anecdotal reports in the reverse.
Is that really such a crazy thing to say?
note even if you think following one doctor’s anecdotal report is reasonable ( and I don’t disagree as I made clear over 2 months ago and dozens of times since) . You STILL agree with me unless you think aLL doctors should follow the report of one (or a few) doctor’s anecdotal reports”
So you Ubiq, BOTH AGREE AND DISAGREE WITH YOUR OWN SATATEMENT AND HAVE BEEN DOING SO FOR 2 MONTHS!
VERY FUNNY!
In the study by Dr. David R. Boulware, from the University of Minnesota, “they enrolled more than 800 adults in the United States and Canada who were exposed to someone with covid-19 because of their jobs as health-care workers or first responders, or because they lived with someone with the disease.”
and had not yet (or maybe had) developed the symptoms.
How is all that random?
And only 20% of people in the study were self-medicating with zinc.. and only ½ of them were given HOQ. How much Zinc were they taking? Were they democrats or republicans? (yes, that is relevant).
Only 10% possibly taking zinc, unknown dose.
And while everyone was self-distancing, the people in the study were not self-distancing by the definition of the study.
The HOQ doses given were quite high, toxicity may have destroyed any semblance of a balance in the treatment of people, which may have contributed to a higher infection result.
There are a few unanswered questions here..