Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
And that’s superior to a medical education?Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
My training was to keep soldiers and civilians safe... To defeat our enemies!
never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
Do you even know the fucking definition of publishLiar. She even admitted she didn't publish any relevant data.Not only did she publish it but she went to capitol hill had a press conference told you about it you could ask her any question you wanted.. The media silenced her.. is this the ussr?Someone willing to publish their data is more credible than someone who won’t. Is this a serious question?can't recall, did you post a link to your data? what makes that published data any more credible?I don’t have data. I’m going by what’s published.
And that’s superior to a medical education?Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
My training was to keep soldiers and civilians safe... To defeat our enemies!
Your an idiot... Its training in microbiology... IT IS MEDICAL TRAINING!And that’s superior to a medical education?Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
My training was to keep soldiers and civilians safe... To defeat our enemies!
That doctor is part of this discussion. You can't erase her simply because she spouts some freakishly outrageous stuff.Stick to the topicLOLIs that a joe biden quote!? HahaLOLUmm democrats are attacking a black woman, and her culture.. do you know your history?Why are you injecting race into this? Are you racist?there are more doctors than her making the claim,,,LOLso your just mad they didnt tell you,,,I don't have to. Competent doctors who claim to have a cure for a disease present corroborating data to support their claims.did you call and ask her for it???Refute what data? She has presented no data.Ain’t playing your game Alice. Refute the data or move onStop pretending like you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about and you might learn something.Ain’t playing your game aliceNo, it’s just gibberish because you have no idea what you’re talking about.
maybe mommy can give you a cookie to shut you up,,,
Why would I be mad at some quack who believes our government has reptilians from another planet?
why are you focusing on a black women to silence her???
Dumbfuck racist, which culture practices replacing government officials with reptilian humanoids?
No, it's from Dr. Immanuel. I'll take your non-answer as admission there are none and that you were full of shit when you said there were.
And that’s superior to a medical education?Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
My training was to keep soldiers and civilians safe... To defeat our enemies!Your an idiot... Its training in microbiology... IT IS MEDICAL TRAINING!And that’s superior to a medical education?Simple... You have to learn why and how biological agents work and how to keep yourself and others safe. Thus Human physiology and how they affect us is necessary to learn how to defeat a biological weapon.Why did you get training for bio level containment and what does that have to do with treatment of disease?Bwhaaaaaaaa Where did you get your training, a cracker jack box? I have certifications for Bio-Level 4 containment and all the biological training that goes with it.I know a lot more about this than you.Just stop! Your fucking clueless and promoting falsehoods...Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is not following the science.You got it! the variance changes how drugs react and how viruses react... This is why anecdotal evidence is so important..What's hard is getting the correct set of participants. people with existing illnesses, vs people with no existing illness, age variances and many other factors.they are equally observational.What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
Maybe Stella's patients fit one criteria and not a mix. I'm good with that data being published.
My training was to keep soldiers and civilians safe... To defeat our enemies!
The evidence to support its positive effect is weak. The evidence against it is stronger.never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
and "RIGHT TO TRY" says its none of your business if someone wants to try it,,,
That doctor is part of this discussion. You can't erase her simply because she spouts some freakishly outrageous stuff.Stick to the topicLOLIs that a joe biden quote!? HahaLOLUmm democrats are attacking a black woman, and her culture.. do you know your history?Why are you injecting race into this? Are you racist?there are more doctors than her making the claim,,,LOLso your just mad they didnt tell you,,,I don't have to. Competent doctors who claim to have a cure for a disease present corroborating data to support their claims.did you call and ask her for it???Refute what data? She has presented no data.Ain’t playing your game Alice. Refute the data or move onStop pretending like you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about and you might learn something.Ain’t playing your game aliceNo, it’s just gibberish because you have no idea what you’re talking about.
maybe mommy can give you a cookie to shut you up,,,
Why would I be mad at some quack who believes our government has reptilians from another planet?
why are you focusing on a black women to silence her???
Dumbfuck racist, which culture practices replacing government officials with reptilian humanoids?
No, it's from Dr. Immanuel. I'll take your non-answer as admission there are none and that you were full of shit when you said there were.
It’s not about you opinion it’s about her results she publishedThat doctor is part of this discussion. You can't erase her simply because she spouts some freakishly outrageous stuff.Stick to the topicLOLIs that a joe biden quote!? HahaLOLUmm democrats are attacking a black woman, and her culture.. do you know your history?Why are you injecting race into this? Are you racist?there are more doctors than her making the claim,,,LOLso your just mad they didnt tell you,,,I don't have to. Competent doctors who claim to have a cure for a disease present corroborating data to support their claims.did you call and ask her for it???Refute what data? She has presented no data.Ain’t playing your game Alice. Refute the data or move onStop pretending like you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about and you might learn something.Ain’t playing your game aliceNo, it’s just gibberish because you have no idea what you’re talking about.
maybe mommy can give you a cookie to shut you up,,,
Why would I be mad at some quack who believes our government has reptilians from another planet?
why are you focusing on a black women to silence her???
Dumbfuck racist, which culture practices replacing government officials with reptilian humanoids?
No, it's from Dr. Immanuel. I'll take your non-answer as admission there are none and that you were full of shit when you said there were.
opinions vary,,,The evidence to support its positive effect is weak. The evidence against it is stronger.never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
and "RIGHT TO TRY" says its none of your business if someone wants to try it,,,
It's still on the Internet, available to anyone with Internet access.barely,,,Liar. Her speech is still on the Internet.Are you trolling .. you lefties ripped down her speech from the Internet. You would feel a lot better if you just allow the truth into your life how do you go through life lying to yourself? LolShe spoke therefore she has free speech.Lol free speech never works out for youThat’s not how it works.looks like in front of a microphone. 350 patients 100% recovery. I'm still waiting on the mask's study.Where was her data published?Not only did she publish it but she went to capitol hill had a press conference told you about it you could ask her any question you wanted.. The media silenced her.. is this the ussr?Someone willing to publish their data is more credible than someone who won’t. Is this a serious question?can't recall, did you post a link to your data? what makes that published data any more credible?I don’t have data. I’m going by what’s published.
barely,,,its been scrubbed from all the big sites,,,It's still on the Internet, available to anyone with Internet access.barely,,,Liar. Her speech is still on the Internet.Are you trolling .. you lefties ripped down her speech from the Internet. You would feel a lot better if you just allow the truth into your life how do you go through life lying to yourself? LolShe spoke therefore she has free speech.Lol free speech never works out for youThat’s not how it works.looks like in front of a microphone. 350 patients 100% recovery. I'm still waiting on the mask's study.Where was her data published?Not only did she publish it but she went to capitol hill had a press conference told you about it you could ask her any question you wanted.. The media silenced her.. is this the ussr?Someone willing to publish their data is more credible than someone who won’t. Is this a serious question?can't recall, did you post a link to your data? what makes that published data any more credible?I don’t have data. I’m going by what’s published.
Like the Infectious Disease Society of America?opinions vary,,,The evidence to support its positive effect is weak. The evidence against it is stronger.never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
and "RIGHT TO TRY" says its none of your business if someone wants to try it,,,
sorry but I will take a doctors advice long before I take it from some trroll on the internet,,,
Of course. I also know when she was asked if she had published her findings, she admitted she had not.Do you even know the fucking definition of publishLiar. She even admitted she didn't publish any relevant data.Not only did she publish it but she went to capitol hill had a press conference told you about it you could ask her any question you wanted.. The media silenced her.. is this the ussr?Someone willing to publish their data is more credible than someone who won’t. Is this a serious question?can't recall, did you post a link to your data? what makes that published data any more credible?I don’t have data. I’m going by what’s published.
opinions vary,,,Like the Infectious Disease Society of America?opinions vary,,,The evidence to support its positive effect is weak. The evidence against it is stronger.never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
and "RIGHT TO TRY" says its none of your business if someone wants to try it,,,
sorry but I will take a doctors advice long before I take it from some trroll on the internet,,,
Oh? Name the other doctors in that video who claimed they personally saved lives with HCQ?That doctor is part of this discussion. You can't erase her simply because she spouts some freakishly outrageous stuff.Stick to the topicLOLIs that a joe biden quote!? HahaLOLUmm democrats are attacking a black woman, and her culture.. do you know your history?Why are you injecting race into this? Are you racist?there are more doctors than her making the claim,,,LOLso your just mad they didnt tell you,,,I don't have to. Competent doctors who claim to have a cure for a disease present corroborating data to support their claims.did you call and ask her for it???Refute what data? She has presented no data.Ain’t playing your game Alice. Refute the data or move onStop pretending like you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about and you might learn something.Ain’t playing your game aliceNo, it’s just gibberish because you have no idea what you’re talking about.
maybe mommy can give you a cookie to shut you up,,,
Why would I be mad at some quack who believes our government has reptilians from another planet?
why are you focusing on a black women to silence her???
Dumbfuck racist, which culture practices replacing government officials with reptilian humanoids?
No, it's from Dr. Immanuel. I'll take your non-answer as admission there are none and that you were full of shit when you said there were.
true but why are you ignoring all the other doctors making the same claim???
Oh look. You’ve given up trying to make a convincing argument.opinions vary,,,Like the Infectious Disease Society of America?opinions vary,,,The evidence to support its positive effect is weak. The evidence against it is stronger.never is,,,but the evidence on the ground says its having a positive effect,,,I’m illustrating an important point. Establishing causality is not as simple as you think.how about we stay in reality and keep your imagination to yourself,,,How do they know they didn’t die because they took the drug? If I get COVID and I use healing crystals, can I say the crystals work if I don’t die?oh I dont know,,,maybe its because they didnt die and recovered faster than those that didnt take it,,,How do they know it’s successful?so thats how youre twisting it now,,Because it has nothing to do with whether the medication works or not.how is it not relevant???Nope. The topic from the get go in the OP was assessing the strength of evidence for hydroxychloroquine and my comment is precisely on point.that just [proved you moved the goal post from the OP,,,youre moving the goal post again,,,we arent talking about literature,,,thats already proven it safe,,,The strength of medical literature does not depend on the condition of your patient.so death is not a factor in your book,,,Nope. That is not a factor.that depends on a lot of factors,,,one being time when someone is dying in front of you,,,Sure do. But which is better?both have their place,,,What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?explain better data? what is it you need, I've asked you before you ignored it.If they had better data, they might have a point.
As we can see, anyone can claim whatever they want.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Yes, we are talking about literature. You can’t follow a conversation.
"RIGHT TO TRY"
Nope. You’re just shifting the subject because you are losing.
here’s what we are talking about:
What’s better? Observational retrospective studies or prospective placebo controlled trials?
"RIGHT TO TRY"
“right to try” is not relevant to this topic.
its exactly what its intended for,,,
OH I get it,,you just lied again,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
sorry but there are a lot of docs using it with a high rate of success,,,
sorry that bothers you,,,
you should take some time and listen to what they said instead of ranting like a ignorant moron,,,
Obviously not.
"right to try"
and "RIGHT TO TRY" says its none of your business if someone wants to try it,,,
sorry but I will take a doctors advice long before I take it from some trroll on the internet,,,
"RIGHT TO TRY"
LOLOLIt’s not about you opinion it’s about her results she publishedThat doctor is part of this discussion. You can't erase her simply because she spouts some freakishly outrageous stuff.Stick to the topicLOLIs that a joe biden quote!? HahaLOLUmm democrats are attacking a black woman, and her culture.. do you know your history?Why are you injecting race into this? Are you racist?there are more doctors than her making the claim,,,LOLso your just mad they didnt tell you,,,I don't have to. Competent doctors who claim to have a cure for a disease present corroborating data to support their claims.did you call and ask her for it???Refute what data? She has presented no data.Ain’t playing your game Alice. Refute the data or move onStop pretending like you have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about and you might learn something.Ain’t playing your game aliceNo, it’s just gibberish because you have no idea what you’re talking about.
maybe mommy can give you a cookie to shut you up,,,
Why would I be mad at some quack who believes our government has reptilians from another planet?
why are you focusing on a black women to silence her???
Dumbfuck racist, which culture practices replacing government officials with reptilian humanoids?
No, it's from Dr. Immanuel. I'll take your non-answer as admission there are none and that you were full of shit when you said there were.
LOLOLbarely,,,its been scrubbed from all the big sites,,,It's still on the Internet, available to anyone with Internet access.barely,,,Liar. Her speech is still on the Internet.Are you trolling .. you lefties ripped down her speech from the Internet. You would feel a lot better if you just allow the truth into your life how do you go through life lying to yourself? LolShe spoke therefore she has free speech.Lol free speech never works out for youThat’s not how it works.looks like in front of a microphone. 350 patients 100% recovery. I'm still waiting on the mask's study.Where was her data published?Not only did she publish it but she went to capitol hill had a press conference told you about it you could ask her any question you wanted.. The media silenced her.. is this the ussr?Someone willing to publish their data is more credible than someone who won’t. Is this a serious question?can't recall, did you post a link to your data? what makes that published data any more credible?I don’t have data. I’m going by what’s published.
