Freudian slip on the clot-shot there, quack?
Why didn't his fellow MDs on staff call him out?
CDC and HHS are government. Not physicians. Strike two.
Oh, like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx?
Wikipedia says Pfauci is a physician.
And Birx.
So now you're moving the goalposts; even though you praised Pfauci with pfaint damns later down in your post.
An OTC for sickle cell? Ok. I am game to hear what saved 85% of patients. On ventilators. I am really really sure there was no such critter Strike Three
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647674/
Quote from the article:
"All patients presented with severe COVID-19 infection with most requiring mechanical ventilation due to severe hypoxia. After treatment with the protocol including hydroxyurea, all case study patients improved, mechanical ventilation was removed, and patients were discharged to a rehabilitation facility which was the hospital’s goal for patients presenting with severe illness.
Since the original nine patients included in these clinical summaries were treated, an additional 46 patients have been treated using the same protocol bringing the total number of patients treated with the hydroxyurea protocol to 55. Again, all 55 patients were suffering from severe COVID-19 and had failed to respond to other treatments. Out of the 55 patients seen to date as of April 2021, 47 have made a full recovery and reverted back to pre-COVID respiratory status and eight failed to recover."
emdesevir was ineffective. Never used it much myself nor others in my profession. But let’s not be to hubris. It was not pulled because Ebola was preferable as you insinuate. Strike Four
That was rhetoric. If it was too dangerous (chewing up the kidneys) to use to treat something as deadly, and when not deadly, still very nasty, as Ebola, why was it the treatment of choice for the Coof early on?
The more so as the Coof was not as deadly as those who were fanning the flames of panic, wanted everyone to believe.
You have shared with me some of the challenges you have had. But the descent into calling people with whom you disagree trolls and not using your God given reason instead parroting the insanity of certain bots around here is beneath you.
I'm not parroting anyone. And I know of nobody on this thread, who is opposed to the jabs, who is a bot.
What I do see, is a small coterie of what look from here like paid trolls, or people who have had their livelihoods threatened if they didn't toe the party line from Pfauci et al, fighting a rearguard action against more and more and more evidence from converging, independent sources, increasing over time, that the jabs are a major new source of morbidity and mortality; further, that a number of the possible side-effects of the jab, which had been presented by highly credentialed people with the expertise to raise the issues, and which your side derided as fantasies, or attacked the messenger for, are in fact being seen RETROSPECTIVELY (*) as being realized and seen in the real world.
(*) retrospective == live data, after the fact, "20-20 hindsight"
as opposed to models, or worse, to knowing lies, promulgated by those who falsely predicted COVID-1984 was the end of the world, and draconian losses of freedom were the only possible hope to save humanity.
Such models being all the worse in hindsight, as it came out later that those involved in pushing the models and/or clot shots, not only had vested interests in the outcome, but actually knew themselves to be lying through their teeth at the time they proclaimed the clot shots "safe and effective". See also some of the trial data released under court order by Pfizer, which they had sought to have sealed for 75 years; or the SEC filings by Moderna where they admitted that their treatment was not a vaccine, but an experimental gene therapy: not from the accusations of bots, but according to the FDA; and that as a consequence the company was bleeding red ink, until the Emergency Use Authorization.