There are >10 million doctors worldwide. Thousands equates to .02% think it's the right treatment. That means ten million doctors worldwide disagree. The only medical studies done so far have shown it's not effective against covid19, but is deadly when taken with diabetes medications. The anecdotal evidence that it helps comes from places where it's used in conjunction with antibacterial or antiviral drugs, when used alone it's useless.
Jebus, @bobknight33, the dangerous stupidity is increasing with every post. Not one bit surprising, you get all your information from unethical, amoral propagandists like Trump , Faux, and OAN, all of which are verified constant liars whose listeners are less informed after listening....calling any actual verifiable information "fake news".
Your idiocy would be laughable if this wasn't life and death information.

A quick reminder of hydrooxychloroquine side effects-
Blistering, peeling, loosening of the skin
blurred vision or other vision changes
chest discomfort, pain, or tightness
cough or hoarseness
dark urine
decreased urination
defective color vision
diarrhea
difficulty breathing
difficulty seeing at night
dizziness or fainting
fast, pounding, uneven heartbeat
feeling that others are watching you or controlling your behavior
feeling that others can hear your thoughts
feeling, seeing, or hearing things that are not there
fever with or without chills
general feeling of tiredness or weakness
headache
inability to move the eyes
increased blinking or spasms of the eyelid
joint or muscle pain
large, hive-like swelling on the face, eyelids, lips, tongue, throat, hands, legs, feet, and sex organs
loss of hearing
lower back or side pain
noisy breathing
painful or difficult urination
red irritated eyes
red skin lesions, often with a purple center
severe mood or mental changes
sore throat sores, ulcers, or white spots on the lips or in the mouth
sticking out of the tongue
stomach pain
swelling of the feet or lower legs
swollen or painful glands
trouble with breathing, speaking, or swallowing
uncontrolled twisting movements of the neck, trunk, arms, or legs
unusual behavior
unusual bleeding or bruising
unusual facial expressions
unusual tiredness or weakness
yellow eyes or skin
death

Edit:oh, now I get it. I've now read Giuliani told Trump this crap works, and of course trump trusts him over the medical community or scientific studies...as do .02% of doctors if this opinion piece isn't pure *lies like OAN trades in. Remember, they are essentially a subsidiary of Pravda. It will be interesting to find out how many people pushing the untested hydroxychloroquine recently invested in companies that make it.
Btw-Giuliani had his Twitter account suspended for lying and claiming hydro has 100% effectiveness at eradicating covid19 despite zero evidence to support that claim and tons to refute it.

100000-6000000 American citizens dead....great job.
>$2000000000 for just round 1 of the bailouts (socialism), with Trump indicating it will be up to $6000000000 or more to pay for his lack of quick action....with at least one more round of bailouts after that.
Local leaders were told to fend for themselves, find your own supplies and equipment, then once they did, Trump's administration moved in and outbid the state's to add those supplies to the federal stockpiles that he won't ship to blue states.
Sure Bobby, it's the Democrats complaints that put us here, not Trump's lack of action.
Um...no. Trump didn't "take care of those" rules and laws, he took care of the protections that avoided a pandemic under Obama by shrinking the programs until he could drowned them in a bathtub, then drowning them.

A study just published in a French medical journal provides new evidence that hydroxychloroquine does not appear to help the immune system clear the coronavirus from the body. Other studies show deadly reactions when taken with diabetes medications, and horrific side effects. Also, we can't get much if it turns out to be helpful in limited use, India made it illegal to export.

Trump's not wrong 100% of the time....sometimes he's sleeping. When he's awake and speaking or acting, he's wrong over 80% of the time, but ask him or those of your ilk, he's 100% right 100% of the time. You know that can't be 1/2 true.

Heep you head up Trump ass and drink his Kool Aid on the way to the Trump rally, and be sure to give all those other heroes there a big appreciative hug for standing up against the libtards....maybe a nice sloppy kiss too...trust me, it's safe, and you can take hydroxychloroquine if you're scared....just don't worry if you have these possibly permanent side effects....
Blistering, peeling, loosening of the skin
blurred vision or other vision changes
chest discomfort, pain, or tightness
cough or hoarseness
dark urine
decreased urination
defective color vision
diarrhea
difficulty breathing
difficulty seeing at night
dizziness or fainting
fast, pounding, uneven heartbeat
feeling that others are watching you or controlling your behavior
feeling that others can hear your thoughts
feeling, seeing, or hearing things that are not there
fever with or without chills
general feeling of tiredness or weakness
headache
inability to move the eyes
increased blinking or spasms of the eyelid
joint or muscle pain
large, hive-like swelling on the face, eyelids, lips, tongue, throat, hands, legs, feet, and sex organs
loss of hearing
lower back or side pain
noisy breathing
painful or difficult urination
red irritated eyes
red skin lesions, often with a purple center
severe mood or mental changes
sore throat sores, ulcers, or white spots on the lips or in the mouth
sticking out of the tongue
stomach pain
swelling of the feet or lower legs
swollen or painful glands
trouble with breathing, speaking, or swallowing
uncontrolled twisting movements of the neck, trunk, arms, or legs
unusual behavior
unusual bleeding or bruising
unusual facial expressions
unusual tiredness or weakness
yellow eyes or skin

And don't feel bad when it doesn't help fight covid 19, just blame Obama, that solves everything.
*facepalm

@newtboy,

If North America is to adopt the Amish lifestyle, how many acres of land can the entire continent support? The typical Amish family farm is something like 80 acres is it not? I believe adopting this nationwide as a 'solution' requires massive population downsizing...

If you want to look at the poorest conditions of people in the world and advocate that the poverty stricken regions with no access to fossil fuel industry are the path forward, I would ask how you anticipate selling that to the people of California as being in their best interests to adopt as their new standard of living...

You mention overpopulation as a problem, then invent the argument that I think we should just ignore that and make it worse. Instead I only pointed out that immediately abandoning fossil fuels overnight would impact that overpopulation problem as well. It's like you do agree on one level, then don't like the implications or something?

The massive productivity of modern agriculture is dependent on fossil fuel usage. Similarly, our global population is also dependent upon that agricultural output. I find it hard to believe those are not clearly both fact. Please do tell me if you disagree. One inescapable conclusion to those facts is that reducing fossil fuel usage needs to at least be done with sufficient caution that we don't break the global food supply chain, because hungry people do very, very bad things.

Then you least catastrophic events that ARE NOT supported by the science and un-ironically claim that it's me who is ignoring the science.

You even have the audacity to ask if I appreciate the impacts of massive global food shortages, after having earlier belittled my concern about exactly that!

The IPCC shows that even in an absolute worst case scenario of accelerating emissions for the next century an estimated maximum sea level rise of 3ft, yet you talk about loss of 'most' farmland to the oceans...

Here's where I stand. If we can move off gas powered cars to electric, and onto a power grid that is either nuclear, hydro or renewable based in the next 50 years, our emissions before 2100 will drop significantly from today's levels. I firmly believe we are already on a very good course to expect that to occur very organically, with superior electric cars, and cheaper nuclear power and battery storage enabling renewables as economical alternatives to fossil fuels.

That future places us onto the IPCC's better scenarios where emissions peak and then actually decrease steadily through the rest of the century.

I'm hardly advocating lets sit back and do nothing, I'm advocating let's build the technology to make the population we have move into a reduced emissions future. We are getting close on major points for it and think that's great.

What I think is very damaging to that idea, is panicky advice demanding that we must all make massive economic sacrifices as fast as possible, because I firmly believe trying to enact reductions that way, fast enough to make a difference over natural progress, guarantees catastrophic wars now. Thankfully, that is also why nobody in sane leadership will give an ounce of consideration to such stupidity either. You need a Stalin or Mao type in charge to drive that kind change.

Diatoms, and other phytoplankton, are incredibly sensitive to ocean PH and CO2 levels. This can be another feedback loop already in action.
As fewer diatoms photosynthesize, more CO2 goes unused, raising the concentration, lowering the numbers and health of phytoplankton, allowing more CO2 to go unused, raising the concentration, .....
Every molecule of CO2 added to ocean systems removes one molecule of carbonate, which is necessary for the uptake of iron among other processes. By 2100, surface carbonate is expected to decrease by up to 50%. That may well be below the levels diatoms can tolerate.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/key-biological-mechanism-disrupted-ocean-acidification

If phytoplankton goes, so does the food web. They are the base. If the ocean food web collapses, eventually the bacteria that eat dead sea life will create huge clouds of hydrogen sulfide that cover the land, poisoning any still living organisms there. This has happened before, but on a much longer timescale, with near life ending results for earth.

Hydrogen Sulfide, Not Carbon Dioxide, May Have Caused Largest Mass Extinction. ... "During the end-Permian extinction 95 percent of all species (and >98% of all biomass) on Earth became extinct, compared to only 75 percent during the KT when the dinosaurs disappeared,"

A better title might be "diatoms, the tiny glass shards that support all life on earth, are struggling".

Yes, but I'm not under the delusion that anyone would pay to read my ramblings. Funny enough, my first job was at a publishing company, editing text books when I was 13.

I broke my back....twice....and had partial paralysis for years. Norco gave me opioid induced hypersensitivity, which increased my pain levels insanely. Getting off them was scary, but decreased my pain levels from a daily minimum of 6/10 (equivalent to putting a nail through your foot, which I've done more than once) to a normal maximum of 5/10 (equivalent to putting a nail 1/2 inch into your foot, which I do a few times a year)....but now I'm pushing 50 with no recent work record besides "house husband".
Also, I cannot sell myself to save my life....and no one's clamoring to buy/rent me.

And what exactly does veganism have to do with alcohol consumption? The vast majority of alcohol is vegan friendly.

Vegans have nothing to gain from decreased alcohol consumption.


----
Also Dr.Greger makes no claims. He simply reads out the research from a world wide scope of researchers, none of which are vegan.

And cherry picking what exactly? He's presented literally 10s of thousands of research papers all from unrelated researchers. And it's not like he's picking out some fringe groups, he's quoting the biggest health organisations in the world.

While it's easy to call him a cherry picker, I challenge anyone to find any credible evidence of cherry picking. I'm yet to hear back from someone over the last 6 years.

And I also challenge you to find an article that isn't funded or tied to the egg/milk/beef/fish industry which claims that eating x animal product is healthy.

Even easier, find an industry funded study which shows the detrimental effects of their own product. You won't, because they are inherently biased - an industry would never publish something that would hurt their bottom line. And no he doesn't ignore or cherry pick around industry funded studies, he exposes their tricks and data manipulation as well. That's not cherry picking, that's proper analysis.

And actually thanks to the freedom of information act, we can see how many studies they hide from us (when they don't like the results), and only publish the ones that suit their revenue centered agenda.

And this is why he's labelled a cherry picker - revenue loss. Broccoli ain't making anyone rich.

Let me put it into perspective:

He did a few video on how those WIFI sensitivity diseases are fake, and the comments are insane - because it's hurting people's income. And this is a pretty niche market, so you can imagine what a billion dollar industry would attempt to do to discredit him. Of course, they never address the research, just him.

It's pretty clear the governments can't get their shit together, so it is up to us as individuals to drive the change.

If you want to do your part to combat climate change, then any reduction in products that come from animal farming is going to decrease your carbon (and methane) foot print.

e.g. Go for the bean burrito with guac or tahani dressing, instead of a beef and cheese burrito.

Go for the coconut/soy/almond ice cream instead.

Watch the COWSPIRACY documentary on Netflix, and look up Dr. Richard Oppenlander speaking to the EU parliament.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet

It's pretty clear the governments can't get their shit together, so it is up to us as individuals to drive the change.

If you want to do your part to combat climate change, then any reduction in products that come from animal farming is going to decrease your carbon (and methane) foot print.

e.g. Go for the bean burrito with guac or tahani dressing, instead of a beef and cheese burrito.

Go for the coconut/soy/almond ice cream instead.

Watch the COWSPIRACY documentary on Netflix, and look up Dr. Richard Oppenlander speaking to the EU parliament.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet

I have a theory to help you feel better - you might actually agree with Trump less than you think you do.

Just to play devil's advocate (more literally than usually), there's a fair chance of unconscious bias here. If the shutdown were due to an "obviously good idea" from, say, Obama, being intentionally blocked by republicans I'd say a lot fewer democrats would be so critical of the president.

Of course, this doesn't decrease his hypocrisy, just your self-disgust.

Should be disqualified for decreasing wind resistance.

Movies didn't influence divorce rates. There were a series of events that led to them skyrocketing.

1. Birth Control pills. Women and Men were no longer forced to remain in marriages because of children.

2. Due to economic change and because of WW2, women became more acceptable in the workforce. This increased year after year due to varying factors and after a while, many women became less dependent on their spouses to support them. With this economic independence, women who were in unhappy marriages no longer HAD to stay in them. This also led to....

3. The rise of Feminism. With economic independence, women could start fighting for their rights. Rights that had been withheld from them for many years.

4. The Baby Boom after WW2. Most countries experienced it at some level and with a much high population, more people are going to divorce.

5. The importing and mainstreaming of new ideas in regards to relationships, spirituality, and sex. This didn't come from Hollywood, but from the East. The Kama Sutra, Mysticism, and more worldly takes on relationships.

6. Changes to existing laws, possibly one of the biggest reasons. Prior to the time period listed, divorce was a PAIN IN THE ASS to accomplish. Fault was usually required - one of the spouses must have committed a crime or 'sin' that justified the divorce. A long separation before the divorce used to be mandatory. Around the 50's, states began relaxing many of these laws, swapping to a no-fault style divorce and decreasing the separation period. By 1970, almost all states had laws allowing no-fault divorces. These laws had a great effect on the divorce rate. From 1940 to 1965, the divorce rate remained near 10 divorces for every 1,000 married women. By 1979, the rate had doubled.

7. Divorce also became more acceptable. The guilt and fault of the old divorce laws were gone. As more couples separated, divorce gradually became a normal part of life.

8. Children of divorced parents are more likely to get divorced. As the number of divorced parents increases, so will the number of their children that get divorced.

These are the root factors, not movies. If you believe movies lead to divorce, you probably also think video games lead children to violent acts. We all know how wrong that is.

A 15% decrease in fuel usage is huge.

Text from post just in case they try to delete it

By pksah - Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:52 am
We are offered Coworking Space in Noida, Decreasing Costs and Adding Flexibility. On the off chance that you have concluded that the time has come to get an office, a coworking space bodes well than leasing your own particular office. Leasing an office incorporates dealing with introducing framework and dealing with service charges that deplete money and time. The staff in the coworking space will deal with that for everybody. Additionally, standard office rental requires marking long haul contracts, for the most part for a base time of one year. Coworking spaces enable you to lease your Table or even space for a couple of days, weeks or a month and enable you to centre around what matters: Your work.

Co-Working Space in Noida, Find the perfect environment for your business idea with L2L International. Fully furnished Co-Working office in Noida with all facilities.

See More: https://www.l2linternational.com/co-working-space.php

There are a few problems they skipped.
First, that bigger pie is still finite, but we act as if it's infinite, pretending that one person having billions doesn't adversely effect others, but that's simply not true.
Second, it overlooked the fact that those countries going through industrial revolution often do so by using other non industrial countries resources, making it impossible to industrialize everywhere....we would need at least one more planet to harvest.
Third, it never pointed out that the GDP increases caused by industrial revolutions were met with massive increases in population, which decreases the per capita net worth significantly. Doubling GDP while tripling population makes the average person have less, not more.

I'm disappointed they didn't mention the French revolution, caused largely by the wealth disparity they're discussing.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich.

This video seems to be a long winded version of 'a rising tide lifts all boats'.

Wow, that a fascinating statistic you pulled out of your ass.

Let's see what literally THREE FUCKING SECONDS of searching on Google produces

(search term: "Australia homicide rate")

Oh, look!

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4510.0~2016~Main%20Features~Victims%20of%20Crime,%20Australia~3

Aaaaand I quote:

"Across Australia, the number of victims of Murder decreased by 4% between 2015 and 2016, from 236 to 227 victims

A weapon was used in 69% of Murders (157 victims). A knife was twice as likely to have been recorded as the murder weapon (71 victims), when compared to a firearm (32 victims). (Table 4)"

So there was a DECREASE in the murder rate in 2017. Furthermore, of 227 murders, only -32- were from firearms, or ~14%.

Let's look at mass shootings in Aussieland.

Oh, that's right, we can't: BECAUSE THERE WERE NONE!

How about the good ol' USA where any idiot can purchase a gun?

In 2016, there were 10,182 murders by firearms. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/). A total of 17,250 people were reported killed in the US in 2016, with the number of murders increasing by about 8.6% in comparison to 2015. (https://qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/)

Let's see here: ~14% of the murders is your maligned Antipodes were committed with a firearm and the murder rate was down while ~60% of the murders here in the US were committed with a firearm and the murder rate is up.

What conclusions can we draw from this?

Oh, yeah, there's this as well:

https://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

And a nb: I know you're going to howl and wail that Chicago has the most restrictive gun laws in the US and people are getting mowed down there left, right and center.

From NPR:
(https://www.npr.org/2017/10/05/555580598/fact-check-is-chicago-proof-that-gun-laws-don-t-work)

"A 2015 study of guns in Chicago, co-authored by Cook, found that more than 60 percent of new guns used in Chicago gang-related crimes and 31.6 percent used in non-gang-related crimes between 2009 and 2013 were bought in other states. Indiana was a particularly heavy supplier, providing nearly one-third of the gang guns and nearly one-fifth of the non-gang guns."

(actual study here: http://home.uchicago.edu/ludwigj/papers/JCrimLC%202015%20Guns%20in%20Chicago.pdf )

In conclusion: maybe do a little research next time, hmm?