Can We Get Criticisms of Chloroquine for Covid that Don’t Commit Fallacies?

 

I like Dr. Vinay Prasad, and his January article “We Need to Talk about the Vaccines” is very good. Among other important claims in the article:

  • the censorship is bad;
  • myocarditis as an mRNA vax side effect for young males is a big deal;
  • ivermectin is a fine drug that should never have been portrayed as anything else, and so are chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine;
  • and, unfortunately, they don’t cure Covid.

The part that I want to disagree with is the rejection of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (hereafter collectively referred to as “chloroquine”) and ivermectin for Covid. I say I want to disagree. That doesn’t mean I should.

File:Chloroquine-ligand-CLQ-A-from-PDB-xtal-4FGL-Mercury-3D-balls.pngBut should I?  On chloroquine (molecular structure left; nice picture from Ben Mills), Dr. Prasad cites an article in Nature: “Mortality Outcomes with Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine in COVID-19 from an International Collaborative Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.”

Before talking about this article, let me ask you a question:

Did Dr. Zelenko, Dr. Risch, Dr. McCullough, or any other advocate of chloroquine for Covid not promote chloroquine as a treatment for very early on in the disease–i.e., as soon as symptoms appear, pre-hospitalization?

I’m pretty sure the answer to that is “No.”  Please let me know if I’m missing something.

Similarly, I’m pretty sure the chloroquine advocates were recommending chloroquine for Covid with zinc and also with an antibiotic.  Were they not?  Am I missing something?  Please tell me if you think I’m missing something.

Unless I really am missing something there, that means that if you want to argue that these guys are wrong, it’s not enough to just cite some study that says that some variation of a chloroquine-for-Covid treatment didn’t work.  You have to cite a study that looks at chloroquine for Covid as an early treatment, probably with zinc, and preferably with an antibiotic as well!

Cite some other study, and from what I can tell all you’re doing is making a straw man fallacy–a fallacy of arguing against a position your opponent never actually takes.  In this case, the fallacy would be something like, “Studies show that chloroquine taken in ways not prescribed by Zelenko/McCullough/Risch don’t help with Covid, and therefore Zelenko/McCullough/Risch are wrong.”

YARN | One thing I pride myself on, Jafar, I'm an excellent judge of character. | Aladdin (1992) | Video gifs by quotes | 13ca0d44 | 紗I hesitate to say what the Sultan of Agrabah said, but Dr. Prasad seems to me as earnest and honest as any Covid commentator in the business, much more ethical than most of them, and almost infinitely more knowledgeable than I am on medical stuff.

I don’t want to accuse him of any fallacy.  But maybe he made a mistake.  Maybe he fell for a fallacy.  Let’s find out.  Back to the Nature article we go!

The Nature article is a meta-study.  The abstract explains that it relies on 28 studies of chloroquine for Covid.  We don’t know if their argument is any good until we check to see whether those studies were looking at the same treatment, or at least at something sufficiently similar.

Conveniently, the URL above for the Nature article gives us what we need in a nice Excel document that tells us how to find the studies.  A Pakistani study gets three rows in the spreadsheet, and one from North Carolina gets two rows–for a total of twenty-nine rows.  Once you subtract those, you get only 26 studies.  I’m not following how they got the 28 studies mentioned in the abstract. But whatever.

I’ve run a rudimentary logic check on this information using a new spreadsheet.  I’ve kept the first column from the original spreadsheet and combined the extra rows for the aforementioned studies from Pakistan and North Carolina.  I relabeled the first column (Column A) “Searchable tag” because it contains things like “NCT04353336″ and “NCT04308668,” which is how you can locate information on the studies through search engines.

I’ve searched all 26 studies, and I’ve added some columns to keep track of whether these studies are actually checking up on the chloroquine treatment actually recommended by chloroquine advocates.  Column B: Are they using chloroquine early on–at the first sign of symptoms, pre-hospitalization?  Column C: Are they using zinc?  Column D: Are they using an antibiotic?  (Occasionally, by the way, a study will give patients chloroquine plus the then-reigning “standard of care.”  I can’t promise that that never included zinc or an antibiotic, so I tried to at least include this information parenthetically when it came up.)  There’s also a Column E for more information.

Interesting results.

In order for the meta-study to give us a useful argument against the position of Risch, Zelenko, McCullough, et al, we should have a whole lot of boxes with “Yes” in them.  We should have several rows that have at least two boxes with a “Yes,” and preferably three.

Illogical Spock GIFs | TenorNow guess how many boxes have a “Yes” in them–out of 78 boxes (for 26 rows and 3 columns).

Go on–guess!

13.  Just 13 out of 78.

Guess how many rows have at least 2 boxes with a “Yes.”

0.  0 out of 26.

The only mention of zinc I even noticed was the study that gave zinc only to the control group.

And that means that these studies, and the Nature article based on them, are not good evidence against advocates of chloroquine for Covid like Drs. McCullough, Zelenko, and Risch.  The Nature article’s conclusion is:

In this work, we find that treatment with HCQ is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of CQ.

It looks like they reached that conclusion by way of a straw-man fallacy.

So I can disagree with Dr. Prasad.  On chloroquine, anyway.  (Don’t ask me about ivermectin.  I’m already spending too much time trying to think through chloroquine!)

Raphael's “School of Athens” – Alyssa Boutelle | oudonquijoteMight chloroquine actually be useless against Covid?  Or even harmful?  Might it be useful in some treatments and useless in others? Might it be harmful in some combinations, or harmful for a late-stage infection?  Sure–what the heck do I know?

But, like certain a Greek philosopher who never goes out of style, I know what I don’t know, and I don’t know that the chloroquine treatment recommended by its advocates is useless.  That hasn’t been shown by this study, the studies behind it, or anything else I’ve come across (and been able to understand).

But wait! There’s more!

If you go to HCQMeta.com, you can look at a nice overview of the results from a much bigger number of studies.  You can even look over the areas of the page where they look at only the controlled studies that consider chloroquine as an early treatment.  Chloroquine looks pretty good there.

You can also look at the areas of the page where they look at the late-treatment studies.  Chloroquine doesn’t look so good there.

You can also look at the section where they include only the better trials–i.e., the randomized controlled ones.  It turns out chloroquine looks very good on 8 randomized controlled studies of its early use.  It looks bad on just three of them. (One of those three is a “Small early terminated” study with only 62 total people and some other issues.  Another one did not involve zinc or an antibiotic, did involve other drugs, and still managed to find that “High-dose Oseltamivir and Hydroxychloroquine were superior to voluntary quarantine without antiviral agent in terms of viral clearance in mild Covid -19” and that “Favipiravir plus Darunavir-Ritonavir plus Hydroxychloroquine were superior to other antiviral agent combinations in terms viral clearance and death in moderate to severe Covid -19.”  And a third, involving an antibiotic but no zinc, doesn’t look great for chloroquine. However, it only involves 42 patients taking chloroquine, and the worst thing that happened was that a grand total of 1 of them went to hospital compared to 0 in the control group; we need more data than that.)

In short, I want to disagree with Dr. Prasad on the uselessness of chloroquine, and apparently I get what I want.

And you know what else I want? I want those who tout the official positions to do so without using any logical fallacies.

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 26 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    This comment space reserved for whatever may later seem important to mention in the first comment.

    • #1
  2. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Dr. Risch makes various criticisms of the anti-chloroquine and anti-ivermectin science here.  In this post, I’m zooming in on just one of his worries.

    • #2
  3. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    I can remember in one of the two or three presentations I saw by Dr. McCullough he insisted that the use of HCQ or Ivermectin needed to be administered early and as a cocktail treatment similar to what had been the case in some earlier treatments for viruses such as AIDS. I have family members who used this approach and they were taking six or eight different things simultaneously, none of which resulted in negative outcomes.

    • #3
  4. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Yes, this has been a problem mentioned several times in various posts/comments over the past 2 years, including by me.  The “studies” that supposedly show HCQ (and Ivermectin) not being effective, seem to pretty much universally be testing things that are not what the advocates describe.  Mostly the lack of also giving zinc and sometimes an antibiotic at the same time, and perhaps primarily that these “tests” are conducted after people are already hospitalized, which even the advocates state is too late.  So you have a double- or even triple-straw-man fallacy.

    • #4
  5. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    And don’t forget the “Likes” so that other people can see this on the Main Feed.

    • #5
  6. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Yes, this has been a problem mentioned several times in various posts/comments over the past 2 years, including by me. The “studies” that supposedly show HCQ (and Ivermectin) not being effective, seem to pretty much universally be testing things that are not what the advocates describe. Mostly the lack of also giving zinc and sometimes an antibiotic at the same time, and perhaps primarily that these “tests” are conducted after people are already hospitalized, which even the advocates state is too late. So you have a double- or even triple-straw-man fallacy.

    I wasn’t gonna look into ivermectin, but you could ruin my plans by making it look that easy.

    • #6
  7. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Yes, this has been a problem mentioned several times in various posts/comments over the past 2 years, including by me. The “studies” that supposedly show HCQ (and Ivermectin) not being effective, seem to pretty much universally be testing things that are not what the advocates describe. Mostly the lack of also giving zinc and sometimes an antibiotic at the same time, and perhaps primarily that these “tests” are conducted after people are already hospitalized, which even the advocates state is too late. So you have a double- or even triple-straw-man fallacy.

    I wasn’t gonna look into ivermectin, but you could ruin my plans by making it look that easy.

    Not sure you need to do the work again.  Seems like people who already know, already know, and the people who don’t, are immune to evidence.

    • #7
  8. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    I believe there was a clinical study by the discoverers of the uses of Ivermectin that was issued  March 3rd, 2020, ( now lost to censorship) way before hundreds of thousands of people died from COVID, that claimed that Ivermectin cured COVID within 48 hours. How could that be ignored?

    I am pissed.  Really pissed. 

    I know people who have died because of this Big Pharma/AMA/NIH/FDA corrupt nonsense denied them the appropriate treatment they deserved.  I  also know several people whose careers have been ruined by the mandatory mRNA Vaccine Nonsense as well as at least one person who died from the vaccine.  I also know of loved ones of friends who also died from the vaccine. 

    This Bullcrap has to stop. Now, that we know the whole anti-HCQ, anti-Ivermectin, pro-Vaccine nonsense is thoroughly corrupt and not backed by any credible science, and that literally almost all of the NIH was bought off to tune of 350 million dollars, radical changes are in order.   Ivermectin had been used 3 billion times with little problems. WHO  did a study on HCQ using 170,000 patients in 2017 and found not a single death from HCQ.

    The reason HCQ and Ivermectin had to be deep-sixed was because if they were found to be a cure fo COVID, legally the “Emergency Use Authorization” for mRNA vaccines could not be granted by law, and so there would be mRNA vaccines to proscribe and make billions for Big Pharma.  

    But now we know it is all Bullcrap. All the doctors, pharmacists and hospitals  who refused to proscribe HCQ and Ivermectin, and who also proscribed the vaccines  without advising the patients of the terrible potential side effects should really in reality be prosecuted for gross Medical malpractice, gross negligence, and if their patients died, which hundreds of thousands did, at least manslaughter. ( potentially multiple cases of manslaughter. 

    At the very minimum, all those who proscribed the vaccines, need to notify immediately all those patients of the extreme hazards of the vaccines.

    The former Pfizer VP Michael Yeadon says those who pushed the idea of Universal vaccines are guilty of “Crimes against Humanity”. According to Michael , in the early rollout from December 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 Pfizer knew already of 1,223 deaths from it’s vaccines and 42,086 adverse events. It knew and did nothing. 

     He said “It’s simply not possible to obtain data demonstrating adequate longitudinal safety in the time period any pandemic can last. Those who pushed this line of argument and enabled the gene-based agents to be injected needlessly into billions of innocent people are guilty of crimes against humanity.”

    “It’s simply not possible to obtain data demonstrating adequate longitudinal safety in the time period any pandemic can last. Those who pushed this line of argument and enabled the gene-based agents to be injected needlessly into billions of innocent people are guilty of crimes against humanity.”

    continued

    • #8
  9. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Yes, this has been a problem mentioned several times in various posts/comments over the past 2 years, including by me. The “studies” that supposedly show HCQ (and Ivermectin) not being effective, seem to pretty much universally be testing things that are not what the advocates describe. Mostly the lack of also giving zinc and sometimes an antibiotic at the same time, and perhaps primarily that these “tests” are conducted after people are already hospitalized, which even the advocates state is too late. So you have a double- or even triple-straw-man fallacy.

    I wasn’t gonna look into ivermectin, but you could ruin my plans by making it look that easy.

    Ivermectin is the established drug that my family members were prescribed along with with some other medicines and vitamins (D3) and minerals (zinc).

    • #9
  10. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Unsk (View Comment):

    The former Pfizer VP Michael Yeadon says those who pushed the idea of Universal vaccines are guilty of “Crimes against Humanity”. According to Michael , in the early rollout from December 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 Pfizer knew already of 1,223 deaths from it’s vaccines and 42,086 adverse events. It knew and did nothing. 

     He said “It’s simply not possible to obtain data demonstrating adequate longitudinal safety in the time period any pandemic can last. Those who pushed this line of argument and enabled the gene-based agents to be injected needlessly into billions of innocent people are guilty of crimes against humanity.”

    Can I get an article or a Rumble video or something on that? Thanks.

    • #10
  11. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    Excerpted from The Epoch Times article: “People Who Pushed Idea of Universal Vaccination are “guilty of Crimes against Humanity”; Former Pfizer VP  by Enrico TRigoso

    It’s simply not possible to obtain data demonstrating adequate longitudinal safety in the time period any pandemic can last. Those who pushed this line of argument and enabled the gene-based agents to be injected needlessly into billions of innocent people are guilty of crimes against humanity.”

    We all knew that- at least those with a brain.

    Yeadon continues:

    Yeadon feels that the novel vaccines should have not been given emergency use authorization (EUA) and that if he were directing the pandemic response, children, pregnant women, and people who already had contracted the virus would have been given a red light on the jabs.

    He further argues that the vaccines were sure to be toxic and it was only a matter of degree of toxicity.

     “Having selected spike protein to be expressed, a protein which causes blood clotting to be initiated, a risk of thromboembolic adverse events was burned into the design. Nothing at all limits the amount of spike protein to be made in response to a given dose. Some individuals make a little and only briefly. The other end of a normal range results in synthesis of copious amounts of spike protein for a prolonged period. The locations in which this pathological event occurred, as well as where on the spectrum, in my view played a pivotal role in whether the victim experienced adverse events including death,” Yeadon said.

    “There are many other pathologies flowing from the design of these agents, including for the mRNA ‘vaccines’ that lipid nanoparticle formulations leave the injection site and home to liver and ovaries, among other organs, but this evidence is enough to get started.”

    Earlier this month, a physician said that he has been seeing an unusual amount of fetal death and miscarriages linked to the COVID-19 vaccines—according to his observations—and noted that mRNA products, contained in nanoparticles, accumulate in the ovaries.

    “From data that we have, there appears to be a concentration of the lipid nanoparticles, which are very, very small particles, which are in the vaccine that are injected into the arm,” Dr. James Thorp told The Epoch Times, “and then the vast majority of those are dispersed throughout the entire body.”

    A lipid nanoparticle is a fat-soluble membrane that is the cargo of the messenger RNA.

    This horrific Vaccination scam needs to be exposed . Now.

    Too many people are being forced to take the jab against their will, and many will be severely injured or die. 

    It is not only the doctors, but far too many of our government Health Care Officials who pushed this awful tragedy, and far to many in the corporate,  and political worlds who push this nonsense strictly  because of politics. They all need to be punished. Now.

     

    • #11
  12. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Nobel-Prize-winning human medicine horse-laughed out of public discourse as “horse paste”, with public and private star chambers and propagandists enforcing political diktats — your laws, your rights and your Constitution be damned.

    I support horse paste and fish tank cleaner based on the quality and ferocity of the opposition — and the fact that I would rather accept a small risk to health, yes public health too, than play along with the present-tense abrogation of our rights.

    • #12
  13. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    Saint, Check out Epoch Times. They are perhaps the best at informing the public on HCQ, Ivermectin and the vaccines.

    • #13
  14. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Saint, Check out Epoch Times. They are perhaps the best at informing the public on HCQ, Ivermectin and the vaccines.

    And a great many things.  

    • #14
  15. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Words have meaning. In my opinion the Covid vaccines were a therapeutic. Unlike the polio or measles vaccines that prevent an infection the Covid vaccines could minimize the effect of Covid infection in individuals that had underlying health issues. The Covid vaccines could not prevent an infection.

    • #15
  16. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Words have meaning. In my opinion the Covid vaccines were a therapeutic. Unlike the polio or measles vaccines that prevent an infection the Covid vaccines could minimize the effect of Covid infection in individuals that had underlying health issues. The Covid vaccines could not prevent an infection.

    Which seems to mean they’re not actually vaccines.

    • #16
  17. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Words have meaning. In my opinion the Covid vaccines were a therapeutic. Unlike the polio or measles vaccines that prevent an infection the Covid vaccines could minimize the effect of Covid infection in individuals that had underlying health issues. The Covid vaccines could not prevent an infection.

    “Had.”

    • #17
  18. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    Words have meaning.

    The original:

    子路曰。衞君待子而爲政、子將奚先 子曰。必也正名乎。子路曰。有是哉。子之迂也 奚其正 子曰。野哉、由也 君子於其所不知、蓋闕如也。名不正、則言不訓。言不訓、則事不成。事不成、則禮樂不興。禮樂不興、則刑罰不中。刑罰不中、則民無所措手足。故君子名之必可言也、言之必可行也。君子於其言、無所苟而已矣。

    Muller translation:

    Zi Lu said: “The ruler of Wei is anticipating your assistance in the administration of his state. What will be your top priority?”

    Confucius said, “There must be a correction of terminology.”

    Zi Lu said, “Are you serious? Why is this so important?”

    Confucius said, “You are really simple, aren’t you? A noble man is cautious about jumping to conclusions about that which he does not know.”

    “If terminology is not corrected, then what is said cannot be followed. If what is said cannot be followed, then work cannot be accomplished. If work cannot be accomplished, then ritual and music cannot be developed. If ritual and music cannot be developed, then criminal punishments will not be appropriate. If criminal punishments are not appropriate, the people cannot make a move. Therefore, the noble man needs to have his terminology applicable to real language, and his speech must accord with his actions. The speech of the noble man cannot be indefinite.”

    Legge translation:

    Zi Lu said, “The ruler of Wei has been waiting for you, in order with you to administer the government. What will you consider the first thing to be done?”

    The Master replied, “What is necessary is to rectify names.”

    “So! indeed!” said Zi Lu. “You are wide of the mark! Why must there be such rectification?”

    The Master said, “How uncultivated you are, You! A superior man, in regard to what he does not know, shows a cautious reserve. If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success. When affairs cannot be carried on to success, proprieties and music will not flourish. When proprieties and music do not flourish, punishments will not be properly awarded. When punishments are not properly awarded, the people do not know how to move hand or foot. Therefore a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately, and also that what he speaks may be carried out appropriately. What the superior man requires is just that in his words there may be nothing incorrect.”

    The one that makes me think of is the “booster” terminology.  It’s not a booster.  It’s a recommended  yearly shot, like flu.

    Either that, or they should leave us alone after we’ve had two or three.

    • #18
  19. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    The mechanism by which Chloroquine defeats COVID if taken along with supplemental zinc is through its ability to put zinc back where it needs to be, after the infection has stripped zinc out of the body.

    So when those two items are a duo, the zinc is properly absorbed into the COV patient’s body.

    The best course of action then is for the two items to be given as soon as the patient’s symptoms indicate the patient is dealing with COV, preferably before Day 4 of the infection.

    However although that is the ideal, many doctors using this combo saw success when offering it to patients beyond the suggested best timeframe.  These would include the drs at the Bakersfield clinic, also Dr Zelenko, & several of America’s Frontline Doctors.

    Here is one Calif Doctor’s remarks on his experiences with the HCQ/zinc remedy:

    “Dr. Anthony Cardillo said he viewed very promising results when prescribing hydroxychloroquine along with zinc for the most severely-ill COVID-19 patients.

    “‘Every patient I’ve prescribed it to has been very, very ill. Within 8 to 12 hours, they were basically symptom-free,'” Cardillo told Eyewitness News. “‘So clinically I am seeing a resolution.'”

    “Cardillo is the CEO of Mend Urgent Care, which has locations in Sherman Oaks, and Burbank. He said he has found it only works if combined with zinc. The drug, he said, opens a channel for the zinc to enter the cell and block virus replication.”

    The article, which includes testimonies from other drs, is here:

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/04/06/here-are-five-doctors-whose-patients-have-seen-recovery-with-hydroxy-chloroquine-n2566409

     

    Then this yahoo article of last year  discussed a Medrxiv review of HCQ plus zinc & its effectiveness among seriously ill COV patients who had been on ventilators. (I confess there are several drugs AZM can refer to.)https://news.yahoo.com/study-shows-hydroxychloroquine-zinc-treatments-210300816.html  author Andrew Mark MillerJune 9, 2021  

    A new study shows that the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine touted by former President Donald Trump increased the survival rate of severely ill coronavirus patients.

    The observational study, published by medRxiv, found that antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine, along with zinc, increased the coronavirus survival rate by as much as nearly 200% if distributed at higher doses to ventilated patients with a severe version of the illness.

    “We found when the cumulative doses of two drugs, HCQ and AZM, were above a certain level, patients had a survival rate 2.9 times the other patients,” the study’s conclusion states.

    #####

    Then of course there is my fall back case study which is nothing more than realizing Japan, a nation of 126 million people, had only 1900 deaths by Nov 8th 2020, as compared to hundreds of thousands in the USA. The final calculation was they had 2/125ths the fatalities we had. They used HCQ w/ zinc, also favipiravir, no ventilators but only C pap machines.

    ####

    • #19
  20. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    I’m never early for anything, so something that works only for very early treatment is not very interesting to me.

    • #20
  21. Mad Gerald Coolidge
    Mad Gerald
    @Jose

    Here are a couple of video channels that offer informed and objective input on all things Covid, including disinformation, suppressed information, and unapproved medication.

    John Campbell – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg

    Dark Horse – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAWCKUrmvK5F_ynBY_CMlIA

    • #21
  22. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    So, I can’t really digest all of this because I am coughing – in my 2nd week of probably Covid. I thought I was feeling better, but then took a turn for the worse. At a low point this afternoon, my daughter suggested that maybe I should go to the doctor. That is literally the first time I thought if it. After all this controversy and censorship and test-tracking, I want nothing to do with doctors. I have never been like that, and if it were another issue, I would go. So there we are. I’d really like to breathe freely again soon. 

    • #22
  23. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Lilly B (View Comment):

    So, I can’t really digest all of this because I am coughing – in my 2nd week of probably Covid. I thought I was feeling better, but then took a turn for the worse. At a low point this afternoon, my daughter suggested that maybe I should go to the doctor. That is literally the first time I thought if it. After all this controversy and censorship and test-tracking, I want nothing to do with doctors. I have never been like that, and if it were another issue, I would go. So there we are. I’d really like to breathe freely again soon.

    Zinc and vitamin D?

    • #23
  24. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    Lilly B (View Comment):

    So, I can’t really digest all of this because I am coughing – in my 2nd week of probably Covid. I thought I was feeling better, but then took a turn for the worse. At a low point this afternoon, my daughter suggested that maybe I should go to the doctor. That is literally the first time I thought if it. After all this controversy and censorship and test-tracking, I want nothing to do with doctors. I have never been like that, and if it were another issue, I would go. So there we are. I’d really like to breathe freely again soon.

    Still gotta deal with life…dinner, cleanup, peaches, forcing my kids to memorize LOTR quotes, etc.

    • #24
  25. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Lilly B (View Comment):

    So, I can’t really digest all of this because I am coughing – in my 2nd week of probably Covid. I thought I was feeling better, but then took a turn for the worse. At a low point this afternoon, my daughter suggested that maybe I should go to the doctor. That is literally the first time I thought if it. After all this controversy and censorship and test-tracking, I want nothing to do with doctors. I have never been like that, and if it were another issue, I would go. So there we are. I’d really like to breathe freely again soon.

    Zinc and vitamin D?

    That’s been my regimen so far

    • #25
  26. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Lilly B (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Lilly B (View Comment):

    So, I can’t really digest all of this because I am coughing – in my 2nd week of probably Covid. I thought I was feeling better, but then took a turn for the worse. At a low point this afternoon, my daughter suggested that maybe I should go to the doctor. That is literally the first time I thought if it. After all this controversy and censorship and test-tracking, I want nothing to do with doctors. I have never been like that, and if it were another issue, I would go. So there we are. I’d really like to breathe freely again soon.

    Zinc and vitamin D?

    That’s been my regimen so far

    If you still have a sense of food tastes, it might not be COVID. I had a very mild case of COV in March 2020 – and even food texture was off. Steak and oatmeal not only tasted the same bland way – their texture seemed identical.

     

    • #26
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.