Abortion Basically Illegal In Texas Now

[Governor]

2 hours ago, ComradeKayAdams said:

 

Strong-arm tactics are completely unnecessary when your opposition commits political suicide on the national stage.

 

As far as political strategy discussion goes, the only interesting question is what to do about the Supreme Court?

 

As far as abortion policy discussion goes, yeah I think we’re done here.

All politics is local Kay. We may very well be close to a checkmate nationally, but we’re getting killed at the local and state level, Governorships, etc., and we’re seeing the effects of that today. This is what happens when a party gets distracted by social issues and gets away from a strong meat and potatoes economic message.

 

The courts are their last stand and I’m in “believe it when I see it mode” as far them going crazy and straying away from national opinion on any one issue.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Governor

[Governor]

4 hours ago, Niagara Bill said:

Interesting thoughts!

What I cannot understand is the need for religion to force itself on others. 

If you do not believe in something, do not do it.

We have long established in western cultures that murder is wrong, that stoning is assault, that a justice system is the way of dealing with outside activities, that private holdings are ok, that selling of daughters is wrong, that women are equal, that all people are free to practice their religion, as long ss it fits inside the parameters of our law.

Abortion is like the final piece after 200 years. Most of society accepts the need and we are just looking for the exact point of acceptance. Some do not want to show flexibility. Sounds alot like ISIS. They have been fighting infidels since the crusades.  

Our society in Western cultures has so many problems today, drugs, gangs, poverty, the 1%, etc. Why oh why do supposedly intelligent people have to hide behind a religious issue with where thought goes out the window. 

 

If you take a look at the updated GOP platform you’ll notice that it’s the Heritage Foundation handbook.

 

Everyone should know what their true intentions are at this point.

[Orlando Tim]

https://www.salon.com/2021/09/04/why-satanists-may-be-the-last-best-hope-to-save-abortion-rights-in-texas/

 

When the satanists are your best advocates you might want to reconsider your believes 

[SectionC3]

14 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

My vaccine was put improperly into my arm and caused my much pain, does that make it not worthwhile? HCQ is good for lungs as a preventative measure against infections that stiffen the tissue of the lungs. My uncle took it for year many times (50+)while working in India in the 1980s 

 

Obviously the vax is worthwhile.  HCQ does not help COVID 19 patients.  Increased mortality and no clinical benefit.  So that's why taking the vax, in spite of the pain, is smart, and promoting HCQ--"just enough to keep me safe," in the words of "Doc"--is foolish, dangerous, and a waste of breath.  

[B-Man]

 

 

REMINDER for this page also,  that the Title of this thread is incredibly wrong.

 

The Left knows this false, but wants the "controversy"...................their concern is votes, not women's rights.

 

 

 

 

No, Texas's New Law Does Not Ban Abortions - Or Even A Majority Of Them

 

 

After the Supreme Court declined the ACLU’s request to block SB8, the new Texas law, which bans abortion after a baby’s heartbeat is detected, went into effect in the state immediately.  Almost predictably, the left went into a total meltdown, suggesting that this was an all-out ban on abortions, which it very much isn’t. 

 

Liberals and Progressives alike complained that this law was somehow an affront to women everywhere (you know, after they have spent the last four years telling us to call them “birthing persons”), claiming that the majority of abortions occur after a heartbeat is detected.

 

Well, that’s just not true.  In fact, the vast majority of abortions occur within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and a plurality within the first six weeks.

 

According to Abort83.com, a site that compiles abortion statistics, a maximum of 40.5% of abortions occurs within the first six weeks of pregnancy, which in Texas are all still legal.  In weeks 7-9, another 37.5% of abortions take place. In total, 78% of all abortions take place before the beginning of week 10.

 

While heartbeats can possibly be detected as early as weeks 6 or 7, WebMD states that the majority of doctors don’t test until after eight weeks with ultrasound, and not until 12 weeks with fetal doppler. If we attribute half of the week 7-9 abortions as a split, that would be 18.75%. 

 

That would suggest that 59.25% of all abortions occur before a heartbeat is even detected, which, again, is still legal in Texas.

 

While the law contains a requirement for doctors to verify a heartbeat before an abortion is performed, it does not specify how that verification must take place. If doctors chose to verify by doppler (and you know there will be some who want to skirt the intent of the law, just like this despicable clinic Mike Miller wrote about), it would extend the potential for abortions past 10 weeks, leading to the potential of 80% of the abortions taking place previously to continue.

 

 

https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2021/09/03/no-the-texas-law-does-not-ban-abortions-or-even-a-majority-of-them-n437269

 

https://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

[Doc]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

Obviously the vax is worthwhile.  HCQ does not help COVID 19 patients.  Increased mortality and no clinical benefit.  So that's why taking the vax, in spite of the pain, is smart, and promoting HCQ--"just enough to keep me safe," in the words of "Doc"--is foolish, dangerous, and a waste of breath.  

 

Stop making as ass of yourself.  Although I know that's hard...

[SectionC3]

Just now, Doc said:

 

Stop making as ass of yourself.  Although I know that's hard...

Hoax.  You have no science to support your position, “Doc.”  Maybe if you mix HCQ and horse dewormer you’ll get a better result.  Keep us posted. 

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  You have no science to support your position, “Doc.”  Maybe if you mix HCQ and horse dewormer you’ll get a better result.  Keep us posted. 

 

Sure I do.  You just conveniently put your fingers in your ears and scream "lalalalalala I can't hear you!"  It's like talking, much less explaining things, to a child.

 

As for ivermectin, check out India.  Bye.

[SectionC3]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

Sure I do.  You just conveniently put your fingers in your ears and scream "lalalalalala I can't hear you!"  It's like talking, much less explaining things, to a child.

 

As for ivermectin, check out India.  Bye.

Still no science.  Put down the dewormer and get to work, “Doc.”  

Edited September 6, 2021 by SectionC3

[Doc]

Just now, SectionC3 said:

Still no science.  Put down the dewormer and get to work, HCQ. 

 

No, I changed my mind.  You weren't complicit with the Dems.  You're just that dumb.  Go draft some documents, Gibbons.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

No, I changed my mind.  You weren't complicit with the Dems.  You're just that dumb.  Go draft some documents, Gibbons.

 

And . . . still no science,  "Doc."

 

I don't take requests from phonies like you, but I'll make an exception today.  Here's a "Doc"ument:

 

Dear "Doc":

 

Please show us the science upon which you base your position that HCQ and Ivermectin are both effective prophylactics and treatments with respect to COVID-19.  Otherwise, we will continue to understand your position in those respects to be groundless.  Or, in layman's terms, a hoax.  

 

Yours, etc.

 

SectionC3 

[Doc]

20 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

And . . . still no science,  "Doc."

 

I don't take requests from phonies like you, but I'll make an exception today.  Here's a "Doc"ument:

 

Dear "Doc":

 

Please show us the science upon which you base your position that HCQ and Ivermectin are both effective prophylactics and treatments with respect to COVID-19.  Otherwise, we will continue to understand your position in those respects to be groundless.  Or, in layman's terms, a hoax.  

 

Yours, etc.

 

SectionC3 

 

I already did.  You a) couldn't understand it and b) wouldn't accept it even if you could, for obvious reasons (on both parts).  So it's plainly obvious "science" is wasted on you.  Like your party and others of your ilk, feelz is more important.  The funniest part is when you whipped-out a Johns Hopkins article from last year as some kind of proof of anything other than your poor research skills. 

 

What you choose to believe is not my problem.  Suffice it to say that I wasn't the one who believed lies about it being unsafe and thus that it couldn't be used, only because Trump mentioned it, just so people would die and get him out of office.  Again, congrats.  You're just who your party wants you to be.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

I already did.  You a) couldn't understand it and b) wouldn't accept it even if you could, for obvious reasons (on both parts).  So it's plainly obvious "science" is wasted on you.  Like your party and others of your ilk, feelz is more important.  The funniest part is when you whipped-out a Johns Hopkins article from last year as some kind of proof of anything other than your poor research skills. 

 

What you choose to believe is not my problem.  Suffice it to say that I wasn't the one who believed lies about it being unsafe and thus that it couldn't be used, only because Trump mentioned it, just so people would die and get him out of office.  Again, congrats.  You're just who your party wants you to be.

Hoax.  You didn’t.  Because it doesn’t exist.  Have a nice night, hoax man.  Just don’t write any scripts for HCQ or ivermectin for patients who have COVID. 

[Doc]

HCQ being dangerous was the biggest hoax.  Science has proven it (you want yer science, I got yer science right 'ere...).  Yet you bought it.  Own it.  That it didn't work was the other hoax.  Again your masters "saved" the world from a safe drug, one infinitely more safe than the Wuhan virus it has been show to help fight.  Congrats.

 

And I'll write (as in "prescribe") them if I want.  But not to worry, it won't be in fish tank cleaner or horse de-wormer...

Edited September 7, 2021 by Doc

[Tenhigh]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  You didn’t.  Because it doesn’t exist.  Have a nice night, hoax man.  Just don’t write any scripts for HCQ or ivermectin for patients who have COVID. 

STILL beating this drum? Stop stalking the guy, weirdo.  YOU are going to get us moderated.

[Orlando Tim]

11 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

STILL beating this drum? Stop stalking the guy, weirdo.  YOU are going to get us moderated.

Of course he is still beating this drum- his side has screwed the pooch at every turn so he has to pick on the Latinos who believe information coming from south America. 

[Doc]

16 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

STILL beating this drum? Stop stalking the guy, weirdo.  YOU are going to get us moderated.

 

I don't mind.  It only reflects poorly on him.

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

HCQ being dangerous was the biggest hoax.  Science has proven it (you want yer science, I got yer science right 'ere...).  Yet you bought it.  Own it.  That it didn't work was the other hoax.  Again your masters "saved" the world from a safe drug, one infinitely more safe than the Wuhan virus it has been show to help fight.  Congrats.

 

And I'll write (as in "prescribe") them if I want.  But not to worry, it won't be in fish tank cleaner or horse de-wormer...

Still no science.  

[Doc]

10 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Still no science.  

 

Hoax.

[SoCal Deek]

13 hours ago, Niagara Bill said:

Your point may have some validity today, but I think it  primarily comes from that base.

"Imagine all the people

Living life in peace"

 

 

 

 

My point has more than a little validity. Jesus Christ is not quoted as having said anything about abortion.  Abortion is a Human Rights issue.  It's yet another "inconvenient truth" that the Left conveniently chooses to ignore.

[SectionC3]

8 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Hoax.

You could, you know, show us the science.  Especially since so many people still die as a result of this virus. Your miracle cure could save lives.  Might even get you a prize.  You could be the 2022 winner of the Nobel for physiology or medicine.  The world demands no less, “Doc.”

[Niagara Bill]

8 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

My point has more than a little validity. Jesus Christ is not quoted as having said anything about abortion.  Abortion is a Human Rights issue.  It's yet another "inconvenient truth" that the Left conveniently chooses to ignore.

Again you are wrong, it always pains me to have to tell you.

"Thou shalt not kill", very basic religion based. Written by Jesus father as told by Moses.

The Human Rights thing comes from that. 

 

[SectionC3]

26 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said:

Again you are wrong, it always pains me to have to tell you.

"Thou shalt not kill", very basic religion based. Written by Jesus father as told by Moses.

The Human Rights thing comes from that. 

 

 

Isn't the translation thou shall not murder?  I suppose it doesn't make a difference in the abortion context, but the semantical distinction is interesting in other areas.  I suppose it might justify the (utterly obtuse and hypocritical) view that any form of abortion is wrong, but executing pursuant to the death penalty is morally acceptable. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by SectionC3

[SoCal Deek]

47 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said:

Again you are wrong, it always pains me to have to tell you.

"Thou shalt not kill", very basic religion based. Written by Jesus father as told by Moses.

The Human Rights thing comes from that. 

 

Wait a minute….your last post said murder isn't a religious issue, but more of a universally accepted morality matter. Which one is it? 

[Backintheday544]

This law infringes on religious liberties. An exemption needs to be made for anyone that says they’re part of the Satanic Temple:

 

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/texas/satanic-temple-challenges-texas-abortion-law/285-edf8b1f8-8605-4e6d-9331-afeefe1e5352
 

“The Satanic Temple stands ready to assist any member that shares its deeply-held religious convictions regarding the right to reproductive freedom,” wrote the group on its website. “Accordingly, we encourage any member who resides in Texas and wishes to undergo the Satanic Abortion Ritual within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy to contact The Satanic Temple so we may help them fight this law directly.”

 

One of the seven beliefs on the Satanic Temple’s website reads, “One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.”

 

Another says, “Beliefs should conform to one’s best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one’s beliefs.”   

 

 

—— 

I’m sure our right wing friends fully support this because Freedom.

[SoCal Deek]

47 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

This law infringes on religious liberties. An exemption needs to be made for anyone that says they’re part of the Satanic Temple:

 

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/texas/satanic-temple-challenges-texas-abortion-law/285-edf8b1f8-8605-4e6d-9331-afeefe1e5352
 

“The Satanic Temple stands ready to assist any member that shares its deeply-held religious convictions regarding the right to reproductive freedom,” wrote the group on its website. “Accordingly, we encourage any member who resides in Texas and wishes to undergo the Satanic Abortion Ritual within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy to contact The Satanic Temple so we may help them fight this law directly.”

 

One of the seven beliefs on the Satanic Temple’s website reads, “One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.”

 

Another says, “Beliefs should conform to one’s best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one’s beliefs.”   

 

 

—— 

I’m sure our right wing friends fully support this because Freedom.

Huh?

Nice try

[Backintheday544]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Huh?

Nice try

So you’re going to stop a religion from its rituals because…….? Seems like tyranny to me.

[Niagara Bill]

3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Wait a minute….your last post said murder isn't a religious issue, but more of a universally accepted morality matter. Which one is it? 

You do not have to be religious to know murdering your neighbor is wrong, or Hitler was wrong, or genocide is wrong.

 

Both for abortion too. Those who fight it based it on religion,  others it is a moral issue. Hard to define.

Just to make it clear.

I am a fiscal conservative and pro choice. My wife would be pro choice but could never imagine making the choice to having an abortion. 

 

I can be friends with anti folks, just not those who preach their flippin religious bs and suggest I am the devil for being pro choice. 

 

Always find it strange that many anti are freedom thinkers when it comes to guns, masks, death penalty and vaccines

 

Have a good day dude. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

43 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said:

You do not have to be religious to know murdering your neighbor is wrong, or Hitler was wrong, or genocide is wrong.

 

Both for abortion too. Those who fight it based it on religion,  others it is a moral issue. Hard to define.

Just to make it clear.

I am a fiscal conservative and pro choice. My wife would be pro choice but could never imagine making the choice to having an abortion. 

 

I can be friends with anti folks, just not those who preach their flippin religious bs and suggest I am the devil for being pro choice. 

 

Always find it strange that many anti are freedom thinkers when it comes to guns, masks, death penalty and vaccines

 

Have a good day dude. 

Why is it strange?  It seems perfectly logical to me—life is complicated and people complex. 
 

I’m not pro-choice, but I am pro-reasonable.  I think the suite of abortive offerings of Virginia and NY are barbaric.  I think abortion up to 3 months is pretty awful generally but I can understand why it makes sense to some people.  
 

I’m a male, I think I have a right to an opinion, and recognize that if I was talking to the young Lenny he would think differently, though not markedly so.  
 

I think some medical professionals offer abortions because there is good money in it, some because they believe in choice and there is good money in it, and some likely would donate their services to needy people. 
 

What I’ve always thought sorta strange is that given the pro-choice standards employed by liberal minded folks, why they would think the sperm provider has any obligation to the woman carrying the child.  
 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

52 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said:

You do not have to be religious to know murdering your neighbor is wrong, or Hitler was wrong, or genocide is wrong.

 

Both for abortion too. Those who fight it based it on religion,  others it is a moral issue. Hard to define.

Just to make it clear.

I am a fiscal conservative and pro choice. My wife would be pro choice but could never imagine making the choice to having an abortion. 

 

I can be friends with anti folks, just not those who preach their flippin religious bs and suggest I am the devil for being pro choice. 

 

Always find it strange that many anti are freedom thinkers when it comes to guns, masks, death penalty and vaccines

 

Have a good day dude. 

I wish you the best as well.  You seem to draw some self defined magic line between religion and morality.  Going to Church on Sunday, or temple on Saturday, abstaining from meat on Friday, or not eating shellfish are religious matters.  Murder on the other hand is a generally accepted moral principle.  I'd put it to you that those who oppose abortion oppose it as a moral concept, not because of some religious tenant, as you seem ready to suggest.

[Doc]

5 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

You could, you know, show us the science.  Especially since so many people still die as a result of this virus. Your miracle cure could save lives.  Might even get you a prize.  You could be the 2022 winner of the Nobel for physiology or medicine.  The world demands no less, “Doc.”

 

Do me a favor and take a look at the "The Next Pandemic" thread.  Specifically the (as of right now) penultimate post by Big Blitz.  Now what about that?

 

Besides that kill shot, the (finally properly-done) study is out there Gibbons.  If you can't accept it, and you obviously have every reason not to, that's on you, not me.  You've lost.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Doc

[Niagara Bill]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Why is it strange?  It seems perfectly logical to me—life is complicated and people complex. 
 

I’m not pro-choice, but I am pro-reasonable.  I think the suite of abortive offerings of Virginia and NY are barbaric.  I think abortion up to 3 months is pretty awful generally but I can understand why it makes sense to some people.  
 

I’m a male, I think I have a right to an opinion, and recognize that if I was talking to the young Lenny he would think differently, though not markedly so.  
 

I think some medical professionals offer abortions because there is good money in it, some because they believe in choice and there is good money in it, and some likely would donate their services to needy people. 
 

What I’ve always thought sorta strange is that given the pro-choice standards employed by liberal minded folks, why they would think the sperm provider has any obligation to the woman carrying the child.  
 

 

 

Well thought out. Pro reasonable is a reasoned position. I think I fit that mold. 

 

[SectionC3]

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Do me a favor and take a look at the "The Next Pandemic" thread.  Specifically the (as of right now) penultimate post by Big Blitz.  Now what about that?

 

Besides that kill shot, the (finally properly-done) study is out there Gibbons.  If you can't accept it, and you obviously have every reason not to, that's on you, not me.  You've lost.

 

“Properly-done study is out there.”  But not here.  Any time you want to prove it exists, instead of cryptically pretending that it exists, let us know.  Until then, don’t dust off space on the mantle for the 2022 Nobel.  Or get yourself busy saving lives with HCQ and horse dewormer.  Dealer’s choice.  

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

“Properly-done study is out there.”  But not here.  Any time you want to prove it exists, instead of cryptically pretending that it exists, let us know.  Until then, don’t dust off space on the mantle for the 2022 Nobel.  Or get yourself busy saving lives with HCQ and horse dewormer.  Dealer’s choice.  

 

I'm not here to do your homework for you Gibbons.  Although with that Hopkins blunder, maybe I should...

But in any case, Tony told you all you need to know about HCQ and Wuhan virus.  And he's the man, right?

[SectionC3]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I'm not here to do your homework for you Gibbons.  Although with that Hopkins blunder, maybe I should...

But in any case, Tony told you all you need to know about HCQ and Wuhan virus.  And he's the man, right?

Big Blitz at least gave us a study from 2005 about use of the subject drug in animals that (obviously) couldn’t consider the virus in question.  (That’s the penultimate post to which you referred.). You’ve given us nothing recent about the efficacy of HCQ in humans with respect to COVID-19.  

 

So, you can repeat your Q platitudes and insults. and pretend you have science to support your garbage position about the garbage treatments that you promote.  Or, you could give us the science that supports your view that HCQ and Ivermectin are effective treatments for COVID-19.  Dealer’s choice, “Doc.”  

[Doc]

7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Big Blitz at least gave us a study from 2005 about use of the subject drug in animals that (obviously) couldn’t consider the virus in question.  (That’s the penultimate post to which you referred.). You’ve given us nothing recent about the efficacy of HCQ in humans with respect to COVID-19.  

 

So, you can repeat your Q platitudes and insults. and pretend you have science to support your garbage position about the garbage treatments that you promote.  Or, you could give us the science that supports your view that HCQ and Ivermectin are effective treatments for COVID-19.  Dealer’s choice, “Doc.”  

 

Hoax.  Tony is the first person to tout HCQ, not Trump.  And it's safe unlike what your masters told you.  Man that's got to be such a gut punch to you libs!

 

You lost Gibbons.  Keep making a further fool of yourself if you wish. 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

8 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Hoax.  Tony is the first person to tout HCQ, not Trump.  And it's safe unlike what your masters told you.  Man that's got to be such a gut punch to you libs!

 

You lost Gibbons.  Keep making a further fool of yourself if you wish. 

 

 

One thing our official clown car scientific community, or the slow-witted media and other self-proclaimed experts, can't explain is how the early and aggressive outpatient treatment of households and family units with Ivermectin in India coincided with a 97% reduction in cases in Delhi over a 28 day period this past May.  Other States using the protocol also showed improvement and conversely those that did not saw cases rise.  Could something else be responsible?  Perhaps, but to this point there is no reasonable or "scientific" explanation to suggest anything other factor drove down Delta cases.  The country went from the worst outbreak to being out of the conversation today.  This is a country with very low vaccine rates.  Even after all these cases and deaths piled up the US still has more cases and more deaths even with the benefit of our expensive and bloated healthcare system.    

 

But here in the U.S., cheap and readily available solutions not producing Big Pharma revenues and profits just don't reside in the DNA of America's decision makers.  Their flippant arrogance to dismiss anything outside of the box they reside in is a pathetic substitute for the science they claim to follow.  The only thing worse is the close minded idiots who continue to defend it.      

[Doc]

19 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

One thing our official clown car scientific community, or the slow-witted media and other self-proclaimed experts, can't explain is how the early and aggressive outpatient treatment of households and family units with Ivermectin in India coincided with a 97% reduction in cases in Delhi over a 28 day period this past May.  Other States using the protocol also showed improvement and conversely those that did not saw cases rise.  Could something else be responsible?  Perhaps, but to this point there is no reasonable or "scientific" explanation to suggest anything other factor drove down Delta cases.  The country went from the worst outbreak to being out of the conversation today.  This is a country with very low vaccine rates.  Even after all these cases and deaths piled up the US still has more cases and more deaths even with the benefit of our expensive and bloated healthcare system.    

 

But here in the U.S., cheap and readily available solutions not producing Big Pharma revenues and profits just don't reside in the DNA of America's decision makers.  Their flippant arrogance to dismiss anything outside of the box they reside in is a pathetic substitute for the science they claim to follow.  The only thing worse is the close minded idiots who continue to defend it.      

 

The libs, likely with orders/payments from Big Pharma, spearheaded the HCQ smear campaign (and the ivermectin smear campaign is an off-shoot of that because, if ivermectin can work...) to not only get the vaccines approved (obvious) but cause disease and death to get Trump out (notice neither Pfizer nor Moderna revealed they had a vaccine ready to go by the end of the year until after the election?).  I mean, all they talked about was how Trump looked at his portfolio and randomly picked out a dangerous drug that had no science behind it at all, when all along it was their hero Fauci who first recommended and didn't mention it was too dangerous to use (not that most of us who were familiar with the drug didn't already know that). 

 

The saddest part is the quite a few in the medical community went along with this criminality.  I can only SMH.

[SectionC3]

47 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Hoax.  Tony is the first person to tout HCQ, not Trump.  And it's safe unlike what your masters told you.  Man that's got to be such a gut punch to you libs!

 

You lost Gibbons.  Keep making a further fool of yourself if you wish. 

 

 

Hoax.  Fauci never touted anything.  The agency that he led simply published a study about HCQ 15 years before COVID-19.  And, as noted and as still is unaddressed by “Doc,” that study did not involve human trials.  

 

So, we continue to await the “science” that supports your garbage opinions about your garbage treatments, “Doc.”  Feel free to stop changing the subject and show your cards any time you wish.  

36 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

One thing our official clown car scientific community, or the slow-witted media and other self-proclaimed experts, can't explain is how the early and aggressive outpatient treatment of households and family units with Ivermectin in India coincided with a 97% reduction in cases in Delhi over a 28 day period this past May.  Other States using the protocol also showed improvement and conversely those that did not saw cases rise.  Could something else be responsible?  Perhaps, but to this point there is no reasonable or "scientific" explanation to suggest anything other factor drove down Delta cases.  The country went from the worst outbreak to being out of the conversation today.  This is a country with very low vaccine rates.  Even after all these cases and deaths piled up the US still has more cases and more deaths even with the benefit of our expensive and bloated healthcare system.    

 

But here in the U.S., cheap and readily available solutions not producing Big Pharma revenues and profits just don't reside in the DNA of America's decision makers.  Their flippant arrogance to dismiss anything outside of the box they reside in is a pathetic substitute for the science they claim to follow.  The only thing worse is the close minded idiots who continue to defend it.      

Got a study?  Or are you referring to the one that wasn’t published because of concerns about flawed data? 

[Doc]

GUT...PUNCH.

 

If you want the abuse to continue, take it to the other thread.  This is for abortions.  Not that the left's smear campaign against HCQ couldn't be considered one.