Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 23 minutes ago, Doc said: Yes, zero science. Even Teflon Tony admitted they were useless at the outset. And then this: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full Sure you didn't consider Trump. You just considered the "danger" of HCQ, while telling your patients to adjust their masks and move a little further away from you. And "real doctors" my ass. Again, beyond masking and 6 feet, tell me what they said about remdesivir again, while pooh-poohing HCQ? It would have been comical if it weren't so shameful. this paper doesn't say what you think it says https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventions-interrupt-or-reduce-spread-respiratory-viruses-review once again, a little knowledge is a dangerous this but also shame on Cochraner for releasing such a poorly explained review and needing to apologize. politics have never played a role in my medical decision making (or of anyone I personally know) regardless of what you think (really, why should anyone care what u think?) The vast majority of real doctors questioned HCQ from the very beginning. The studies were small and appropriately viewed with skepticism. If you actually hold a medical degree, you were in a very small minority of doctors who were very clearly wrong and lost respect among their colleagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: this paper doesn't say what you think it says https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventions-interrupt-or-reduce-spread-respiratory-viruses-review once again, a little knowledge is a dangerous this but also shame on Cochraner for releasing such a poorly explained review and needing to apologize. politics have never played a role in my medical decision making (or of anyone I personally know) regardless of what you think (really, why should anyone care what u think?) The vast majority of real doctors questioned HCQ from the very beginning. The studies were small and appropriately viewed with skepticism. If you actually hold a medical degree, you were in a very small minority of doctors who were very clearly wrong and lost respect among their colleagues. Masks were used a political tool because Trump refused to wear them. They essentially did nothing. And like I care about political morons in the medical community who claimed HCQ was dangerous and therefore couldn't be used, when there was anecdotal evidence it did and we had nothing else to treat Wuhan virus with. And your refusal to talk about remdesivir tells me all I need to know about you. Edited April 12, 2023 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 1 minute ago, Doc said: Masks were used a political tool because Trump refused to wear them. They essentially did nothing. And like I care about political morons in the medical community. And your refusal to talk about remdesivir tells me all I need to know about you. Cochrane's biggest mistake was assuming only intelligent people would read the review and that people like you with political agendas wouldn't misinterpret and amplify the misinterpretation. Remdesivir has nothing to do with physical barriers for decreased transmission but in comparison to Ivermectin and HCQ the early studies were more robust and convincing. It appears the approval process was incorrect based on the unfulfilled promise of the early studies. I wasn't part of the FDA panel that approved it. They probably shouldn't have just as they shouldn't ever have for HCQ. two wrongs don't make a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Cochrane's biggest mistake was assuming only intelligent people would read the review and that people like you with political agendas wouldn't misinterpret and amplify the misinterpretation. Remdesivir has nothing to do with physical barriers for decreased transmission but in comparison to Ivermectin and HCQ the early studies were more robust and convincing. It appears the approval process was incorrect based on the unfulfilled promise of the early studies. I wasn't part of the FDA panel that approved it. They probably shouldn't have just as they shouldn't ever have for HCQ. two wrongs don't make a right. Right, and people like you with a political agenda weren't smart enough to see through the bull#### behind remdesivir versus the treatment of HCQ. Again when there was no treatment for wuhan virus and HCQ was a perfectly safe enough drug for millions of people to be on daily for years/decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Doc said: Right, and people like you with a political agenda weren't smart enough to see through the bull#### behind remdesivir versus the treatment of HCQ. Again when there was no treatment for wuhan virus and HCQ was a perfectly safe enough drug for millions of people to be on daily for years/decades. you do realize that remdesivir is still approved for use in non hospitalized patients by the FDA and in many other countries. It has proven effectiveness in this subset. Not so for HCQ or Ivermectin. But joust on Don Quixote...keep fighting those windmills. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/treatments-for-severe-illness.html Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: you do realize that remdesivir is still approved for use in non hospitalized patients by the FDA and in many other countries. It has proven effectiveness in this subset. Not so for HCQ or Ivermectin. But joust on Don Quixote...keep fighting those windmills. I was under the impression remdesivr was only formulated for IV/Infusion. Which restricts use to inpatient situations. Is there an approved oral or self-injectable? I know HCL and Ivermectin are both taken orally. One being an anti-inflamatory and the other a protease inhibitor. I believe approved Paxlovid is also a protease inhibitor but much more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: you do realize that remdesivir is still approved for use in non hospitalized patients by the FDA and in many other countries. It has proven effectiveness in this subset. Not so for HCQ or Ivermectin. But joust on Don Quixote...keep fighting those windmills. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/treatments-for-severe-illness.html Great that it's still approved by the FDA. No one is prescribing it anymore and lawsuits are piling up over it causing renal failure/death. And initial trials showed it was useless but it was still pushed. So again, why did they claim HCQ was dangerous and couldn't be used? Edited April 12, 2023 by Doc 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 15 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I was under the impression remdesivr was only formulated for IV/Infusion. Which restricts use to inpatient situations. Is there an approved oral or self-injectable? I know HCL and Ivermectin are both taken orally. One being an anti-inflamatory and the other a protease inhibitor. I believe approved Paxlovid is also a protease inhibitor but much more expensive. lots of iv drugs are given in these places called infusion centers. Remdesivir was also given in ER's IV. Still is as far as I know. Not keeping up with trends and the literature as much these days. I did just see a paper that showed improved mortality for non ventilator inpatients with it vs placebo and it's still approved for that. Neither HCQ or Ivermectin are approved for Covid in any pt. Paxlovid is approved and oral. It's all in the link I gave earlier. 11 minutes ago, Doc said: Great that it's still approved by the FDA. No one is prescribing it anymore and lawsuits are piling up over it causing renal failure/death. And initial trials showed it was useless but it was still pushed. So again, why did they claim HCQ was dangerous and couldn't be used? There are dangers with any drug, even aspirin (GI bleeding especially) and zantac (confusion, aspiration etc) and drug interactions with anything prescribed. It's about risk/benefit. If there are no demonstrable benefits than the finite risks of HCQ outweigh its use. It's Not rocket surgery "Doc" Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: There are dangers with any drug, even the aspirin (GI bleeding especially) and zantac (ZE syndrome, aspiration etc). It's about risk/benefit. If there are no demonstrable benefits than the finite risks of HCQ outweigh its use. It's Not rocket surgery "Doc" LOL! Go perform an EKG "doc." Edited April 12, 2023 by Doc 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 If one changed hcq for say mifepristone in the story above. Same voices would be arguing about choice and availability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Chris farley said: If one changed hcq for say mifepristone in the story above. Same voices would be arguing about choice and availability. not following. please diagram your argument cuz I can't. 27 minutes ago, Doc said: LOL! Go perform an EKG "doc." Almost never performed them and neither do anesthesiologists. Techs or nurses perform them. Doctors interpret them and make often difficult medical decisions based on these interpretations.. Same with EEG's or CT's, echos, stress tests, sleep studies, plain films, labs etc. Do you practice in a 3rd world country? Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Almost never performed them and neither do anesthesiologists. Techs or nurses perform them. Doctors interpret them. Same with EEG's or CT's, sleep studies, plain films, labs etc. Do you practice in a 3rd world country? Stick with what you know, whatever that is. We always use EKG monitoring in the OR. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Doc said: Stick with what you know, whatever that is. We always use EKG monitoring in the OR. yeah, I've never seen an anesthesiologist place his own EKG electrodes which the word "perform" would imply. And intraoperatively, it's almost always a monitor strip with limited leads and not an actual 12 lead EKG. stop digging...and NC calls me a quack and leaves you unquestioned. You guys are so transparent and disingenuous. truth isn't often part of any of your arguments. Why is that? hmmmm...Is reality that unflattering? Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: yeah, I've never seen an anesthesiologist place his own EKG electrodes which the word "perform" would imply. And intraoperatively, it's almost always a monitor strip with limited leads and not an actual 12 lead EKG. stop digging...and NC calls me a quack and leaves you unquestioned. You guys are so transparent and disingenuous. First off, you missed the joke. Second of all, even a 3 lead EKG is more than most other doctors perform typically and it's not hard to place the other 8 (or 6 if you're using 5 leads). But I can diagnose virtually anything with it (if I want ST monitoring I use a 5-lead) and even diagnosed a patient with a previously undiagnosed Mobitz Type II a few weeks ago. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Doc said: First off, you missed the joke. Second of all, even a 3 lead EKG is more than most other doctors perform typically and it's not hard to place the other 8 (or 6 if you're using 5 leads). But I can diagnose virtually anything with it (if I want ST monitoring I use a 5-lead) and even diagnosed a patient with a previously undiagnosed Mobitz Type II a few weeks ago. Oh wow!!! Did a cardiologist read the preop EKG and miss heart block? c'mon. stop lying. 6 if you're using 5 leads? your math isn't great either. btw, heart block recognition is required of nurses to pass advanced CPR. It's not difficult. https://www.aclsmedicaltraining.com/rhythm-recognition/ and no. I didn't take a prep course for ACLS ever. Knew these rhythms in med school. Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Oh wow!!! Did a cardiologist read the preop EKG and miss heart block? c'mon. stop lying. 6 if you're using 5 leads? your math isn't great either. btw, heart block recognition is required of nurses to pass advanced CPR. It's not difficult. Exactly, it's not hard. And no, there was no preop EKG. Edited April 12, 2023 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Doc said: Exactly, it's not hard. And no, there was no preop EKG. So why were you bragging about it? btw, this was a test and you failed. The scenario you described is unlikely but possible. Heart block can be intermittent and if you knew what you were talking about that would have been the obvious rebuttal. but you don't. and you better start doing preop EKG's on pt's susceptible to any cardiac condition if you want to avoid getting sued. Clinical testing med students and residents is part of our training so I'm very familiar with this type of questioning. If you were on rounds with me as the attending, you'd have been very embarrassed. But you would have learned. EKG: Men over the age of 50 and women over the age of 60 should have a 12-lead EKG if one has not been performed in the past year. A patient of any age with cardiopulmonary disease, renal disease, hypertension, or diabetes, should also have a preoperative EKG performed close to the date of the procedure. Guidelines for Preoperative Cardiac and Pulmonary Testing Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: So why were you bragging about it? btw, this was a test and you failed. The scenario you described is unlikely but possible. Heart block can be intermittent and if you knew what you were talking about that would have been the obvious rebuttal. but you don't. and you better start doing preop EKG's on pt's susceptible to any cardiac condition if you want to avoid getting sued. We don't do EKGs on otherwise healthy 53 year olds, which she was. And yes it was intermittent. What that has to do with it happening and me diagnosing it is a good question. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Doc said: We don't do EKGs on otherwise healthy 53 year olds, which she was. And yes it was intermittent. What that has to do with it happening and me diagnosing it is a good question. fail. That should have been an immediate, spontaneous response from any anesthesiologist I've ever met. Should not have required prompting. You are either really bad at your job or you're not an anesthesiologist. Oh, and for men 50 is the cutoff for EKG's per the guideline. In all the hospitals I've worked in an EKG over a month old wouldn't suffice despite the caveat in the guidelines for 1 year. Why take the risk? This 53 yo could have easily gone into 3rd degree HB on your table and you' and he would be screwed. BTW, what happened to the patient? Was the case presented at M and M? What was the surgeon's response. Will he still work with you? Did you have to defend your decision not to do a preop EKG to your peers? Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: fail. That should have been an immediate, spontaneous response from any anesthesiologist I've ever met. Should not have required prompting. You are either really bad at your job or you're not an anesthesiologist. Opinions are like... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 10 minutes ago, Doc said: Opinions are like... For not being a Trump voter - you really have strong opinions about this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 27 minutes ago, Doc said: Opinions are like... Strong response. March on Don Quixote. Feed your donkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: Strong response. March on Don Quixote. Feed your donkey. It was a fitting response. Your words are merely your opinions and have no basis in fact. You're just like they want you to be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 18 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Strong response. March on Don Quixote. Feed your donkey. I would not want you as my doctor. You are a snob and from your posts, IMO you have a sh***y bedside manner. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 2 hours ago, Doc said: Great that it's still approved by the FDA. No one is prescribing it anymore and lawsuits are piling up over it causing renal failure/death. And initial trials showed it was useless but it was still pushed. So again, why did they claim HCQ was dangerous and couldn't be used? Hoax. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Wacka said: I would not want you as my doctor. You are a snob and from your posts, IMO you have a sh***y bedside manner. When you are critically ill, bedside manner doesn't help much. And I'm retired. Did OK. Oh, and I don't care about your opinion. Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 9 hours ago, Wacka said: Well, it might have been just as effective as the "vaccine". IOW, zero. Could have used it to see if it worked. Millions upon Millions have been given Invermectin around the world without side effects. Hoax. 5 hours ago, Doc said: Shocking, considering your news sources. Yeah and you bought masks and 6 feet of distance and remdesivir. All of which have zero science behind them (and in remdesivir's case, dangerous and very expensive). And you no doubt told everyone you knew that HCQ was dangerous (even though you should have known better) because you didn't want Trump to get a win. So spare me. Hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 On 4/10/2023 at 10:54 PM, Buffarukus said: i already tryed this with you mr. time. but yes. this is the typical answer, when its attempted. so kuschner secretly stole campaign money. ill take this as absolute truth. that is not a trump policy that negatively effected you personally. so much for over and over. still waiting on the first. for the description provided as satan on earth..especially by a guy infatuated like yourself. you have already not answered what should be the easiest question asked on the planet. i should get a list immediately. If you typed this sober, then you really should consider a remedial English class. On 4/7/2023 at 7:36 AM, BillsFanNC said: A lucky 7! You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SUNY_amherst. Options You've chosen to ignore content by BillStime. Options You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by Kemp. Options You've chosen to ignore content by Kemp. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SUNY_amherst. Options Snowflake. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 13 minutes ago, Wacka said: I would not want you as my doctor. You are a snob and from your posts, IMO you have a sh***y bedside manner. i was thinking. There's a dude on the board here that I could refer you to. @Docare you taking referrals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 2 hours ago, Doc said: Great that it's still approved by the FDA. No one is prescribing it anymore and lawsuits are piling up over it causing renal failure/death. And initial trials showed it was useless but it was still pushed. So again, why did they claim HCQ was dangerous and couldn't be used? Still gnawing on your car battery-sized block of Ivermectin after all this time. Good stuff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, SectionC3 said: Still gnawing on your car battery-sized block of Ivermectin after all this time. Good stuff. I think they call it conformation bias. It's generally frowned upon in medicine. Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: I think they call it conformation bias. It's generally frowned on in medicine. I always figured Doq just liked the taste and touch of Ivermectin. Kills parasites, has a pleasant texture, and tastes yummy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I always figured Doq just liked the taste and touch of Ivermectin. Kills parasites, has a pleasant texture, and tastes yummy. I've heard it grows hair. Where, I'm not sure. But no doubt he has no tapeworms. Edited April 12, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: I've heard it grows hair. Where, I'm not sure. Probably on horses is my bet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 14 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Still gnawing on your car battery-sized block of Ivermectin after all this time. Good stuff. Hoax. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 26 minutes ago, Doc said: Hoax. did you get vaxed? for the benefit of your patients if not yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 The late night planned circle jerk that turned into a sword fight. Don't get any on ya fellas! You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options You've chosen to ignore content by redtail hawk. Options You've chosen to ignore content by SectionC3. Options 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 On 4/11/2023 at 6:16 AM, Buffarukus said: no you shouldnt go on. like i said i tryed this with you and this is what you give. your listing things that trump didnt fix? biden passes a infrastructure deal that cost trillions of dollars and thats a trump policy that negatively effected you personally? a rotted infrastructure that was allowed to happen over decades..the entire time biden had power to address it as a career politician AND vp. this is a trump policy that negatively effected you? same goes with "trump care"? read above. so policies he never made is your example? what the hell are you talking about? he did work on bills to lower prescription prices. you act like his campaign promises have anything to due with a democrat loyalist. biden said he was going to bring the country together. the policy he never made is negativly effecting me cause you are still a billstime biden lover! im holding biden responsible for this broken campaign promise of a reply you gave lol now this is great. billstime was in full support of the wall!? i had you all wrong. his corporate tax cuts negatively effected "us?" you sure? my company reinvested it to buy me a new stapler. its red. sorry you work for greedy pigs who bought back stocks. lol. your generalizing and really have no clue how you were effected by that. debt piling is something you personally applaud. i said negative effect personally. again trade war with china? that negativley effected you? this!? this is what our board member who has a trump is the worst president doctorate degree has to say when it comes to policy that effected him? policy he never made and hyporbolics on broad complex topics that never significantly touched you in any reasonable way? ill give you a example. bidens has cost me personally and direct members of my family thousands of dollars due to his anti oil climate policy. executive order aka biden directly did this. bidens federal vaccination policy has been addopted by ny state. thousands of qualified healthcare workers have been fired. my grandfather has stage 4 Alzheimer's. he used to get a nurse provided to his home by ny state 5 days a week. that has been cut to 3 due to lack of employees. me and my family rotate to cover this. it has negativley effected me. executive order aka biden directly did this. THOSE are direct reprocussions of a failed presidents policies. my side street still looks like $#[÷. thats getting fixed in 2 weeks you said? 😉 should i go on? ill give credit. you tried. most dont answer because they understand the question I've never seen any write so much without saying anything. You also write these up like a concussed 4th grader. Your "reprocussions" are weak and if you comprehended, are the same as the China trade war. Time and money. Also, don't try and be condescending. You are not smart enough. Learn to capitalize with your flip phone first, it will work better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 7 hours ago, Wacka said: I would not want you as my doctor. You are a snob and from your posts, IMO you have a sh***y bedside manner. Imagine walking into @redtail hawk office wearing a MAGA hat. That oath he took goes right out the window.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 (edited) 8 hours ago, redtail hawk said: did you get vaxed? for the benefit of your patients if not yourself? I did. Got infected with wuhan virus a month after the booster. Got it from my wife who was also boosted. Some benefit. Edited April 12, 2023 by Doc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts