JimmyC
229
Guys, it’s clear what happened here. Seven respected medical researchers got together and conspired to cherry-pick cases and put together a bogus study so they could discredit HCQ, thereby realizing their long-standing desire to…uh…well, I haven’t really worked that part of my theory out yet. But clearly, they must somehow be profiting off their nefarious scheme, otherwise, why would they do it?
1 Like
There is no shift of the goalposts. Either you don’t understand the subject matter or you don’t understand why those questions and definitions matter.
Either that or when I answered your questions you read them with your eyes closed so again, lack of any attempt to do aything here other than waste my time.
Have a good night.
Every post you’ve made since you first failed to support your claim has been a “shift of the goalposts”.
Gaslighting isn’t going to work. This is the internet, there’s a record. All of your posts - and mine - are here for all to see.
You can bluster and attack me personally all you want, but I dont think it’ll work - we can all see through that.
What claim exactly is that?
No, 7 ophthalmologists who don’t know squat about this disease produced a piss poor paper that they can’t even defend and won’t , making a recommendation that is in direct conflict with their own data.
Do you have anything to support this claim?
Or is it gonna be like the others?
Wait. I’m supposed to play fetch for you when you won’t provide anything to support your claims?
You get what you give.
No, you’re “supposed” to provide evidence to support your claims, otherwise we all just assume you’re making them up.
The gaslighting isn’t working. I stand behind all of my posts in this thread - now stand behind just one of yours.
BS you haven’t provided anything I’ve asked for and haven’t even attempted to.
When you want to have an honest discussion get back with me.
You have to know that no one is buying this, right?
All. Of. The. Posts. Are. Still. Here.
You need to stay on the same plane of reality as the rest of us.
1 Like
You have yet to provide data to his first question. That is what you are missing.
Provide evidence that patients were “cherry picked”
Already done and explained thoroughly.
No it hasn’t. You have not provided a stitch of data to show that patients were cherry picked. Not one.
Your posts are all here. Since you have no problem tracking down posts, you should be able to track down the post that has the link to “cherry picked” patients
Where is it?
One very small group over one very small window in time. By definition that’s cherry picked.
The authors even point that out.
