*** PLEASE NOTE ***



*** PLEASE NOTE *** I use no other social media, and my comment section here remains closed due to chronic harassment/repeat impersonations by a certain individual. Also, I rarely comment anywhere; when I do, only from this blog as "Chrysalis" or with my real name from email (see correct spelling my profile). If there is ever any question as to legitimacy, please contact myself or Mark via email or phone.


Sunday, August 2, 2020

Dear "Distant Relative" (Avatar of a Commenter Elsewhere) ...

(Updated) 

I just read JH's post about your "binned" comment (?), clearly directed at me. 

This conversation would be helped much if we were able to speak directly to each other, without strange things happening to our comments in JH's comments section, wouldn't it? ;)

Regardless, here is my reply, which I doubt will be released, but here is an exact copy nonetheless, because it's clear you're reading here: 

DR - This conversation, and any miscommunication, could be much better cleared up if strange things didn't happen to both our comments ;) 

It IS possible that I just didn't see your comment with the link until later on, because when I returned, I first noticed JH's reply, as well his removing my 2nd.

There was sincerely no conscious "misrepresentation" of your time of reply, I just didn't notice it until later. 

However, the time of reply is not the real issue - the issue was the content of your reply. 

In my 2nd reply, I again asked you about the first link you provided, the NIH study on hydroxychloroquine and cancer - if you could further explain the connection you were trying to make between them, because I sincerely didn't understand/you lost me on it - cancer and COVID are two entirely two different diseases.

When you DID reply - regardless of time stamp - not only did you still not answer that question, but the new link you provided was NOT to that NIH August 2005 hydroxychloroquine/virus study. 
 
It was instead to a "white paper" written by America's Frontline Doctors (who have questionable backgrounds and religious beliefs), supporting the false statement that "Fauci has known since 2005 that hydroxychloroquine worked on the virus."
If you actually read that NIH study from 2005 - which neither the white paper nor you provided, for whatever reason - you can clearly see it's on a completely different virus, as well as hydroxychloroquine and was trialed on primate cell cultures in a lab, not live patients - and Fauci never publicly stated his opinion on it. 

SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV2 - the "2" is important here - are distantly related (no pun intended) viruses, but they are separate and distinct viruses, and COVID-19 is the resulting condition, which is completely new and unique.



Giving you the benefit of the doubt as much as I can, here, may I then ask - since you posted the NIH study on hydroxychloroquine and cancer - why didn't you just reply then with the actual 2005 NIH study on hydroxychloroquine, instead of the white paper by AFL, since you were already at the NIH site? For that matter, why didn't America's Frontline Doctors do the same?

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to offend - it's just working in healthcare myself, knowing this is real and what's been tried by doctors - who are willing to try anything, regardless of what press and politicians say, to save their patients public health is too important for us to be passing around information that we have not been properly vetted, researched, and validated, and all of this political conspiracy speculation, even if you are correct, will not help us solve the problem and cure the virus. 

If you do find a study on SARS-CoV2 and hydroxychloroquine - published by academia in reputable medical journals or the NIH, I'll be happy to read it, because it is possible there's something out there I have not read/seen, and I am going based upon the decisions by the doctors I work for, what has worked and hasn't, alone.
Take care,

_____________________________



P.S. I neglected to mention that I haven't read any of your comments since, so if you DID finally answer that question about the connection you were trying to make between COVID and cancer - or have provided anything else after Thursday evening - I haven't read it.  

I only know that by Thursday evening, you had left only the link to the "white paper" as well as links regarding other Flynn and other issues - and you still did not answer the COVID/cancer correlation question I'd asked - and it appears you still haven't?)

I only noticed and read JH's post today, mentioning your comment had been "binned," which I found interesting, in that strange things always seem to happen to people's comments when people disagree in some way - particularly with him, the blog owner.

However, I meant that last paragraph, sincerely - if you, or anyone, feels that a treatment hasn't been given enough of a fair trial or something isn't being done enough on behalf of public health, I'll be happy to read it -  because I don't trust big pharma and big insurance much lol.  Just put my avatar name in your comment, or else in all likelihood, I won't see it.  

That is because I typically don't read the content of JH's blog, I usually just skim comments for the thoughts of other people I know  - your original comment caught my attention, because it was about COVID treatment, and because I didn't understand the connection you were making between COVID and cancer (and still don't).

However, fair warning - I WILL vet it, and the sources, fairly thoroughly, while wearing my critical-thinking cap first ;)

I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but this virus has too much deadly potential to pass around dysinformation on, political or otherwise, and NOT investigate it/vetting it thoroughly first ;) 








No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.