Good News - CDC issues mask order to (hopefully) allow cruising to resume!

[NikiPinkston]

15 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

 

Nope, not wrong, it's brand new today & what great news 😃

Thank you. That is great news! I just meant that I stand corrected about not being able to infect others after one has been vaccinated.  But everyone getting the vaccine will go a long way to eliminating the virus.

[ScratchTheRat]

I do not think for a second that we are "living in fear" and that the "government are mind controlling us". Any notion to that effect is sheer nonsense.

 

The fact of the matter is, any decision governments make on the virus will attract scorn and hatred from some groups. 

 

If they remove lockdown and say it's safe to go out there, they will be condemned by scientists, health officials, epidemiologists, WHO, CDC and the United Nations.

 

If they lock us down and contain the virus, they are condemned by groups of the public, some politicians, economists and business owners etc.

 

There is no way to win the argument.

 

Instead of conspiracy theories and accusations of control, follow the science and the facts. I see far too many people getting their information from Fox News and the like rather than doing any research for themselves.

 

Democracy means we all have the power to vote for who makes the decisions in our country. We did vote, they made decisions. Sure we can disagree with them, but we PUT them in power and why? To MAKE hard decisions on our lives. That's literally their job AND the democracy we fight for every day. We don't have to like the rules, but we do have to follow them and trust in those we gave a democratic mandate to lead.

[pbenjamin]

22 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

That's true, not everybody does. But the big issue we have here is "food deserts". There are legitimately very few people in the greater Cincinnati area that can walk to a grocery store. And in the areas that are more "walkable" (aka, inner city) many of the grocery stores closed up those locations due to too many thefts. So even in walkable areas you couldn't walk to a grocery store. This issue was brought to light, that people who didn't drive couldn't get to a grocery store and essentially shopped at corner stores and gas stations for their groceries. Lately there has been more of a movement to intentionally open grocery stores in those locations.

Yes, we have that problem here. Made some progress in the last year when a Fry’s (Kroger affiliate) opened in a downtown high rise. 

[Formula280SS]

12 hours ago, ScratchTheRat said:

I do not think for a second that we are "living in fear" and that the "government are mind controlling us". Any notion to that effect is sheer nonsense.  Yeah, right.  Maybe not mind control, but definitely behavioral.  For thee only.  It's nonsense "not" to recognize and "fear" such.  Restaurants and bars reopening in the highest active infection and death levels, 2-3 times the levels when they were shut down due to such.  Science?

 

The fact of the matter is, any decision governments make on the virus will attract scorn and hatred from some groups.  Not all groups and not all government decisions.  Foolish, non-science based, biased and related government decisions, aka "executive fiat," unequally applied, brings not "scorn," rather appropriate rebuke.

 

If they remove lockdown and say it's safe to go out there, they will be condemned by scientists, health officials, epidemiologists, WHO, CDC and the United Nations.  There is an in-between; the extremist one end or the other is childish.

 

If they lock us down and contain the virus, they are condemned by groups of the public, some politicians, economists and business owners etc.  Well, they, the experts, now say the private, at home environment is the highest spreader; i.e., the lock down locations so ordered.

 

There is no way to win the argument.  There shouldn't have been an argument, it became a weaponized partisan global tool.  Great.  There is a British strain, an Africa strain, a Brazilian strain, but NO, NO don't say a Chinese virus.  LOL.

 

Instead of conspiracy theories and accusations of control, follow the science and the facts. I see far too many people getting their information from Fox News and the like rather than doing any research for themselves.  What information from Fox New are you referencing?  I suspect you have ZERO references.  However, thanks for confirming your pajamas.

 

Democracy means we all have the power to vote for who makes the decisions in our country.  All power is retained by its' citizenry unless yielded to the state and/or federal government.  That is the little read and understood US Constitution.

 

We did vote, they made decisions. Sure we can disagree with them, but we PUT them in power and why? To MAKE hard decisions on our lives. That is not what nationally elected official are tasked with.  They are not vested with the unlimited authority to "make our hard decisions about our lives.  That's literally their job AND the democracy we fight for every day.  Every day we fight for our freedom from our governments.  We don't have to like the rules, but we do have to follow them and trust in those we gave a democratic mandate to lead.  Wow, what a change.  Prior to a recent date, those elected should NOT be followed?  We don't have to follow their RULES (they are not law), nor Executive Orders (they are NOT LAWS; Congress initiates legislation, conferences with each other, and sends an agreed upon bill to the Executive Branch for vote to become LAW.  Executive Orders are not LAW.

 

The source of this virus would be a good place that I would recommend trying for citizenship experience the full benefit of compliance with government management and control of ones' life.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Formula280SS

[winterbliss]

On 02/02/2021 at 3:15 PM, bucfan2 said:

 

Wow...indeed a pleasure to read your post.  Start to wonder if I'm the only one who feels this way.  'Stay scared' montra rolls on...

Well, at least there's a few of us on here questioning! It truly is beyond my comprehension. Alberta, Canada upped the ante today on quarantines for close contacts re variant...24 days. Listened to a doctor on mainstream news declare that she is optimistic children and babies will be able to get their vaccines by summer. Simply incomprehensible. 

[DCGuy64]

19 hours ago, Formula280SS said:

 

The source of this virus would be a good place that I would recommend trying for citizenship experience the full benefit of compliance with government management and control of ones' life.

The most fascinating thing to me over the past 3 weeks has been the bewildering alacrity with which people who condemned the government over everything are now saying "we have to trust them." More stuff you can't make up. 🙄 And I agree with 100% of what you wrote. About everything.

[NikiPinkston]

In my opinion, there’s indeed a lot of shady stuff going on in the world’s governments, but it’s a shame that this virus became politicized.  Again, just my opinion, but based on what my husband the medical guy tells me, hydroxychloroquine could have saved many, many lives & shortened this pandemic had it not been demonized by the media.  My BIL took it for many years for an auto-immune disease.  It’s a medication that’s been used for decades with almost zero side effects, but most doctors were afraid to or prohibited from prescribing it for treatment of covid.  Thankfully, the vaccine, which was based on previous on-going research, was created in record time and offers us some hope.  I know there have been an extremely small percentage of people who have had severe reactions even, sadly, death, after receiving the vaccine (although no direct cause has been established), but most people do just fine and I think my chances with the vaccine are better than if I caught the virus.  You just don’t know if you’ll be the one who ends up on a ventilator or with lasting damage, or worse.

[Formula280SS]

53 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

The most fascinating thing to me over the past 3 weeks has been the bewildering alacrity with which people who condemned the government over everything are now saying "we have to trust them." More stuff you can't make up. 🙄 And I agree with 100% of what you wrote. About everything.

 

Look at the anger at these people living life.  Their "sentence?"  Deny them Covid vaccines.  "Let them die."  

 

So, do you think while cruising (upon resumption) they'll subject passengers with this same shaming?

 

'Let 'em die': Prominent doctor says maskless Floridians in viral grocery store video should be denied COVID-19 vaccines

 

The doctor said: 'Let 'em die. I'm so tired of these people.'

 

 

IMO, we've got MUCH BIGGER PROBLEMS than the virus.

 

It's been clear for quite a while that, for some, it is more about a hypocritical oath.

Edited February 4, 2021 by Formula280SS

[hftmrock]

18 minutes ago, NikiPinkston said:

In my opinion, there’s indeed a lot of shady stuff going on in the world’s governments, but it’s a shame that this virus became politicized.  Again, just my opinion, but based on what my husband the medical guy tells me, hydroxychloroquine could have saved many, many lives & shortened this pandemic had it not been demonized by the media.  My BIL took it for many years for an auto-immune disease.  It’s a medication that’s been used for decades with almost zero side effects, but most doctors were afraid to or prohibited from prescribing it for treatment of covid.  Thankfully, the vaccine, which was based on previous on-going research, was created in record time and offers us some hope.  I know there have been an extremely small percentage of people who have had severe reactions even, sadly, death, after receiving the vaccine (although no direct cause has been established), but most people do just fine and I think my chances with the vaccine are better than if I caught the virus.  You just don’t know if you’ll be the one who ends up on a ventilator or with lasting damage, or worse.

I believe hydroxychloroquine was not shown effective in any double blind case studies. I do not believe it had anything to do with the side effects. If you found a documented proved double blind study that shows that its effective, I would certainly want to know because as far as I know, there isn't one. This drug has saved lives for other issues and has helped many people but just not for covid that I have seen so far

[winterbliss]

7 minutes ago, NikiPinkston said:

In my opinion, there’s indeed a lot of shady stuff going on in the world’s governments, but it’s a shame that this virus became politicized.  Again, just my opinion, but based on what my husband the medical guy tells me, hydroxychloroquine could have saved many, many lives & shortened this pandemic had it not been demonized by the media.  My BIL took it for many years for an auto-immune disease.  It’s a medication that’s been used for decades with almost zero side effects, but most doctors were afraid to or prohibited from prescribing it for treatment of covid.  Thankfully, the vaccine, which was based on previous on-going research, was created in record time and offers us some hope.  I know there have been an extremely small percentage of people who have had severe reactions even, sadly, death, after receiving the vaccine (although no direct cause has been established), but most people do just fine and I think my chances with the vaccine are better than if I caught the virus.  You just don’t know if you’ll be the one who ends up on a ventilator or with lasting damage, or worse

HCQ....yep....I wonder how many Drs have fallen into the categories you mention....and my next question would be Why is that? I'm Canadian so it has nothing to do with USA politicians from my perspective. 

[Formula280SS]

41 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

I believe hydroxychloroquine was not shown effective in any double blind case studies. I do not believe it had anything to do with the side effects. If you found a documented proved double blind study that shows that its effective, I would certainly want to know because as far as I know, there isn't one. This drug has saved lives for other issues and has helped many people but just not for covid that I have seen so far

 

1 hour ago, NikiPinkston said:

In my opinion, there’s indeed a lot of shady stuff going on in the world’s governments, but it’s a shame that this virus became politicized.  Again, just my opinion, but based on what my husband the medical guy tells me, hydroxychloroquine could have saved many, many lives & shortened this pandemic had it not been demonized by the media.  My BIL took it for many years for an auto-immune disease.  It’s a medication that’s been used for decades with almost zero side effects, but most doctors were afraid to or prohibited from prescribing it for treatment of covid.  Thankfully, the vaccine, which was based on previous on-going research, was created in record time and offers us some hope.  I know there have been an extremely small percentage of people who have had severe reactions even, sadly, death, after receiving the vaccine (although no direct cause has been established), but most people do just fine and I think my chances with the vaccine are better than if I caught the virus.  You just don’t know if you’ll be the one who ends up on a ventilator or with lasting damage, or worse.

 

That is correct.  Many were afraid because of possible litigation and they were also prohibited for the same reason by employers.  Yes, it has been used for decades.

 

We know why it was scorned, black-listed and tainted as dangerous.

 

Did it matter "when" the hydroxychloroquine was introduced?

 

1.  As a precursor?

2.  Out patient, no symptoms?

3.  Out patient, mild symptoms?

4.  In patient, mild symptom?

5.  In patient, severe symptoms?

 

Nope.

 

Only one category of the above was actually agreed up to be true.

 

5.  In patient, severe symptoms?

 

What about  1-4?

 

Well, many pointed the potential benefit, and low risk level, of 2-4, and that 1 was under study for those long-term on the drug.

 

See NJ study just released below.

 

 

38 minutes ago, winterbliss said:

HCQ....yep....I wonder how many Drs have fallen into the categories you mention....and my next question would be Why is that? I'm Canadian so it has nothing to do with USA politicians from my perspective. 

 

See threat of litigation above, add to those two, threat of ethical violation charges by others (doctors included) and loss of license to practice and to earn a living.

 

41 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

I believe hydroxychloroquine was not shown effective in any double blind case studies. I do not believe it had anything to do with the side effects. If you found a documented proved double blind study that shows that its effective, I would certainly want to know because as far as I know, there isn't one. This drug has saved lives for other issues and has helped many people but just not for covid that I have seen so far

 

Well, as per the first response above, such was only the case in situation #5.

 

The rest, 1 through 4, were "forced" to be ignored in favor of 5.  Yes, we do know why.

 

https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-05773-w

 

Conclusions

In this retrospective observational study of SARS-CoV-2 infected non-hospitalized patients hydroxychloroquine exposure was associated with a decreased rate of subsequent hospitalization. Additional exploration of hydroxychloroquine in this mildly symptomatic outpatient population is warranted.

 

 

Could controversial drug benefit COVID patients after all? Some N.J. docs say yes.

 

Updated Feb 04, 2021; Posted Feb 03, 2021

 

"In a recently published study in the peer-reviewed journal BMC Infectious Diseases, the team at Hackensack Meridian found that hydroxychloroquine could help prevent hospitalizations among people who are mildly ill and in the early stages of COVID-19.

 

“It was a surprise because it was a drug that most people had already written off because of the initial studies for hospitalized patients,” Ip said."

[NikiPinkston]

3 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

I believe hydroxychloroquine was not shown effective in any double blind case studies. I do not believe it had anything to do with the side effects. If you found a documented proved double blind study that shows that its effective, I would certainly want to know because as far as I know, there isn't one. This drug has saved lives for other issues and has helped many people but just not for covid that I have seen so far

I think it’s sad that the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for covid was politicized and HCQ was characterized as a dangerous drug when I believe it could have saved lives.  Again, JUST MY OPINION, but based on: (1) numerous anecdotal reports of its use shortening the severity & length of the virus, and saving the lives of some patients who were severely ill; and (2) my husband having prescribed it for his patients for 45 years for various medical conditions with virtually no side effects. 

There is also this recent report from the US Nat'l Library of Medicine, Nat'l Institute of Health, that summarizes a total of 43 medical studies examining the use of HCQ treatment for covid patients that states that "HCQ was found to be consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting," and "no unbiased study found worse outcomes with HCQ use, and no mortality or serious safety adverse events were found.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7534595/

My thinking is that if hydroxychloroquine could save lives with minimal adverse effects & some doctors have had great success with its use, why not use everything we have in our arsenal to fight this virus?  (BTW, remdesevir, which is also effective in the treatment of covid, was promoted as the drug of choice, but a typical treatment costs $3,120 and the supply is very limited, while HCQ costs only $37 & is readily available, so more patients could be treated.)

[DCGuy64]

31 minutes ago, NikiPinkston said:

I think it’s sad that the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for covid was politicized and HCQ was characterized as a dangerous drug when I believe it could have saved lives.  Again, JUST MY OPINION, but based on: (1) numerous anecdotal reports of its use shortening the severity & length of the virus, and saving the lives of some patients who were severely ill; and (2) my husband having prescribed it for his patients for 45 years for various medical conditions with virtually no side effects. 

There is also this recent report from the US Nat'l Library of Medicine, Nat'l Institute of Health, that summarizes a total of 43 medical studies examining the use of HCQ treatment for covid patients that states that "HCQ was found to be consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting," and "no unbiased study found worse outcomes with HCQ use, and no mortality or serious safety adverse events were found.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7534595/

My thinking is that if hydroxychloroquine could save lives with minimal adverse effects & some doctors have had great success with its use, why not use everything we have in our arsenal to fight this virus?  (BTW, remdesevir, which is also effective in the treatment of covid, was promoted as the drug of choice, but a typical treatment costs $3,120 and the supply is very limited, while HCQ costs only $37 & is readily available, so more patients could be treated.)

I'm going to tread lightly here because I know the rules about discussing politics on this site. I'll just say I think it's a pity when promising drug treatments take a backseat to politics because some people in government and the media have a vendetta against a certain former president.

I'm also of the opinion that any human being with a terminal illness ought to have access to any drug he/she can afford, regardless of how many (or how few) studies have been done on it. That kind of thing makes me very angry. I heard people over and over again poo-poo HCQ because "it's not proven to be safe." Yeah, well if my father were dying of COVID and HCQ was the only thing available, then I don't give a damn about whether someone else thinks it's unsafe. It's not their decision!

 

[hftmrock]

4 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'm going to tread lightly here because I know the rules about discussing politics on this site. I'll just say I think it's a pity when promising drug treatments take a backseat to politics because some people in government and the media have a vendetta against a certain former president.

I'm also of the opinion that any human being with a terminal illness ought to have access to any drug he/she can afford, regardless of how many (or how few) studies have been done on it. That kind of thing makes me very angry. I heard people over and over again poo-poo HCQ because "it's not proven to be safe." Yeah, well if my father were dying of COVID and HCQ was the only thing available, then I don't give a damn about whether someone else thinks it's unsafe. It's not their decision!

 

I could be wrong but I don't think anyone banned its use. it was just publicized that there is no approved double blind study (gold standard) that said it showed any improvement whatsoever and there was a few studies done. I assume if a hospital wants to prescribe it, they could have. but I assume no one should feel this will significantly help.. if it does... great

 

there was a political figure that said that HCQ was a miracle drug that could cure everyone and I think most others were trying to do damage control to make sure that mentality was corrected

 

 

that's how I saw it from the scientific documentation I saw. I certainly could be wrong

[luckyinpa]

with canada shot down for the year maybe we will get some good data from them since they are isolating still

[NikiPinkston]

11 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'm going to tread lightly here because I know the rules about discussing politics on this site. I'll just say I think it's a pity when promising drug treatments take a backseat to politics because some people in government and the media have a vendetta against a certain former president.

I'm also of the opinion that any human being with a terminal illness ought to have access to any drug he/she can afford, regardless of how many (or how few) studies have been done on it. That kind of thing makes me very angry. I heard people over and over again poo-poo HCQ because "it's not proven to be safe." Yeah, well if my father were dying of COVID and HCQ was the only thing available, then I don't give a damn about whether someone else thinks it's unsafe. It's not their decision!

 

Thank you, DCGuy64, I agree completely!

[DCGuy64]

10 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

I could be wrong but I don't think anyone banned its use. it was just publicized that there is no approved double blind study (gold standard) that said it showed any improvement whatsoever and there was a few studies done. I assume if a hospital wants to prescribe it, they could have. but I assume no one should feel this will significantly help.. if it does... great

 

there was a political figure that said that HCQ was a miracle drug that could cure everyone and I think most others were trying to do damage control to make sure that mentality was corrected

 

 

that's how I saw it from the scientific documentation I saw. I certainly could be wrong

Not an outright ban, but as I recall, a number of doctors urged people not to turn to it for fear that there'd be a run on HCQ and there wouldn't be enough for those who already took it. I don't know of any political figure who said HCQ was a miracle drug and, as you say, "could cure everyone." I only know of one political figure who related stories he'd heard from people who claimed that hydroxychloroquine had personally helped them. That's not the same as boasting of a miracle cure. There's a difference between relaying a story you got from someone else, and claiming it yourself.

Edited February 4, 2021 by DCGuy64
fixed a word

[hftmrock]

9 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

. I don't know of any political figure who said HCQ was a miracle drug and, as you say, "could cure everyone." I only know of one political figure who related stories he'd heard from people who claimed that hydroxychloroquine that personally helped them

The son of a high political figure (the highest), posted a video of someone claiming it was a 'sure-fire cure' and his tweet was 'MUST WATCH'. Twitter and YouTube took it down for false claims

 

these are more than just his opinion

Edited February 4, 2021 by hftmrock

[NikiPinkston]

8 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

I could be wrong but I don't think anyone banned its use. it was just publicized that there is no approved double blind study (gold standard) that said it showed any improvement whatsoever and there was a few studies done. I assume if a hospital wants to prescribe it, they could have. but I assume no one should feel this will significantly help.. if it does... great

 

there was a political figure that said that HCQ was a miracle drug that could cure everyone and I think most others were trying to do damage control to make sure that mentality was corrected

 

 

that's how I saw it from the scientific documentation I saw. I certainly could be wrong

The use of HCQ for treatment of covid was actually banned in several states, including Ohio, Texas, Idaho and Nevada. 

https://www.cbs17.com/community/health/coronavirus/one-state-has-banned-the-sale-of-hydroxychloroquine-to-treat-covid-19/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-pharmacies/states-work-to-limit-prescriptions-of-potential-coronavirus-drugs-idUSKBN2190XC

Here in California, doctors & pharmacists were told they were breaking the law if they prescribed or filled prescriptions of HCQ for covid treatment.

https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2020-04/board-of-pharmacy-covid-19-prescribing.pdf

The previous link actually shows actions taken by state pharmacy boards regarding HCQ for covid treatment so you may find more states that banned its use or made it extremely difficult to prescribe.

[DCGuy64]

Just now, hftmrock said:

The son of a high political figure (the highest), posted a video of someone claiming it was a 'sure-fire cure' and his tweet was 'MUST READ'. Twitter and YouTube took it down for false claims

 

these are more than just his opinion

OK, but we're getting farther afield here. Maybe this isn't how you meant it, but "the son of a high political figure" isn't the same as the political figure himself. Regardless of who said it, if Patient A takes a particular drug and it works for him, it's not for me to question him. Does it mean it'll work for everyone? No. But does it mean I can discredit him because it might not work for everyone? Again, no.

It's none of my business. People are allowed to make their own health decisions (or should be, anyway). That's how I see it.

 

[hftmrock]

1 minute ago, DCGuy64 said:

OK, but we're getting farther afield here. Maybe this isn't how you meant it, but "the son of a high political figure" isn't the same as the political figure himself. Regardless of who said it, if Patient A takes a particular drug and it works for him, it's not for me to question him. Does it mean it'll work for everyone? No. But does it mean I can discredit him because it might not work for everyone? Again, no.

It's none of my business. People are allowed to make their own health decisions (or should be, anyway). That's how I see it.

 

and as I said... if a hospital wanted to prescribe it they should but because of people claiming it was a sure fire cure... many scientists went to the media to stop that rhetoric and had to publicly say that there was no proven studies that was shown any effectiveness. The scientists and the media had to set the record straight once political figures touted it as a sure fire cure.

 

if someone wanted it and the hospital wanted to provide it.. Im sure it was provided and people on this thread said they know it was prescribed many times

[Formula280SS]

47 minutes ago, hftmrock said:

there was a political figure that said that HCQ was a miracle drug that could cure everyone and I think most others were trying to do damage control to make sure that mentality was corrected

 

that's how I saw it from the scientific documentation I saw. I certainly could be wrong

 

Bingo.

 

Respondents chose not to simply put it in the correct context, that for early virus therapeutic purposes (such as the examples 1-4, and specifically not for 5, severe stage cases in hospitalization) it was medically valuable; but not, the conscious and planned decision was to taunt and require a dogma that "it was completely and totally bad."  That was the mentality; and that mentality, which possibly let tens of thousands of people suffer and die at the earlier stages 1-4, "for their own sick and demented purposes (and enjoyment)," is disgusting.

 

A note from memories of not really that long ago, the goal and ambition of the control and correction of the mentality of the populace is not really a good thing.

[hftmrock]

1 minute ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Bingo.

 

Respondents chose not to simply put it in the correct context, that for early virus therapeutic purposes (such as the examples 1-4, and specifically not for 5, severe stage cases in hospitalization) it was medically valuable; but not, the conscious and planned decision was to taunt and require a dogma that "it was completely and totally bad."  That was the mentality; and that mentality, which possibly let tens of thousands of people suffer and die at the earlier stages 1-4, "for their own sick and demented purposes (and enjoyment)," is disgusting.

 

A note from memories of not really that long ago, the goal and ambition of the control and correction of the mentality of the populace is not really a good thing.

I dont think they went to try to make it completely and totally bad. They needed people to know it was not the miracle cure others were touting so in order to get to the middle , then needed to stress that NO proven studies proved this medication helped at all. So they kept saying that.

 

if it had not been for them stressing that no scientific study proved any effectiveness , there would have been a shortage of HQC and people who needed it for proven cures (not covid), would now not be able to get it causing more issues and not helping the people with covid even if they took it (According to proven scientific studies).

 

 

[Formula280SS]

1 minute ago, hftmrock said:

I dont think they went to try to make it completely and totally bad. They needed people to know it was not the miracle cure others were touting so in order to get to the middle , then needed to stress that NO proven studies proved this medication helped at all. So they kept saying that.

 

if it had not been for them stressing that no scientific study proved any effectiveness , there would have been a shortage of HQC and people who needed it for proven cures (not covid), would now not be able to get it causing more issues and not helping the people with covid even if they took it (According to proven scientific studies).

 

 

 

Nope.

[hftmrock]

1 minute ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Nope.

I appreciate your opinion... I have mine

 

agree to disagree.. apologies for going off topic regarding cruising.. Im done with this line of thought.

 

Hopefully cruising starts sooner rather than later with the proper protocols