2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 382.87

-0.8%

Nov 13 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: alanrs who wrote (176611)	8/17/2021 10:22:35 AM
From: arun gera	1 Recommendation Recommended By Snowshoe Read Replies (2) of 217754

<I also hope that existing drugs are effective, the study out of hospitals in Argentina seem to indicate that Ivermectin is useful. I wonder about the obfuscation.> Because anyone who has has been involved in drug development will tell you that out of everything that works in-vitro, very few work in-vivo. So if HCQ and Ivermectin work in-vitro does not mean they will work in-vivo. Thats just a starting point. There is much more burden of proof required. Let me explain it in another language. Trump says "why don't we inject people with disinfectant and shine sunlight inside the body". He does not understand in-vitro vs in-vivo. In-vitro disinfectant and sunlight kill Covid virus. In-vivo they don't or if they do with side effects (think chemotherapy and radiation for cancer). Just because HCQ and Ivermectin have fancy sounding chemical and medical names unlike bleach we all know, does not make their efficacy in-vivo any better than household disinfectant and UV. -Arun

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next