https://thedonald.win/p/4FWoXTT/so-why-are-we-being-whipped-...
"It escaped the Wuhan BL4 facility and was likely a bug/bio weapon Chinese were working on in that facility using our tax & trade deficit dollars"
Seems a reliable source!
EDIT: Also from the user's post history:
"I'm not an academic so fuck all that citation waste of time"
OP above you is merely revealing this non-reliability.
Top OP might be correct but zero sources makes me immediately question every single argument. Dude can't be bothered to name ONE SOURCE! One! A paper. A Person. An organization....anything. Nope! Nada. Zilch.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2020/04/05/wuhan-f...
"All that hilariously misguided and counterproductive criticism the media piled on chloroquine (purely for political reasons) as a viable treatment will now go down as the biggest Fake News blunder to rule them all. The media actively engaged their activism to fight ‘bad orange man’ at the cost of thousands of lives. Shame on them."
The media critique part reads more like a political rant than scientific discourse.
> [The evidence is] not only piling up but now leading to a general field-level consensus backed up by a few previously little-known studies that we’ve had it all wrong the whole time.
Pardon my French, but name the studies or GTFO.
If that is the case, why are you attacking his lack of credentials and politics instead of his hypothesis?
edit: here is an actual paper saying the same thing the medium post is
EDIT: She also noted that many of the patients were breathing fine, but their pulse ox would just drop and drop.
EDIT2: really? downvotes for asking a questions and seeking info?
I would be fascinated to hear their take on this article.
But I'm not a medical researcher and this is not medical research- it's more of a guess.
I'm looking forward to some expert comments here on whether this theory has any basis in reality.
If the man is talking nonsense, it should be easy to refute him. It would also serve as a great "teaching moment" to help everyone sharpen their BS detectors.
This is how online communities work. Small number of moderators fighting off an endless stream of BS.
We can't encourage discussion on life or death matters when they are shared without even citing a single source! There is no debate, just emotional pandering.
Do you have a link you can share about medium blocking it? thanks!
https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/nyc-doctor-says-coronavirus-ve...
https://www.the-hospitalist.org/hospitalist/article/220301/c...
Essentially these researchers claim that they modeled the corona virus surface proteins and found that they will bind to hemoglobin and cause it to release the iron atom - making it non-functional. This leads to the other symptoms of COVID-19. Given the severity of the outbreak it is certainly a hypothesis that others should test to validate or discredit. But based on scientific analysis, not just twitter snarking.
https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surf...
I found this to be an interesting article and true or false Doesn’t it fall under the Freedom of Speech... I sent this link to several people I know that are in the medical industry one of which is a brilliant doctor on the front lines saving lives at NCH hospital in Naples Florida... but before she sees it it is no longer available...
I track this to this thread and see everyone debating everything from politics to science... yet why was this removed I. The first place? I’m sorry but when my mother raised me she was adamant about the point that we could say anything we wanted to anyone that we wanted and as long as it didn’t hurt anybody we were free to do so… Now I’m finding it very disturbing situation where information that I felt was important and needed to be looked at by people that I needed to trust to tell me if it was correct or not etc. etc. now it’s gone and I come to this group debating… And thank goodness I found out about this.
Share the actual studies! Debate those. Don't encourage the very armchair scientists the author derides in his article.... The author of the article is one too!
You don't go to your friend and open a debate about how you should treat your cancer, you go to your doctor and start the conversation there.
COVID-19: Attacks the 1-Beta Chain of Hemoglobin and Captures the Porphyrin to Inhibit Human Heme Metabolism SOURCE: https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surf...
if a crank takes the theory of relativity to heart, does that invalidate it?
strong pedants aren't necessarily strong thinkers
Absolutely not. Reread my comment. There are experts who describe the theory of relativity and link to papers supporting it. It is far better to link to articles from those experts than to articles from cranks who happen to get relativity correct but intersperse their articles with conspiracy theories.
A Flat Earther might write an article about geometry where the geometry is valid and then mix in unsubstantiated claims about the shape of the Earth. Would you say that is a good article about geometry? No. You would link to an article about geometry that sticks to just the facts.
I got my information from the academic article (https://chemrxiv.org/ndownloader/files/22129965). Then I saw this submission on HN that I felt was an OK summary of it. Then I saw your ilk flag it.
An interesting hypothesis is an interesting hypothesis--even when it does not come from our pill-pushing, astroturfing, tell-us-more-about-harry-and-meghan-while-the-bombs-are-falling mainstream media.
Yes, we can not have a discussion spawned from a crank conspiracy theorist about general relativity even if his ideas are sound.
You are advocating upvoting articles from blithering conspiracy theorists just because part of the article has something that is based in science. You should have just submitted the actual science article instead.
I have advocated two things:
1. Not flagging/censoring/de-platforming people for their screwy opinions. Most people aren't stupid, and can assess statements well enough without your assistance. If you downvoted him because you disagree, great! That's what votes are for. However, flagging this is an abuse. His synopsis was mostly consistent with the research, and there was nothing uncivil in his "blithering."
2. If an idea is incorrect, attack the idea, not the person. Going after the guy's politics and his (lack of) credentials is just a lazy, thinly-veiled, ad hominem when the idea is of an objective nature.
And if you are going to ding him on credentials (not that you should), what exactly are yours?
I just said that it's a low quality article. There are many high quality articles on hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin treatment (https://lmgtfy.com/?q=hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin), some of which discuss additional treatments that are also undergoing testing based on the blood disease hypothesis, so there is no reason to upvote this one.