Coronavirus

So I got a message from the Texas Medical Board today. It asks for Covid deaths to be reported within 10 days of death and that’s not happening now. So daily death reports are truly inaccurate.

Nothing is accurate about Covid.
 
So I got a message from the Texas Medical Board today. It asks for Covid deaths to be reported within 10 days of death and that’s not happening now. So daily death reports are truly inaccurate.
Nothing is accurate about Covid.

Yes, iis ,but the DSHS is using that ruling to continue to inflate death numbers. Of course they are saying deaths counts have been under reported. However, the new direction is to use only the death certificate to categorize. Before the city and county health officials had to confirm. Now the state org will just use the certificates. Also, remember back in April the CDC instructed hospitals to add COVID to death certificates if they suspected the patient had COVID from symptoms.

Also remember that the last time Texas DSHS took over for counties the case counts went up for similar reasons. I posted the video from Collin County which explains this. Not sure anyone took the time to watch. But it is probably the most important 45 minutes you will spend if you want to understand what has been happening in our health organizations.
 
Damn, he sure has changed his tune on this.
Saw a story this morning that showed a tweet from him demanding a sit-down with DHS to discuss a 'cease fire' and withdrawal. How does he get to negotiate a 'cease fire' unless he concedes being involved in the acts of violence?
 
Can't wait to see the results of the Dr. Stella Immanuel research. First results involve dream sex with demons/witches, reptilians, and medical use of alien DNA. I mean she could be the poster child for 2020.
 
Now that I agree with. It may help, I don't know. I'm not a doc.

The success rate I believe is 100% when done by a certain time.....or when other factors outside of the virus are involved. There is a point of no return that the HCQ won’t help. That’s my understanding.

I also read where a doctor stated that the testing the researchers did on the HCQ were flawed due to the amount of high dosage they used to test. His words were “if you use a toxic level to test, you get a toxic result”.
 
The success rate I believe is 100% when done by a certain time.....or when other factors outside of the virus are involved. There is a point of no return that the HCQ won’t help. That’s my understanding.

I also read where a doctor stated that the testing the researchers did on the HCQ were flawed due to the amount of high dosage they used to test. His words were “if you use a toxic level to test, you get a toxic result”.

It looks to be about 50% if taken early. Yeah, I heard one doctor say that on some of the studies they gave patients enough HCQ to kill a gorilla.
 
Twitter calls itself a platform that is now behaving like a publisher. They are not supposed to be doing this crap by law.

Even if they're a publisher, they can block videos, censor people, etc. The big impact of being a publisher is that they become responsible for what people post. If you post on Twitter that OUBubba blows goats (of course truth is always a defense to a defamation case), he could not only sue you, he could sue Twitter if it's deemed a publisher.
 
Even if they're a publisher, they can block videos, censor people, etc. The big impact of being a publisher is that they become responsible for what people post. If you post on Twitter that OUBubba blows goats (of course truth is always a defense to a defamation case), he could not only sue you, he could sue Twitter if it's deemed a publisher.

So comparing this situation to the bakery refusing to serve the gay couple. The courts ruled they couldn’t discriminate against the gay couple. Wouldn’t this be a form of discrimination when they are clearly censoring one side but not the other?
 
Mr D
Explain further
Are you saying they and other big tech can get away with what they are doing.?

It depends on what you mean by "get away with" it. It's not illegal, so yes, they can get away with it. However, it could have legal repercussions in other ways if they are deemed a publisher. It would be far easier for them to get sued if someone posts something defamatory.
 
So comparing this situation to the bakery refusing to serve the gay couple. The courts ruled they couldn’t discriminate against the gay couple. Wouldn’t this be a form of discrimination when they are clearly censoring one side but not the other?

There isn't a general law against discrimination. There are laws against discrimination for specified reasons. The baker was sued, because in Colorado it's illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of sexual orientation.
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top