Dr. Simone Gold Fired from ER Doc Job for appearing in Pro-HCQ Video

Balrog

Senior Member
Do you think all of these Doctors who have been treating with it are lying about the results of treating with it?
The doctors that I know in real life never seem as confident that it works as the ones on the internet do. I am cautious to believe anyone who feels extremely strongly about it one way or another.

In the absence of conclusive proof, my comments are based on my experiences and my perceptions. Others may have had different experiences, and different perceptions, and thus may come to a different conclusion. That's why we need unbiased studies. And those don't seem to be happening.
 
Last edited:
God bless her & her peers for doing what they can to try to potentially help those encountering COVID-19.



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...-hcq-not-effective-10-late-treatment-studies/

51 Global Studies Find HCQ Effective in Treating COVID-19 — 16 Find HCQ NOT Effective — But 10 of Those Are Late Treatment Studies!

** Pre-exposure prophylaxis (or PrEP) — 100% success
** Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (or PEP) — 100% success
** Early Treatment — 100% success
** Late Treatment — 62%

 
So doctors that treat cancer for example, are aware of best methods of treating and are able to utilize it without fear of reprisal even if it does not involve chemo and radiation or chemo?
Not sure where you are going. They would potentially be made aware of new studies and recommendations for treating cancer. Many variables and biases may be present in that continuing education.

I have been to some CME's sponsored by a certain robotic surgical instrument manufacturer that was so absurdly biased in favor of their products that I just played on my lap top, ate their free food for 2 days, and waited on Delta to start boarding the plane back to Atlanta.

Speakers are required to disclose any relationships they have with manufacturers at CME events. Its important to pay attention to those.
 
Last edited:
Not sure where you are going. They would potentially be made aware of new studies and recommendations for treating cancer. Many variables and biases may be present in that continuing education.

I have been to some CME's sponsored by a certain robotic surgical instrument manufacturer that was so absurdly biased in favor of their products that I just played on my lap top, ate their free food for 2 days, and waited on Delta to start boarding the plane back to Atlanta.

Speakers are required to disclose any relationships they have with manufacturers at CME events. Its important to pay attention to those.
I was talking more about alternative methods that don’t require big pharma to get involved. Proven effective treatments that don’t expose the patient with a treatment that actually causes cancer.

It is my understanding that the Standard of American Care won’t consider any methods that aren’t chemo or radiation.

Accelerated Vitamin C treatments, lymphatic messages, mistletoe extract, Laetrile, coffe enemas, And Rick Simpson oil, all have been proven in other countries to make cancer disappear. I could tell you a long story about a member here who is my best friend who was diagnosed with stage 4 squamous cell carcinoma in his neck And how he beat it, but it would take too long.
 
I was talking more about alternative methods that don’t require big pharma to get involved. Proven effective treatments that don’t expose the patient with a treatment that actually causes cancer.

It is my understanding that the Standard of American Care won’t consider any methods that aren’t chemo or radiation.

Accelerated Vitamin C treatments, lymphatic messages, mistletoe extract, Laetrile, coffe enemas, And Rick Simpson oil, all have been proven in other countries to make cancer disappear. I could tell you a long story about a member here who is my best friend who was diagnosed with stage 4 squamous cell carcinoma in his neck And how he beat it, but it would take too long.
In general, if you recommend only alternative treatments like that, yes, you can be sued for malpractice because they are not considered standard of care. For about $15,000 per testimony, the plaintiff's attorney will be able to find experts to testify against you.

That said, you can do any of those alternative treatments in addition to standard treatments, and not have violated the standard of care. And if a patient fails to follow your recommendations for standard treatment in lieu of alternative treatments, the doctor still has not violated the standard of care because he made the recommendation.
 
Last edited:
In general, if you recommend only alternative treatments like that, yes, you can be sued for malpractice because they are not considered standard of care. For about $15,000 per testimony, the plaintiff's attorney will be able to find experts to testify against you.

That said, you can do any of those alternative treatments in addition to standard treatments, and not have violated the standard of care. And if a patient fails to follow your recommendations for standard treatment in lieu of alternative treatments, the doctor still has not violated the standard of care because he made the recommendation.
But if you elect the alternative treatments the oncologist will not give you a pet scan to determine if the treatments are working unless you agree to chemo or radiation. I know this because I witnessed it first hand.
 
But if you elect the alternative treatments the oncologist will not give you a pet scan to determine if the treatments are working unless you agree to chemo or radiation. I know this because I witnessed it first hand.
I don't know the details of the situation you witnessed of course. If the alternative treatment had not worked, and the cancer had progressed, would the patient have been willing to do chemo or radiation?

If the answer is no, then I am not sure there is much point to get the scan except for reassurance.

If the answer is yes, then I would say they should have ordered the scan.

Did the alternative therapy work?

Also, I would point out that sometimes things happen that astound me in medicine and make me know that an almighty God is in control and miracles happen that I cannot explain.
 
I don't know the details of the situation you witnessed of course. If the alternative treatment had not worked, and the cancer had progressed, would the patient have been willing to do chemo or radiation?

If the answer is no, then I am not sure there is much point to get the scan except for reassurance.

If the answer is yes, then I would say they should have ordered the scan.

Did the alternative therapy work?

Also, I would point out that sometimes things happen that astound me in medicine and make me know that an almighty God is in control and miracles happen that I cannot explain.
He was basically forced to do chemo and radiation and he had to agree to it before they would do a pet scan. When they did the pet scan prior to the treatment they found that the tumor had shrunk by 2/3. He advised him how he did it and they prescribed chemo and radiation anyway. It almost killed him.

That seems criminal to me.
 
So doctors that treat cancer for example, are aware of best methods of treating and are able to utilize it without fear of reprisal even if it does not involve chemo and radiation or chemo?
I have been involved with low dosage mV photon radiation treatment for COVID for months now. Radiation can be a good thing.
 

MudDucker

Moderator
Staff member
Lancet study debunked ... Ford Foundation Study still stands. I sure don't see how HcQ would hurt most folks and if infected, I would take it under Dr.'s advise. I would also talk to him about the nebulized steroid treatment, which makes sense to me, since this infection causes so much lung inflammation.
 
Top