• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Let's take a moment to thank Pfizer, Moderna & the academic Elites at WFU: forcing mRNA into young athletes veins "It could have been so much worse"

80deacon said:
The articles only open if you go to the link
Click to expand...
Here:

scholar.google.com

Peter A McCullough, MD, MPH

Truth for Health Foundation - Cited by 66.584 - Internal Medicine - Cardiology - Nephrology
scholar.google.com scholar.google.com

or more targeted, here:

Google Scholar

scholar.google.com scholar.google.com

Peter A McCullough is a cardiologist and has authored or co-authored 100s of papers, mostly on the cardio-vascular system, kidney disease and surgical procedures. He's had dozens of papers of COVID effects on the heart and on red blood cells since 2020, and a handful on Ivermectin. All of his ivermectin research has suffered from incredibly small sample sizes, like this one with 26 cases: https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/full/10.2217/fmb-2022-0014. It sincerely looks to me like McCullough is, for some reason, using the credibility and credentials built through decades of solid research on heart and circulatory system disease and treatment to signal boost some uncertain but maybe wort pursing further research on ivermectin and Covid.

So, instead of relying on a series of small sample size methodologically flawed studies, I'd suggest reading a review paper or a meta analysis paper. Meta-analyses essentially analyze the analyses and combine the findings to look for patterns across the series of small sample size studies. Here is one, for example, that finds:
Most RCTs had some concerns or high risk of bias, mostly due to lack of concealment of the randomization sequence and allocation, lack of blinding and high number of missing cases. Ivermectin did not show an effect in reducing mortality (RR = 0.76; 95%CI: 0.52–1.11) or mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.74; 95%CI: 0.48–1.16). This effect was consistent when comparing ivermectin vs. placebo, and ivermectin associated with SOC vs. SOC, as well as in sensitivity analysis.
Click to expand...
bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com

Systematic review and meta-analysis of ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19: evidence beyond the hype - BMC Infectious Diseases

Background The role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 is still under debate, yet the drug has been widely used in some parts of the world, as shown by impressive market data. The available body of evidence may have changed over the last months, as studies have been retracted and...
bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com

It is important to seek a diversity of research on these kinds of emerging issues where sample sizes are difficult to accrue and haste leads to weakened statistical design.
 
80deacon said:
The major point is quacks don't get 888 research articles peer reviewed and published.

Once downloaded in their entirety, any of these articles can be read by MDs or medical researchers who can interpret what the studies find.
Click to expand...
Having 888 articles in my field would actually prove that you ARE a quack because that’s a ridiculous number. I know some fields are different. It’s also quite easy to get “published” in some fields as long as you are willing to pay.
 
deacdixieboy said:
Having 888 articles in my field would actually prove that you ARE a quack because that’s a ridiculous number. I know some fields are different. It’s also quite easy to get “published” in some fields as long as you are willing to pay.
Click to expand...
He is documented as highest peer reviewed articles published in his field (Cardiology) author. The medical center that list his articles say 888. It ought to impress you enough to at least consider listening to some of what he's concluded.I'm not a researcher but my Wake degree leads me to believe "peer reviewed" is not on the level of paying for something to be published. All his Ivermectin work is not totally small sample size, IIRC.
 
Last edited:
deacdixieboy said:
Having 888 articles in my field would actually prove that you ARE a quack because that’s a ridiculous number. I know some fields are different. It’s also quite easy to get “published” in some fields as long as you are willing to pay.
Click to expand...
Especially if you are the editor of a pay-to-publish journal, like Dr. McCullough is of the pay-to-publish journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, where > 75 of his 688 publications that appear in PubMed were published. It costs $2200 to publish an article in this journal (the editor likely has a significant or full discount). It's odd because the articles have titles like, "Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Multidrug Treatment of COVID 19," which isn't the type of article one would expect in a cardiology review journal. I looked at a few of the "articles" and they are just brief editorials with no new data.
 
80deacon said:
He is documented as highest peer reviewed articles published in his field (Cardiology) author. The medical center that list his articles say 888. It bought to impress you enough to at least consider listening to some of what he's concluded.I'm not a researcher but my Wake degree leads me to believe "peer reviewed" is not on the level of paying for something to be published. All his Ivermectin work is not totally small sample size, IIRC.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are many pay-to-publish journals that use peer review. In fact, most do. These journals are called open-access; the pay-to-publish model allows them to be free to the public without a subscription. In theory, this is a great model, and there are some high-quality open-access journals. However, the model has been corrupted, and there are now thousands of these "journals" that make money through people that are willing to pay to have low-quality papers published. I get about 15 spam emails a day (they go directly into my junk mail) from these kinds of journals asking me to submit an article, and this happens to everyone that has published in standard journals.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
I could publish this dumb as shit thread if I paid some predatory journal the publishing fee, today I received 26 such requests. I’ve narrowed the list so please let me know which editor you would like me to correspond with, article@onlinemypaper.org, editor@remedyjj.com, nia@scholarzway.com, editor@ajohnsopubj.com, editor@accroapubj.com, and hayenancy.medocs@gmail.com
Click to expand...
Ha! I have some of those same ones in my inbox too (and I doubt we are in the same field).
 
80deacon said:
He is documented as highest peer reviewed articles published in his field (Cardiology) author. The medical center that list his articles say 888. It bought to impress you enough to at least consider listening to some of what he's concluded.I'm not a researcher but my Wake degree leads me to believe "peer reviewed" is not on the level of paying for something to be published. All his Ivermectin work is not totally small sample size, IIRC.
Click to expand...
I’m just a mediocre high school English teacher, but based on the subsequent posts, I think this is irony.
 
80deacon said:
The major point is quacks don't get 888 research articles peer reviewed and published.

Once downloaded in their entirety, any of these articles can be read by MDs or medical researchers who can interpret what the studies find.
Click to expand...
Trust me - this could not be more false.
 
Trained in Dallas at UT-Southwestern where there are actual leaders in medicine and cardiology. PM was the punch line of nearly every joke. He is a joke, a fraud, a pay-me-to-say bullshitter who has been run out of every medical society imaginable. Also - I trained with the HIGHEST published cardiologist in the world in New Orleans. He is a great friend. But I’ve watched and seen what gets deemed “peer-reviewed” and what gets passed along as “academic”. So give me a fucking break and stay in your lane. Not sure what kind of work you do, but I’m happy to belittle it and besmirch it after I do some quick googling to prove my disproven points. Nothing personal against you, but I don’t take my car to the dentist when my carburetor fails.
 
Rafi said:
Especially if you are the editor of a pay-to-publish journal, like Dr. McCullough is of the pay-to-publish journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, where > 75 of his 688 publications that appear in PubMed were published. It costs $2200 to publish an article in this journal (the editor likely has a significant or full discount). It's odd because the articles have titles like, "Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Multidrug Treatment of COVID 19," which isn't the type of article one would expect in a cardiology review journal. I looked at a few of the "articles" and they are just brief editorials with no new data.
Click to expand...
Have you heard that the reason COVID can be lethal is it's a major threat to organs, especially damaged or weak organs. I caught COVID in Europe and survived fairly easily with monoclonal antibodies, but it damaged my kidneys about 10 %.

COVID also affects the heart, hence McCollough's interest. BTW. European studies have found a correlation between myocarditis (and other heart problems) and COVID/ COVID vaccines.

(McCullough is also an Epidemiologist)
 
80deacon said:
Have you heard that the reason COVID can be lethal is it's a major threat to organs, especially damaged or weak organs. I caught COVID in Europe and survived fairly easily with monoclonal antibodies, but it damaged my kidneys about 10 %.

COVID also affects the heart, hence McCollough's interest. BTW. European studies have found a correlation between myocarditis (and other heart problems) and COVID/ COVID vaccines.

(McCullough is also an Epidemiologist)
Click to expand...

I’m having a hard time telling if this is a parody account. If it is, bravo, well played.
I’m going to assume it is not…

Yes, I am aware that COVID can affect a variety of organ systems. I’m a physician and have cared for many people with COVID.

An article about the effects of COVID on the cardiovascular system would be expected in the journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, whereas an article on hydroxychloroquine for COVID would not (that would go to an infectious disease or general medicine journal). I looked at the articles by McCullough in this journal - they are brief editorials on topics not typically found in cardiovascular journals.
 
deac03 said:
Trained in Dallas at UT-Southwestern where there are actual leaders in medicine and cardiology. PM was the punch line of nearly every joke. He is a joke, a fraud, a pay-me-to-say bullshitter who has been run out of every medical society imaginable. Also - I trained with the HIGHEST published cardiologist in the world in New Orleans. He is a great friend. But I’ve watched and seen what gets deemed “peer-reviewed” and what gets passed along as “academic”. So give me a fucking break and stay in your lane. Not sure what kind of work you do, but I’m happy to belittle it and besmirch it after I do some quick googling to prove my disproven points. Nothing personal against you, but I don’t take my car to the dentist when my carburetor fails.
Click to expand...
How old of a car do you drive? 😁
 
Rafi said:
I’m having a hard time telling if this is a parody account. If it is, bravo, well played.
I’m going to assume it is not…

Yes, I am aware that COVID can affect a variety of organ systems. I’m a physician and have cared for many people with COVID.

An article about the effects of COVID on the cardiovascular system would be expected in the journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, whereas an article on hydroxychloroquine for COVID would not (that would go to an infectious disease or general medicine journal). I looked at the articles by McCullough in this journal - they are brief editorials on topics not typically found in cardiovascular journals.
Click to expand...
As stated above McCullough is also an Epidemiologist .
 
Rafi said:
Especially if you are the editor of a pay-to-publish journal, like Dr. McCullough is of the pay-to-publish journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, where > 75 of his 688 publications that appear in PubMed were published. It costs $2200 to publish an article in this journal (the editor likely has a significant or full discount). It's odd because the articles have titles like, "Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Multidrug Treatment of COVID 19," which isn't the type of article one would expect in a cardiology review journal. I looked at a few of the "articles" and they are just brief editorials with no new data.
Click to expand...
To make sure I understand, you are saying less than 75 of the 688 articles you found by him are in the "pay' journals, correct? So, over 600 are not in such a category? Can you find out how many, if any, are in a journal such as JAMA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top