3 ms·

Any discussion of HCQ that ignores zinc, a key part of the original treatment protocol, is missing the mark. Rationale: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/

Any discussion of HCQ that ignores zinc, a key part of the original treatment protocol, is missing the mark. Rationale: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306987720306435 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030698772... Trial: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32930657/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32930657/

gridlockd 6y ago
A paper published in Nature is being criticized as "too neutral" for pointing out that the evidence is inconclusive. My comment is getting heavily downvoted, despite being properly sourced. No counter-argument or evidence is presented. Why? Does nobody care to explain themselves?
- scns 6y ago
  Maybe your negative tone or the low information density. I guess just dropping links is frowned upon. You could have written a short summary or at least paste the TLDR from these papers and then link to the sources.