- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cancer breakthroughs
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:01 pm to N2cars
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:01 pm to N2cars
Talking to an NP I know,she works for a PCP.She told me a patient of theirs has lung cancer, is taking chemo but wasn’t responding to it.
Patient started taking ivermectin on her own,didn’t tell her oncologist.Her tumors are shrinking and her breathing is better.
I’v read these stories but first one I’ve heard locally from someone I know.
Patient started taking ivermectin on her own,didn’t tell her oncologist.Her tumors are shrinking and her breathing is better.
I’v read these stories but first one I’ve heard locally from someone I know.
0
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:30 pm to castorinho
quote:
Missing the 5% part from both those links....
quote:
Those are estimated percentages from data collected in the industry as a whole
Reading is hard
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:35 pm to WigSplitta22
It's 65%, based on estimated percentages from data collected in the industry as a whole.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:45 pm to guedeaux
quote:
So much ignorance is put on display by home-office scientists in threads like these.
No kidding. You would think one would know by now how medical care in the US is handled. All you need to do is go to your primary care doctor and see if they can treat you for something minor without throwing cures at the symptoms. This is the same thing but on a smaller scale but for some reason you think because this is a life/death illness they aren't going to do the same for you this time around especially when there are millions of dollars on the line. The fact of the matter is more money should always be thrown at curative therapies vs life prolongment drugs. It doesn't take a mathmetician to figure that out.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:50 pm to castorinho
quote:
It's 65%, based on estimated percentages from data collected in the industry as a whole.
65% of the 40% of allowable R&d funding for oncology drugs?
This post was edited on 8/4/25 at 1:54 pm
Posted on 8/4/25 at 1:58 pm to WigSplitta22
quote:FYI, if a percentage is given then a subset of that percentage is given, then the second percentage is a % of the subset.
65% of the 40% of allowable funding for oncology drugs?
(e.g, if in a sample 100 students, 50 are girls and 10 are black girls, you would say 50% are female and only 20% of those are black). So your "5%" really should have been 12.5%.
Back to the topic at hand, you don't get to just throw out a number like that in a discussion like this and not back it up. Which is the point I was making with my last message.
Posted on 8/4/25 at 2:25 pm to WigSplitta22
quote:
Reading is hard
It evidently is, for some.
Page 12 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News