Who has an extra pulse oximeter?

I really don't understand the vitamin C and D supplements in a poor tropical country. Mangos, pineapple, papaya, jackfruit... basically any fruit commonly ate here is rich is vitamin C. Two large mangos or 200 grams of pineapple will meet your daily vitamin c daily needs (and those are quality natural sources for it, the same can't be said for many supplements). For vitamin D you need 10-30 minutes in the sun (something the average poor Filipinos get much more than).

These supplements are a complete waste of money for the vast majority of people.

It IS misinformation. Stop it.

**********:

If doctor's are prescribing it they are wrong.

Lianhua:

https://doh.gov.ph/doh-press-releas...EATMENTS-AND-CALLS-FOR-RESIGNATION-OF-THE-SOH

Vitamin D:

However, it could potentially help for those with low vitamin D levels so if doctor's here are giving it it is likely after lab results come back showing the person has low levels of it. Also, if a patient is confined to the hospital they likely aren't getting enough sun, so it may make sense to supplement. The context matters.

Vitamin C:

If you are concerned about vitamin c eat some mango, pineapple or jackfruit. Don't waste your money on supplements as this is not what should be prescribed in a hospital/clinical setting.

Azithromycin:

Maybe it helps but this is a controlled substance that requires a doctor's prescription. It is illegal to fake a prescription. You should not be stocking up on this drug as it has many other uses, you will be screwing over people who actually need it and you will also be breaking the law if you obtain it without a prescription. (And if you can't afford to go to the doctor how exactly do you plan on getting a prescription for it?)

You will not continue to spread false or misleading information and you will not encourage people to break the law here. Your time here will be short if you insist on continuing to do so.

Didn't you just completely dismiss a source that said 95% of cases here were asymptomatic because they got the number of hospital beds wrong? And then never went on to provide a source showing the original statement being questioned was incorrect. Why the change in logic here? If we were to follow your previous logic everything said in OPs post should be invalidated because of the misinformation.

 

Ok. So if a source provides two statements and statement A is false then statement B must also be false?

I'm still confused by this logic. If the OP gave a false statement then wouldn't that automatically make her statement about what the other source said also invalid? After all, one false statement discredits everything else a person says. But yet the second statement is actually a valid treatment. Maybe if a single person/source is citing information from two secondary sources perhaps that person/source can make both a false and true statement and all statements made shouldn't be outright dismissed?

Kind of like gathering the number of hospital beds from one source and gathering the number of asymptomatic patients from another source? One may be incorrect, the other may be correct. One wouldn't automatically invalidate (or validate) the other.

Maybe you can help me understand why the percentage of asymptomatic patients (statement A) was automatically dismissed and assumed to be false because the number of covid hospital beds (statement B) was a false statement.

This may be good sound medical advice for a doctor to make. Not for an untrained person to decide on their own at home.