Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine

[FNQ]

The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.

So now that you know that HCQ has never had any positive effect - and was pushed by people for quite some time - is it fair to call that discredited?

And now that youve seen 2 studies - one you propped up yourself - that show remdesivir has potential as a treatment option and is still the base building block of cocktails with the potential upside of neutralizing the spread of COVID once inside the body.. would you characterize its status re:COVID as promising?

Or is there more bias that needs exposing?

[WarriorGM]

The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.

So now that you know that HCQ has never had any positive effect - and was pushed by people for quite some time - is it fair to call that discredited?

And now that youve seen 2 studies - one you propped up yourself - that show remdesivir has potential as a treatment option and is still the base building block of cocktails with the potential upside of neutralizing the spread of COVID once inside the body.. would you characterize its status re:COVID as promising?

Or is there more bias that needs exposing?

What do you mean by discredited? In terms of popularity? Sure. In terms of irrefutable evidence? That's a different question.

HCQ alone looks refuted. HCQ and zinc? Unclear. The study I see cited showing the combination is ineffective overall is the Egyptian RCT. Statistically insignificant but the absolute result if looked at leaned towards the combo being positive rather than negative. There was an earlier larger trial that showed benefit but had corticosteroids confounding the results. What I find interesting is that these HCQ+zinc studies didn't show adverse results as other studies did of HCQ alone. So it was the zinc that helped? But zinc alone doesn't seem to do much either. The results don't paint a consistent picture of what one would expect if this was a cut and dried affair.

Remdesivir looks as promising as Aricept is for Alzheimers. No idea why it gets the coverage it does given the puny benefit if any it may provide other than it is a cash cow. Interferon seems to have a similar profile if taken early but just isn't as sexy not being the new new thing.

[FNQ]

The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.

So now that you know that HCQ has never had any positive effect - and was pushed by people for quite some time - is it fair to call that discredited?

And now that youve seen 2 studies - one you propped up yourself - that show remdesivir has potential as a treatment option and is still the base building block of cocktails with the potential upside of neutralizing the spread of COVID once inside the body.. would you characterize its status re:COVID as promising?

Or is there more bias that needs exposing?

What do you mean by discredited? In terms of popularity? Sure. In terms of irrefutable evidence? That's a different question.

HCQ alone looks refuted. HCQ and zinc? Unclear. The study I see cited showing the combination is ineffective overall is the Egyptian RCT. Statistically insignificant but the absolute result if looked at leaned towards the combo being positive rather than negative. There was an earlier larger trial that showed benefit but had corticosteroids confounding the results. What I find interesting is that these HCQ+zinc studies didn't show adverse results as other studies did of HCQ alone. So it was the zinc that helped? But zinc alone doesn't seem to do much either. The results don't paint a consistent picture of what one would expect if this was a cut and dried affair.

No you are correct here. HCQ+zinc didn't have negative side effects in COVID patients related to COVID. Still had those pesky heart palpatations issues tho. The kinds that can cause long-term damage?

Let me be clear since apparently I wasn't before: HCQ, in any form, in any way, has not been shown to have any kind of positive affect against COVID. With or without zinc. Which btw, is only administered if its determined the patient's zinc level is low enough to need it. Like.. its baffling to me that you are basically assuming all doctors, especially the ones who've now specialized in vaccinations, wouldn't think of these basic things after a full year under the pandemic. Both trials reference zinc levels for that very reason. Every trial has, that I've seen. I'm sure there's some rinkadink ones that didn't reference it directly, but zinc has always been accounted for in the most meaningful ones. And then even some trials exceeded normal dosages and found the same results: zinc does not help HCQ's efficacy, because HCQ doesnt have any.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695238/

Remdesivir looks as promising as Aricept is for Alzheimers. No idea why it gets the coverage it does given the puny benefit if any it may provide other than it is a cash cow. Interferon seems to have a similar profile but just isn't as sexy not being the new new thing.

How in the hell is shortening the amount of time someone could be contagious a 'puny benefit'? You realize that when looking for treatment solutions, not only is that particular building block the most important, its also the hardest to identify?

Interferon has a pathway to being helpful but it can also be extremely destructive. Of course, its 'upside' is pretty much exactly where remdevisir is now, so I dont know why that's particularly relevant here, unless we're trying to discredit remdevisir as the be-all/end-all of treatment options, when the argument has simply been that's it been proven to be effective as a treatment building block, which makes it far more useful than HCQ. Funny enough Remdevisir is ahead of HCQ by the same distance that Remdevisir is ahead of a doorknob, or a lucky rabbit's foot.

[michaelm]

So now that you know that HCQ has never had any positive effect - and was pushed by people for quite some time - is it fair to call that discredited?

And now that youve seen 2 studies - one you propped up yourself - that show remdesivir has potential as a treatment option and is still the base building block of cocktails with the potential upside of neutralizing the spread of COVID once inside the body.. would you characterize its status re:COVID as promising?

Or is there more bias that needs exposing?

What do you mean by discredited? In terms of popularity? Sure. In terms of irrefutable evidence? That's a different question.

HCQ alone looks refuted. HCQ and zinc? Unclear. The study I see cited showing the combination is ineffective overall is the Egyptian RCT. Statistically insignificant but the absolute result if looked at leaned towards the combo being positive rather than negative. There was an earlier larger trial that showed benefit but had corticosteroids confounding the results. What I find interesting is that these HCQ+zinc studies didn't show adverse results as other studies did of HCQ alone. So it was the zinc that helped? But zinc alone doesn't seem to do much either. The results don't paint a consistent picture of what one would expect if this was a cut and dried affair.

No you are correct here. HCQ+zinc didn't have negative side effects in COVID patients related to COVID. Still had those pesky heart palpatations issues tho. The kinds that can cause long-term damage?

Let me be clear since apparently I wasn't before: HCQ, in any form, in any way, has not been shown to have any kind of positive affect against COVID. With or without zinc. Which btw, is only administered if its determined the patient's zinc level is low enough to need it. Like.. its baffling to me that you are basically assuming all doctors, especially the ones who've now specialized in vaccinations, wouldn't think of these basic things after a full year under the pandemic. Both trials reference zinc levels for that very reason. Every trial has, that I've seen. I'm sure there's some rinkadink ones that didn't reference it directly, but zinc has always been accounted for in the most meaningful ones. And then even some trials exceeded normal dosages and found the same results: zinc does not help HCQ's efficacy, because HCQ doesnt have any.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695238/

Remdesivir looks as promising as Aricept is for Alzheimers. No idea why it gets the coverage it does given the puny benefit if any it may provide other than it is a cash cow. Interferon seems to have a similar profile but just isn't as sexy not being the new new thing.

How in the hell is shortening the amount of time someone could be contagious a 'puny benefit'? You realize that when looking for treatment solutions, not only is that particular building block the most important, its also the hardest to identify?

Interferon has a pathway to being helpful but it can also be extremely destructive. Of course, its 'upside' is pretty much exactly where remdevisir is now, so I dont know why that's particularly relevant here, unless we're trying to discredit remdevisir as the be-all/end-all of treatment options, when the argument has simply been that's it been proven to be effective as a treatment building block, which makes it far more useful than HCQ. Funny enough Remdevisir is ahead of HCQ by the same distance that Remdevisir is ahead of a doorknob, or a lucky rabbit's foot.

In Australia as well as so called political commentators pushing Ivermectin on TV on the basis of in vitro data we have an actual member of parliament, although a ‘backbencher’ ie not considered to be worthy of being involved in anything important pushing his own takes on Covid epidemiology and treatment which he claims are scientifically based on his own review of scientific papers; interestingly he has engaged in debate with the authors of some of these papers and disputed their interpretations of their own papers as opposed to his. I am sure his background as a furniture salesman prepared him well to critically evaluate scientific literature.

[FNQ]

What do you mean by discredited? In terms of popularity? Sure. In terms of irrefutable evidence? That's a different question.

HCQ alone looks refuted. HCQ and zinc? Unclear. The study I see cited showing the combination is ineffective overall is the Egyptian RCT. Statistically insignificant but the absolute result if looked at leaned towards the combo being positive rather than negative. There was an earlier larger trial that showed benefit but had corticosteroids confounding the results. What I find interesting is that these HCQ+zinc studies didn't show adverse results as other studies did of HCQ alone. So it was the zinc that helped? But zinc alone doesn't seem to do much either. The results don't paint a consistent picture of what one would expect if this was a cut and dried affair.

No you are correct here. HCQ+zinc didn't have negative side effects in COVID patients related to COVID. Still had those pesky heart palpatations issues tho. The kinds that can cause long-term damage?

Let me be clear since apparently I wasn't before: HCQ, in any form, in any way, has not been shown to have any kind of positive affect against COVID. With or without zinc. Which btw, is only administered if its determined the patient's zinc level is low enough to need it. Like.. its baffling to me that you are basically assuming all doctors, especially the ones who've now specialized in vaccinations, wouldn't think of these basic things after a full year under the pandemic. Both trials reference zinc levels for that very reason. Every trial has, that I've seen. I'm sure there's some rinkadink ones that didn't reference it directly, but zinc has always been accounted for in the most meaningful ones. And then even some trials exceeded normal dosages and found the same results: zinc does not help HCQ's efficacy, because HCQ doesnt have any.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695238/

Remdesivir looks as promising as Aricept is for Alzheimers. No idea why it gets the coverage it does given the puny benefit if any it may provide other than it is a cash cow. Interferon seems to have a similar profile but just isn't as sexy not being the new new thing.

How in the hell is shortening the amount of time someone could be contagious a 'puny benefit'? You realize that when looking for treatment solutions, not only is that particular building block the most important, its also the hardest to identify?

Interferon has a pathway to being helpful but it can also be extremely destructive. Of course, its 'upside' is pretty much exactly where remdevisir is now, so I dont know why that's particularly relevant here, unless we're trying to discredit remdevisir as the be-all/end-all of treatment options, when the argument has simply been that's it been proven to be effective as a treatment building block, which makes it far more useful than HCQ. Funny enough Remdevisir is ahead of HCQ by the same distance that Remdevisir is ahead of a doorknob, or a lucky rabbit's foot.

In Australia as well as so called political commentators pushing Ivermectin on TV on the basis of in vitro data we have an actual member of parliament, although a ‘backbencher’ ie not considered to be worthy of being involved in anything important pushing his own takes on Covid epidemiology and treatment which he claims are scientifically based on his own review of scientific papers; interestingly he has engaged in debate with the authors of some of these papers and disputed their interpretations of their own papers as opposed to his. I am sure his background as a furniture salesman prepared him well to critically evaluate scientific literature.

wasnt too familiar with that name, but it rang a bell.. it turns out it was used with HCQ in trials early on and was shut down in phase 1.

If nothing else, COVID has shown us that the people often times making the decisions that affect us.. shouldn't. Being an expert these days means you're more likely to wind up on Adam Ruins Everything over having an actual impact on the world in your field. Meanwhile if you're a moderately successful lawyer (but not too successful, I must stress that) then you are often times the one making the worlds most important decisions

[Old_Blue]

[Samurai]

Love that t-shirt; where can I buy one?

[Old_Blue]

Love that t-shirt; where can I buy one?

There's a lot with the same phrase. This particular one comes from this site...

https://teeherivar.com/product/i-got-vaccinated-but-i-still-want-some-of-you-to-stay-away-from-me-pro-vaccination/

[WarriorGM]

The Solidarity trial REAFFIRMED that Remdesevir increased the timeline and helped speed along recovery, but did not find that it improved survival percentages.

It does? You'll have to show me how you arrived at that conclusion because what I see is this:

"CONCLUSIONS These Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, Lopinavir and Interferon regimens appeared to have little or no effect on hospitalized COVID-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation and duration of hospital stay."

I don't see a reaffirmation there.

Let me be clear since apparently I wasn't before: HCQ, in any form, in any way, has not been shown to have any kind of positive affect against COVID. With or without zinc. Which btw, is only administered if its determined the patient's zinc level is low enough to need it. Like.. its baffling to me that you are basically assuming all doctors, especially the ones who've now specialized in vaccinations, wouldn't think of these basic things after a full year under the pandemic. Both trials reference zinc levels for that very reason. Every trial has, that I've seen. I'm sure there's some rinkadink ones that didn't reference it directly, but zinc has always been accounted for in the most meaningful ones. And then even some trials exceeded normal dosages and found the same results: zinc does not help HCQ's efficacy, because HCQ doesnt have any.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695238/

There have been many retrospective studies that showed HCQ could be promising. Your statement therefore as given strictly speaking is false.
https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/what-we-know-now-about-hydroxychloroquine-treat-covid-19

With your comment regarding zinc only needing to be administered if a patient's zinc level is low you are displaying your ignorance of the proposed way hydroxychloroquine and zinc could work in concert and why studying them in combination would possibly be useful.

Referencing again that one Egyptian study. Again note it didn't show hydroxychloroquine as net negative which would be expected if it was consistent with the other studies that showed hydroxychloroquine was a net negative. The addition of zinc seems to have changed matters. A lot is being put on the shoulders of that one moderately powered Egyptian RCT in terms of this question.

I'm not even here to argue that hydroxychloroquine is promising. I'm just here to say that it's roughly on the same level as remdesivir in effectiveness which the WHO basically confirms by not recommending either of them and that The New York Times is biased when it props up one but rails against the other. The way you seek to villainize HCQ and praise remdesivir is simply another symptom of the perversion going on in the American body politic.

[FNQ]

It does? You'll have to show me how you arrived at that conclusion because what I see is this:

"CONCLUSIONS These Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, Lopinavir and Interferon regimens appeared to have little or no effect on hospitalized COVID-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation and duration of hospital stay."

I don't see a reaffirmation there.

You are again reading conclusions. That "little" effect? That was remdesivir. It does not help mortally sick patients. Nothing has so far. What it does - and what the study and all subsequent studies have found - is that it accelerates the incubation time and ends it faster. I feel like I've said that a couple times, but its hard to remember what craziness I've been responding to between here and the CA board.

There have been many retrospective studies that showed HCQ could be promising. Your statement therefore as given strictly speaking is false.
https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/what-we-know-now-about-hydroxychloroquine-treat-covid-19

And those studies were done after August of 2020. And what came of them? Maybe the trials I showed you in November 2020 could shed some light. Maybe the subsequent studies that refused to believe can show that.

With your comment regarding zinc only needing to be administered if a patient's zinc level is low you are displaying your ignorance of the proposed way hydroxychloroquine and zinc could work in concert and why studying them in combination would possibly be useful.

Again, refer to the study that showed that even adding zinc, while not hurting the patient as HCQ did initially, did nothing to accelerate the timeline in any consistent fashion.

Referencing again that one Egyptian study. Again note it didn't show hydroxychloroquine as net negative which would be expected if it was consistent with the other studies that showed hydroxychloroquine was a net negative. The addition of zinc seems to have changed matters. A lot is being put on the shoulders of that one moderately powered Egyptian RCT in terms of this question.

HCQ tests have ranged from net neutrals to net negatives. I want to point out that the person saying I'm showing my ignorance seems to think that ranges of outcomes don't exist.

I'm not even here to argue that hydroxychloroquine is promising. I'm just here to say that it's roughly on the same level as remdesivir in effectiveness which the WHO basically confirms by not recommending either of them and that The New York Times is biased when it props up one but rails against the other. The way you seek to villainize HCQ and praise remdesivir is simply another symptom of the perversion going on in the American body politic.

Good, because its not. The WHO recommended that remdesivir by itself is not a good treatment, which it isn't. Its a building block. I seek to villainize those who push HCQ, not HCQ itself which is a fine medication. And screw the Democrats, screw Biden, screw the Republicans, and screw Trump. All of them suck. I dont give a **** about the politics you constantly try to bring up as some justification for your nonsense.

[WarriorGM]

You are again reading conclusions. That "little" effect? That was remdesivir. It does not help mortally sick patients. Nothing has so far. What it does - and what the study and all subsequent studies have found - is that it accelerates the incubation time and ends it faster. I feel like I've said that a couple times, but its hard to remember what craziness I've been responding to between here and the CA board.

Was that Remdesivir? You sure it wasn't interferon? Can you link to the portion of the study that says this?

And those studies were done after August of 2020. And what came of them? Maybe the trials I showed you in November 2020 could shed some light. Maybe the subsequent studies that refused to believe can show that.
[...]
HCQ tests have ranged from net neutrals to net negatives. I want to point out that the person saying I'm showing my ignorance seems to think that ranges of outcomes don't exist.

The only study brought up so far that came afterwards that addresses the question about HCQ and zinc from what I can tell is the Egyptian one. Then you still have studies like this one from last month:

https://www.scmp.com/coronavirus/asia/article/3131090/coronavirus-singapore-study-suggests-hydroxychloroquine-and-throat

The earlier Langone Health study was net positive.

Good, because its not. The WHO recommended that remdesivir by itself is not a good treatment, which it isn't. Its a building block. I seek to villainize those who push HCQ, not HCQ itself which is a fine medication. And screw the Democrats, screw Biden, screw the Republicans, and screw Trump. All of them suck. I dont give a **** about the politics you constantly try to bring up as some justification for your nonsense.

The certainty with which medical professionals in the past have stated uncertain matters and then was publicized by the media has led to gross medical incompetence that is on par with even this covid catastrophe. If you do not understand that and the skepticism people have because of that, prepare to be perpetually disappointed.

[and1GS]

Yeh doctors are dumb that's why I get all my medical advice from realgm posters.

[michaelm]

The Solidarity trial REAFFIRMED that Remdesevir increased the timeline and helped speed along recovery, but did not find that it improved survival percentages.

It does? You'll have to show me how you arrived at that conclusion because what I see is this:

"CONCLUSIONS These Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, Lopinavir and Interferon regimens appeared to have little or no effect on hospitalized COVID-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation and duration of hospital stay."

I don't see a reaffirmation there.

Let me be clear since apparently I wasn't before: HCQ, in any form, in any way, has not been shown to have any kind of positive affect against COVID. With or without zinc. Which btw, is only administered if its determined the patient's zinc level is low enough to need it. Like.. its baffling to me that you are basically assuming all doctors, especially the ones who've now specialized in vaccinations, wouldn't think of these basic things after a full year under the pandemic. Both trials reference zinc levels for that very reason. Every trial has, that I've seen. I'm sure there's some rinkadink ones that didn't reference it directly, but zinc has always been accounted for in the most meaningful ones. And then even some trials exceeded normal dosages and found the same results: zinc does not help HCQ's efficacy, because HCQ doesnt have any.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7695238/

There have been many retrospective studies that showed HCQ could be promising. Your statement therefore as given strictly speaking is false.
https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/what-we-know-now-about-hydroxychloroquine-treat-covid-19

With your comment regarding zinc only needing to be administered if a patient's zinc level is low you are displaying your ignorance of the proposed way hydroxychloroquine and zinc could work in concert and why studying them in combination would possibly be useful.

Referencing again that one Egyptian study. Again note it didn't show hydroxychloroquine as net negative which would be expected if it was consistent with the other studies that showed hydroxychloroquine was a net negative. The addition of zinc seems to have changed matters. A lot is being put on the shoulders of that one moderately powered Egyptian RCT in terms of this question.

I'm not even here to argue that hydroxychloroquine is promising. I'm just here to say that it's roughly on the same level as remdesivir in effectiveness which the WHO basically confirms by not recommending either of them and that The New York Times is biased when it props up one but rails against the other. The way you seek to villainize HCQ and praise remdesivir is simply another symptom of the perversion going on in the American body politic.

The only relevant words in this whole post are “retrospective studies”.

[Old_Blue]

Yeh doctors are dumb that's why I get all my medical advice from realgm posters.

Not just any posters though...You really gotta seek out the advice of those with 10-20 posts per day for years on end. With all that time spent posting (as opposed to practicing medicine), they must be good.

[michaelm]

It does? You'll have to show me how you arrived at that conclusion because what I see is this:

"CONCLUSIONS These Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, Lopinavir and Interferon regimens appeared to have little or no effect on hospitalized COVID-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation and duration of hospital stay."

I don't see a reaffirmation there.

You are again reading conclusions. That "little" effect? That was remdesivir. It does not help mortally sick patients. Nothing has so far. What it does - and what the study and all subsequent studies have found - is that it accelerates the incubation time and ends it faster. I feel like I've said that a couple times, but its hard to remember what craziness I've been responding to between here and the CA board.

There have been many retrospective studies that showed HCQ could be promising. Your statement therefore as given strictly speaking is false.
https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/what-we-know-now-about-hydroxychloroquine-treat-covid-19

And those studies were done after August of 2020. And what came of them? Maybe the trials I showed you in November 2020 could shed some light. Maybe the subsequent studies that refused to believe can show that.

With your comment regarding zinc only needing to be administered if a patient's zinc level is low you are displaying your ignorance of the proposed way hydroxychloroquine and zinc could work in concert and why studying them in combination would possibly be useful.

Again, refer to the study that showed that even adding zinc, while not hurting the patient as HCQ did initially, did nothing to accelerate the timeline in any consistent fashion.

Referencing again that one Egyptian study. Again note it didn't show hydroxychloroquine as net negative which would be expected if it was consistent with the other studies that showed hydroxychloroquine was a net negative. The addition of zinc seems to have changed matters. A lot is being put on the shoulders of that one moderately powered Egyptian RCT in terms of this question.

HCQ tests have ranged from net neutrals to net negatives. I want to point out that the person saying I'm showing my ignorance seems to think that ranges of outcomes don't exist.

I'm not even here to argue that hydroxychloroquine is promising. I'm just here to say that it's roughly on the same level as remdesivir in effectiveness which the WHO basically confirms by not recommending either of them and that The New York Times is biased when it props up one but rails against the other. The way you seek to villainize HCQ and praise remdesivir is simply another symptom of the perversion going on in the American body politic.

Good, because its not. The WHO recommended that remdesivir by itself is not a good treatment, which it isn't. Its a building block. I seek to villainize those who push HCQ, not HCQ itself which is a fine medication. And screw the Democrats, screw Biden, screw the Republicans, and screw Trump. All of them suck. I dont give a **** about the politics you constantly try to bring up as some justification for your nonsense.

Exactly. But at least Biden doesn’t seem to be making medical pronouncements. Trump making a statement about chloroquine has absolutely no relevance to whether it is a good treatment for Covid, particularly given he has also mused about UV and bleach.

And as you say the notion that all the doctors in the world would eschew chloroquine because Trump recommended it is ludicrous. There are plenty of doctors who are conservative politically apart from anything else, although perhaps not a high proportion in public health.

I am not sure the WHO have covered themselves with glory in all this though, they did seem to me to be engaging in politics early on, and were incorrect for whatever reason about mask wearing.

[michaelm]

Double

[FNQ]

Yeh doctors are dumb that's why I get all my medical advice from realgm posters.

Not just any posters though...You really gotta seek out the advice of those with 10-20 posts per day for years on end. With all that time spent posting (as opposed to practicing medicine), they must be good.

Join date: 2006
Total posts: 54k
Total posts per day: 10.1



Although I'll say I never practiced medicine. I was a rehab specialist and the reason I've spent so much time learning the medicine side is because we're frequently at odds with doctors and you have to come correct or they wont even hear you out

[RichmondWarrior]

Why are liberals always afraid to die ??? It’s because y’all don’t believe in Jesus Christ lol you wanna be ur own god and play god for everyone else

[Sleepy51]

Why are liberals always afraid to die ??? It’s because y’all don’t believe in Jesus Christ lol you wanna be ur own god and play god for everyone else

The ease with which the evangelical wing nut utterly ignores the existence of the other major world religions never ceases to impress

[FNQ]

Why are liberals always afraid to die ??? It’s because y’all don’t believe in Jesus Christ lol you wanna be ur own god and play god for everyone else

You'd better have an empty medicine cabinet, no insurance, and not a single trip to the doctor or dentist in your history, lest you might come off as a hypocrite