Talk:Vladimir Zelenko
From Conservapedia
The doctor said on his YouTube video he diagnosed his patients by using the CDC(?) test or symptoms of the disease. I’d like to know the ratio of tests to symptom diagnosis. This cure seems to good to be true. People should also realize a treatment is not the same as a vaccine. Most of Big Pharma does not care to research vaccines for the simple reason a drug given to a person once or twice in their life is not a money maker. For example, metformin is a drug used by millions of diabetics daily for the rest of their lives after first use. I’d also like to see better references. WND and Gateway Pundit are not reliable sources, others should be found.
It should also be mentioned, Dr. Irina Gelman, the Orange County health commissioner, said on March 19 that it was “highly irresponsible” for Zelenko to try to extrapolate the results of 14 tests to apply to the entire village population. [1] --JLind (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2020 (EDT)
- Fourteen? Dr. Zelenko claimed he treated hundreds with the regimen! VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 02:45, 30 March 2020 (EDT)
- Please read the link provided. The doctor was admonished for extrapolating the results of 14 tests to apply to the entire village population. --JLind (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- WND and Gateway Pundit are better (and more reliable and credible) sources for this article than CNN, MSNBC, the nightly network newscasts, the New York Times or the rest of the liberal media (and that includes the link you provided, which is tied to USA Today, a liberal newspaper). Congratulations, you just discredited your argument by relying on a non-credible liberal media source. Northwest (talk) 04:34, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- Amazing how you can simply wave your hand like a Jedi and claim someone’s credibility is discredited by saying LIBERAL! No need to explain why the article in question is suspect, just say LIBERAL! Your way of arguing is incredibly easy. LIBERAL! LIBERAL! Then take a break. Wow.--JLind (talk) 22:44, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- All you're doing by protesting in that way against the truth (which isn't helping your argument either, BTW) is proving my point, as well as showing your refusal to take responsibility for posting sources that resort to lies based on politics and ideology (which all liberal news sites do), all to suit their narratives and their personal opinions which they try to masquerade as "news". Northwest (talk) 23:34, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- What about these two references? Wonder if you have a problem with a Jewish website critiquing a Jewish doctor? [2][3] --JLind (talk) 22:57, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- Kind of a moot point at this point. Dr. Zelenko's method has been approved by the FDA for more testing and distribution already. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:12, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- You might also want to tread carefully here, JLind - some folks might not interpret what you're resorting to or saying here too well. Northwest (talk) 23:34, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- NW: So now I’m protesting the TRUTH. How so? Simply pointing out the skepticism within the medical community concerning Dr Zelenko’s practices is… what? Liberal? Kind of boggles the mind. I could accept constructive criticism on your part, but your mindless knee-jerk reaction to anything that questions your preconceived partisan political opinions, is quite frankly, humorous. I know you can do better. Let’s see you make a reasoned argument against the professional opinions of Zelenko’s colleagues. Anything else is a waste of time, but based on your previous comments, I predict you will do no such thing. As for treading lightly? Yawn… I’m operating well within the commandments. But if you want me gone from Conservapedia, I’m sure there is an administrator who will oblige. RobS: What are you talking about? What method? What distribution? Are you talking about the off-label use of medications? The same method other doctors around the world are using? The same off-label use the FDA has authorized for eons? --JLind (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- To use an old saying, JLind - methinks thou doth protesteth too much (especially with your accusation of "knee-jerk reactions" when that's exactly how you're reacting to what I'm telling you regarding your use of liberal media sources like USA Today and NBC News here, as well as an attempt by you to provoke a response which you could then use as an excuse to make a false accusation of "anti-Semitism" regarding your earlier comment "Wonder if you have a problem with a Jewish website critiquing a Jewish doctor?", even though this has nothing to do with either religion or ethnicity, which you're trying to make this about with that comment). That won't cut it here. Northwest (talk) 18:15, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Eh? Get a grip. I’m not the one protesting. I originally expressed skepticism concerning the good doctor’s methods and I referenced the opinion of another doctor. What have you done? Simply used your confirmation bias to dismiss alleged liberal news organizations for being, in your mind, liberal. You are right about one thing, I am trying to provoke a response, and it has nothing to do with ‘anti-Semitism’. I really wish you would actually try to get your point across by using sound judgement and critical thinking instead of screeching LIBERAL! Have a nice day.--JLind (talk) 18:26, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Denying that that's what you tried to do after you got called out for it, then trying to deflect the blame with projection and use of moral equivalence (i.e. your unjustified criticism of conservative news sources), and even denying that the liberal media is liberally biased (or even liberal), are typical liberal tactics and smacks, once again, of your refusal to take responsibility for your actions - and you're still proving my point about what you're doing. The reason you're reacting like this is because you know I'm right about what I said and you don't like it. Northwest (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Denying… deflect… projection… moral equivalence? Haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about. I must admit, I’m mildly amused by our little conversation. But seriously, not once have you tried to explain why my skepticism, backed up by the opinion of a medical doctor, is wrong. Explain to me where I criticized a conservative source (did I really deny something about the media being liberal)? I looked through the entire exchange and not once did I see such a thing. I think you’re reading into my words and seeing something that is not there. Once again, what was wrong with quoting a doctor that disagreed with Dr Zelenko? It’s a simple request, yet for some strange reason you refuse to answer. I think it is because you have no defense for your silly assertions. --JLind (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- "Haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about" - Which is only because you refuse to get the idea.
"Explain to me where I criticized a conservative source (did I really deny something about the media being liberal)?" - Your claims of WND and the Gateway Pundit being "not reliable sources" and dismissing them solely because they happen to be conservative news outlets is itself criticism of those sources (especially without justification), and your statement "Simply used your confirmation bias to dismiss alleged liberal news organizations for being, in your mind, liberal" is an attempt to deny that the liberal media is both liberal and liberal-biased (and falls right in line with liberals attempting to deny being liberal because of the stigma liberalism now carries).
"I looked through the entire exchange and not once did I see such a thing" - Because as liberals typically do, you refuse to see what you don't want to see.
"I think you’re reading into my words and seeing something that is not there" - Does this look familiar to you?
"Once again, what was wrong with quoting a doctor that disagreed with Dr Zelenko?" - Plenty, when you sought to use that as bait to elicit a response which you'd then use to make a false accusation of anti-Semitism, and you then got mad and went into denial when the bait wasn't taken and I told you why.
"I think it is because you have no defense for your silly assertions" - Oh, like when liberals resort to what you're doing now when you get called on the carpet about the tactics you use to deflect from criticism of the liberal media sources you use for the lies, fear-mongering and opinionating they resort to to push a politically-motivated narrative? Calling that criticism "silly assertions" because you don't like how it exposes the liberal media's tactics (as well as yours here) for what they really are does nothing for your argument and only sinks it further. Northwest (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2020 (EDT)- Where did I ever claim WND and Gateway Pundit were unreliable because they ‘happen to be conservative news outlets’? You’re putting words into my mouth, I demand an apology. Where did I accuse anyone of anti-Semitism? Why do you think I’m mad? Like I said before, I find this entire exchange amusing. I don’t know if you have a reading comprehension problem, maybe English is not your first language, or if you’re flat out… whatever. Please get a grip. At the risk of acting redundant, please detail exactly why you had a problem with me using the words of one doctor to critique another doctor. Screaming LIBERAL!!! ad nauseum is not the answer. It would be the same if I simply dismissed all of your responses by using the exact same words except, replacing liberal with CONSERVATIVE!!!!!!!! Get the idea? I know you don’t, but please try. --JLind (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
- One: You're not getting an apology. Two: You're in no position to be demanding anything here. Three: Continuing to engage in liberal behavior as you're doing and behaving childishly in response to having the truth told to you is getting you nowhere. Four: Enjoy the weekend off. Northwest (talk) 21:24, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
- Where did I ever claim WND and Gateway Pundit were unreliable because they ‘happen to be conservative news outlets’? You’re putting words into my mouth, I demand an apology. Where did I accuse anyone of anti-Semitism? Why do you think I’m mad? Like I said before, I find this entire exchange amusing. I don’t know if you have a reading comprehension problem, maybe English is not your first language, or if you’re flat out… whatever. Please get a grip. At the risk of acting redundant, please detail exactly why you had a problem with me using the words of one doctor to critique another doctor. Screaming LIBERAL!!! ad nauseum is not the answer. It would be the same if I simply dismissed all of your responses by using the exact same words except, replacing liberal with CONSERVATIVE!!!!!!!! Get the idea? I know you don’t, but please try. --JLind (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
- "Haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about" - Which is only because you refuse to get the idea.
- Denying… deflect… projection… moral equivalence? Haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about. I must admit, I’m mildly amused by our little conversation. But seriously, not once have you tried to explain why my skepticism, backed up by the opinion of a medical doctor, is wrong. Explain to me where I criticized a conservative source (did I really deny something about the media being liberal)? I looked through the entire exchange and not once did I see such a thing. I think you’re reading into my words and seeing something that is not there. Once again, what was wrong with quoting a doctor that disagreed with Dr Zelenko? It’s a simple request, yet for some strange reason you refuse to answer. I think it is because you have no defense for your silly assertions. --JLind (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Denying that that's what you tried to do after you got called out for it, then trying to deflect the blame with projection and use of moral equivalence (i.e. your unjustified criticism of conservative news sources), and even denying that the liberal media is liberally biased (or even liberal), are typical liberal tactics and smacks, once again, of your refusal to take responsibility for your actions - and you're still proving my point about what you're doing. The reason you're reacting like this is because you know I'm right about what I said and you don't like it. Northwest (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Eh? Get a grip. I’m not the one protesting. I originally expressed skepticism concerning the good doctor’s methods and I referenced the opinion of another doctor. What have you done? Simply used your confirmation bias to dismiss alleged liberal news organizations for being, in your mind, liberal. You are right about one thing, I am trying to provoke a response, and it has nothing to do with ‘anti-Semitism’. I really wish you would actually try to get your point across by using sound judgement and critical thinking instead of screeching LIBERAL! Have a nice day.--JLind (talk) 18:26, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- To use an old saying, JLind - methinks thou doth protesteth too much (especially with your accusation of "knee-jerk reactions" when that's exactly how you're reacting to what I'm telling you regarding your use of liberal media sources like USA Today and NBC News here, as well as an attempt by you to provoke a response which you could then use as an excuse to make a false accusation of "anti-Semitism" regarding your earlier comment "Wonder if you have a problem with a Jewish website critiquing a Jewish doctor?", even though this has nothing to do with either religion or ethnicity, which you're trying to make this about with that comment). That won't cut it here. Northwest (talk) 18:15, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- NW: So now I’m protesting the TRUTH. How so? Simply pointing out the skepticism within the medical community concerning Dr Zelenko’s practices is… what? Liberal? Kind of boggles the mind. I could accept constructive criticism on your part, but your mindless knee-jerk reaction to anything that questions your preconceived partisan political opinions, is quite frankly, humorous. I know you can do better. Let’s see you make a reasoned argument against the professional opinions of Zelenko’s colleagues. Anything else is a waste of time, but based on your previous comments, I predict you will do no such thing. As for treading lightly? Yawn… I’m operating well within the commandments. But if you want me gone from Conservapedia, I’m sure there is an administrator who will oblige. RobS: What are you talking about? What method? What distribution? Are you talking about the off-label use of medications? The same method other doctors around the world are using? The same off-label use the FDA has authorized for eons? --JLind (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
- Amazing how you can simply wave your hand like a Jedi and claim someone’s credibility is discredited by saying LIBERAL! No need to explain why the article in question is suspect, just say LIBERAL! Your way of arguing is incredibly easy. LIBERAL! LIBERAL! Then take a break. Wow.--JLind (talk) 22:44, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- WND and Gateway Pundit are better (and more reliable and credible) sources for this article than CNN, MSNBC, the nightly network newscasts, the New York Times or the rest of the liberal media (and that includes the link you provided, which is tied to USA Today, a liberal newspaper). Congratulations, you just discredited your argument by relying on a non-credible liberal media source. Northwest (talk) 04:34, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- Please read the link provided. The doctor was admonished for extrapolating the results of 14 tests to apply to the entire village population. --JLind (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- Speaking of vaccines, have any of you seen this article? --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 23:56, 1 April 2020 (EDT)
- Quite disturbing indeed. Even worse, traditionally conservative religious denominations like the Church won't put up a sufficient fight against such! They claim to oppose vaccines made from aborted fetuses, but still advocate for people to inject into their bodies a vaccine even if it's known that the vaccine was derived from an aborted fetus! (see here) --LiberaltearsYour reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe 00:48, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
