Has the Corona Virus infected anyone you know?

[CMJ]

2 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

 

 I couldn’t have possibly been referring back to my position since March 14th that warm weather and UV sunlight would slow things down allowing people to get outside rather than shut themselves inside...which I’ve been questioned on several times since, right?

Or my post on March 28th about Coronavirus and the Sun: a Lesson from the 1918 Influenza Pandemic  which was followed by a post by @CMJ about How Mexican American workers handled that 1918 pandemic better due to being in the sun. ,right?

 

Rick

Well, yes related.  Scientists in the aftermath thought it was a definite possibility.  They were totally racist in their reasoning, but they came to the conclusion.

From the California Commission of Immigration and Housing:

The shortcomings of the Mexicans were their salvation in this epidemic.  Their houses are so full of chinks that the fresh air fans through undisturbed; and the predilection for for sunning themselves - they crawl out just as instinctively as the lizard - provided heaven-given medicine.

 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by CMJ

[UNTLifer]

2 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

 

 I couldn’t have possibly been referring back to my position since March 14th that warm weather and UV sunlight would slow things down allowing people to get outside rather than shut themselves inside...which I’ve been questioned on several times since, right?

Or my post on March 28th about Coronavirus and the Sun: a Lesson from the 1918 Influenza Pandemic  which was followed by a post by @CMJ about How Mexican American workers handled that 1918 pandemic better due to being in the sun. ,right?

 

Rick

UV Light?  You don't say.

https://riordanclinic.org/what-we-do/ultraviolet-blood-irradiation/

[FirefightnRick]

8 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

UV Light?  You don't say.

https://riordanclinic.org/what-we-do/ultraviolet-blood-irradiation/

UV light = disinfectant to viruses.

So they really can inject disinfectant into the body?  

[Censored by Laurie]

Your CoronaVirus Questions Answered

Edited May 8, 2020 by Censored by Laurie

[LongJim]

Interesting opinion on Cuomo's handling of the situation in NYC:

https://reason.com/2020/05/07/andrew-cuomos-morally-grotesque-rationale-for-maintaining-covid-19-lockdowns/

 

[Coffee and TV]

Hydroxychloroquine Fails to Help Coronavirus Patients in Largest Study of the Drug to Date

[keith]

10 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

Hydroxychloroquine Fails to Help Coronavirus Patients in Largest Study of the Drug to Date

As an observer, it is interesting to see so much energy spent attempting to disparage a *potential* treatment for those inflicted with a horrible disease.  In the AP article on this it pretty much admits that this "study" is not the result of rigorous experiment (in other words, science), it is observational and presented as part of an editorial (in other words, opinion...perhaps informed, but opinion presented as fact).

Although the study is observational rather than a rigorous experiment, it gives valuable information for a decision that hundreds of thousands of COVID-19 patients have already had to make without clear evidence about the drug’s risks and benefits, some journal editors and other doctors wrote in an editorial.

This seems accurate - we don't have results from any strict tests, but you wouldn't know it but the amount of press it has received in the last few weeks.  However, I don't believe anyone suggested that HCQ was a panacea.  It's a classic tactic to express the side of the  argument you are opposed to in the extreme when it was never presented that way and to me a shows a fundamental weakness in the case they are trying to make.    "Wouldn't it be great if XYZ could help some people?" becomes "There is no evidence to suggest that XYZ is a cure for 100% of the people infected."

“It is disappointing that several months into the pandemic, we do not yet have results” from any strict tests of the drug, they wrote. Still, the new study “suggests that this treatment is not a panacea.”

Oh, OK, so the patients given HCQ were *sicker* than the others, but don't worry about that.  How much sicker?  What "widely accepted methods were used to take this into account" in this observational study?

Patients given hydroxychloroquine were generally sicker than the others, but widely accepted methods were used to take that into account and still no benefit was seen for the drug.

https://apnews.com/23f7a2d9645602bee1c3dc7c0c952191

 

[El Paso Eagle]

Question about the NEJM study. If you are trying to find results why would you not evenly administer the drug?

 

[FirefightnRick]

49 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

Hydroxychloroquine Fails to Help Coronavirus Patients in Largest Study of the Drug to Date

 

....”Hydroxychloroquine-treated patients were more severely ill at baseline than those who did not receive”.......

The HCQ group’s BMI is on the left, the non HCQ BMI is on the right. 

Think there wasn’t just a little bit of bias in this “study”?

 

Lol

Edited May 8, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[El Paso Eagle]

I know there will be debate and doctor's on both sides. Does it cure? .... probably not .... does it lessen the effects if taken early ... I don't know

For me, what is truly sad is that from the beginning there have been people who hoped it would not work and would be happy if it did not work because "Trump suggested". Like him or not, the politicization of diseases is pathetic. If you and I disagree - THAT IS OK! But if on either side you want a medicine to fail because of your political views you are in bad shape.

[Coffee and TV]

Here's the actual study since so many of you suddenly became molecular biologists overnight...

 

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/hydroxychloroquine-first-large-study-does-not-support-its-routine-use-covid-19-patients

[El Paso Eagle]

8 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

Here's the actual study since so many of you suddenly became molecular biologists overnight...

 

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/hydroxychloroquine-first-large-study-does-not-support-its-routine-use-covid-19-patients

Did not realize asking a question meant I thought I had become a molecular biologist. Never claimed anything. Here is the article I reference and just asked a question. I guess since you provided the information you believe yourself to be the resident molecular biologist

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410

 

I guess I hit nerve when I mentioned people who wanted it to fail due to their political leanings. 

[El Paso Eagle]

Looks like both are referencing the same study. Where they stated what I listed

 

From your link

 

 

[CMJ]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-llama-named-winter-could-be-the-key-to-fighting-the-coronavirus-2020-05-06

[El Paso Eagle]

4 minutes ago, CMJ said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-llama-named-winter-could-be-the-key-to-fighting-the-coronavirus-2020-05-06

At this point I cheer and hope for ANY breakthrough.

[keith]

27 minutes ago, CMJ said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-llama-named-winter-could-be-the-key-to-fighting-the-coronavirus-2020-05-06

I hope Trump doesn't find out about this.  I wouldn't want to be a Llama if he does...hahahahaha.

Edited May 8, 2020 by keith

[FirefightnRick]

How silly is it to criticize the safety of Hydroxychloroquin?  

Per CDC.gov

 

 

😎

Edited May 8, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[keith]

1 hour ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I know there will be debate and doctor's on both sides. Does it cure? .... probably not .... does it lessen the effects if taken early ... I don't know

For me, what is truly sad is that from the beginning there have been people who hoped it would not work and would be happy if it did not work because "Trump suggested". Like him or not, the politicization of diseases is pathetic. If you and I disagree - THAT IS OK! But if on either side you want a medicine to fail because of your political views you are in bad shape.

This x 1,000.

[Censored by Laurie]

1 hour ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I know there will be debate and doctor's on both sides. Does it cure? .... probably not .... does it lessen the effects if taken early ... I don't know

For me, what is truly sad is that from the beginning there have been people who hoped it would not work and would be happy if it did not work because "Trump suggested". Like him or not, the politicization of diseases is pathetic. If you and I disagree - THAT IS OK! But if on either side you want a medicine to fail because of your political views you are in bad shape.

 

29 minutes ago, keith said:

This x 1,000.

I don't think anyone is wanting a medicine to fail. I think most of the pushback has been borne from the fact that Trump has suggested things off-the-cuff, in the face of or at least in advance of medical science confirmation and that could actually be dangerous. see the article CMJ posted on how HCQ works, why it is an effective treatment for lupus and malaria, COULD be an effective treatment for COVID-19, but could also be dangerous. 

if there is a "rooting" element against, it's not directed at the medicine, but the idea of just how much more egotistical and insufferable Trump will be if one of these darts lands. 

that said...I do hope you both (and others) possess the self-awareness to realize you're doing the exact same thing (in the inverse). for whatever reason HCQ is your new political football and you're willing to look to anecdotal success stories and ignore the available medical studies/human clinical trials. 

[El Paso Eagle]

3 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

 

I don't think anyone is wanting a medicine to fail. I think most of the pushback has been borne from the fact that Trump has suggested things off-the-cuff, in the face of or at least in advance of medical science confirmation and that could actually be dangerous. see the article CMJ posted on how HCQ works, why it is an effective treatment for lupus and malaria, COULD be an effective treatment for COVID-19, but could also be dangerous. 

if there is a "rooting" element against, it's not directed at the medicine, but the idea of just how much more egotistical and insufferable Trump will be if one of these darts lands. 

that said...I do hope you both (and others) possess the self-awareness to realize you're doing the exact same thing (in the inverse). for whatever reason HCQ is your new political football and you're willing to look to anecdotal success stories and ignore the available medical studies/human clinical trials. 

I just want something to work. Just like I would like to see medicines developed to cure many other things. once we get past this stage (not sure if this is the correct way to say it) I would really to see similar globalized efforts directed towards other diseases. 

[Censored by Laurie]

2 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I just want something to work. Just like I would like to see medicines developed to cure many other things. once we get past this stage (not sure if this is the correct way to say it) I would really to see similar globalized efforts directed towards other diseases. 

I think everyone does. I have seen very few "GO COVID, GO" banners. 

hope isn't a drug, though. 

[Quoner]

5 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

 

I don't think anyone is wanting a medicine to fail. I think most of the pushback has been borne from the fact that Trump has suggested things off-the-cuff, in the face of or at least in advance of medical science confirmation and that could actually be dangerous. see the article CMJ posted on how HCQ works, why it is an effective treatment for lupus and malaria, COULD be an effective treatment for COVID-19, but could also be dangerous. 

if there is a "rooting" element against, it's not directed at the medicine, but the idea of just how much more egotistical and insufferable Trump will be if one of these darts lands. 

that said...I do hope you both (and others) possess the self-awareness to realize you're doing the exact same thing (in the inverse). for whatever reason HCQ is your new political football and you're willing to look to anecdotal success stories and ignore the available medical studies/human clinical trials. 

The idiotic idea that this new study was hastily fashioned together to somehow own the president is the most absurd part. There are constant studies done in parallel like this all the time. The goal is to create an accurate and full picture across a spectrum - not provide the aha moment that shuts down the conversation. Watching the same three people tout random supporting anecdotes while dumping on the scientific method is comical, but the driving force behind is also the reason there's so many idiots rushing to share Plandemic on Facebook (and that's the danger of "just asking questions" and indulging both sides equally in all discussions. You become completely vulnerable to propaganda if you give all your sources equal weight.)

[FirefightnRick]

25 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

 

I don't think anyone is wanting a medicine to fail. I think most of the pushback has been borne from the fact that Trump has suggested things off-the-cuff, in the face of or at least in advance of medical science confirmation and that could actually be dangerous. see the article CMJ posted on how HCQ works, why it is an effective treatment for lupus and malaria, COULD be an effective treatment for COVID-19, but could also be dangerous. 

if there is a "rooting" element against, it's not directed at the medicine, but the idea of just how much more egotistical and insufferable Trump will be if one of these darts lands. 

that said...I do hope you both (and others) possess the self-awareness to realize you're doing the exact same thing (in the inverse). for whatever reason HCQ is your new political football and you're willing to look to anecdotal success stories and ignore the available medical studies/human clinical trials. 

 

Promising COVID-19 Treatment Faces Political Hurdles

https://theeconomicstandard.com/covid-19-political-hurdles/

 

....”Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is part of recommended treatment for COVID-19 in modern healthcare systems around the world, and every day brings new evidence that appears to support this judgment call by overseas public health authorities. Sadly the U.S. is the only country on earth where the drug has become a toxic political football — due entirely to President Trump’s endorsement

With over 150 trials underway in the U.S. and worldwide to see if HCQ does indeed help COVID-19 patients, we must remove our partisan glasses so we can clearly interpret the results — and maybe even gain valuable insights into the functioning of the virus itself“....

 

Rick

Edited May 8, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[Quoner]

12 minutes ago, FirefightnRick said:

 

Promising COVID-19 Treatment Faces Political Hurdles

https://theeconomicstandard.com/covid-19-political-hurdles/

 

....”Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is part of recommended treatment for COVID-19 in modern healthcare systems around the world, and every day brings new evidence that appears to support this judgment call by overseas public health authorities. Sadly the U.S. is the only country on earth where the drug has become a toxic political football — due entirely to President Trump’s endorsement

With over 150 trials underway in the U.S. and worldwide to see if HCQ does indeed help COVID-19 patients, we must remove our partisan glasses so we can clearly interpret the results — and maybe even gain valuable insights into the functioning of the virus itself“....

 

Rick

Besides someone using the word political and you clapping like a seal, what's the actual issue? Is 150 studies not enough? Did you have a certain number of trials in mind? Are you upset the trials are happening and think this is settled? Just trying to understand. Who's arguing against learning more and using everything we find?

[keith]

6 minutes ago, Quoner said:

Besides someone using the word political and you clapping like a seal, what's the actual issue? Is 150 studies not enough? Did you have a certain number of trials in mind? Are you upset the trials are happening and think this is settled? Just trying to understand. Who's arguing against learning more and using everything we find?

Rick can provide his own answer, but to me it's the hyprocracy (mostly in the press) around this issue.  The media screams rely on science (I think we all agree with that) then in the next breath present findings as fact that that the authors of the study themselves say are not scientific.  

“Given the observational design of the study, our results cannot completely exclude the possibility of either modest benefit or harm of hydroxychloroquine treatment, but the findings do not support its use outside of randomized clinical trials..."

“A randomized controlled trial is the best way to determine if a drug has a benefit, and we support enrolling patients with COVID-19 into such trials...”

“It is disappointing that several months into the pandemic, we do not yet have results” from any strict tests of the drug..."

These are all fine statements from the study or articles about the study.  So can we hold off on the bombshell headlines (either way) until we have findings from true scientific experiments?