The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

[Foxx]

6 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

Here's the thing: I think most people wouldn't drink bleach no matter what Trump said. But Trump still said we should investigate injecting surface disinfectants and UV light beneath the skin to kill a virus...as a treatment. It is, as stated above, evidence of a guy who doesn't understand the science here at a 5th grade level, and I guess that would be fine, if he would defer to the people who know better. 

 

Take for example, this interesting article about Sweden's approach and why its politicians and culture make a difference. Every time someone here says, "We should follow Sweden," I'm in agreement but note my belief that there's ZERO CHANCE we can do what Sweden is doing because we are culturally so different. Does the below sound like something Trump could stomach?

 

 

injecting disinfectants has been done for decades. one example is hydrogen peroxide via a nebulizer.

 

try using that thing between your ears before letting the #TDS take firm hold and opening your mouth.

[oldmanfan]

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

yep, keep throwing that ***** boomerang.

I’d like more info on this.  It looks like it’s treating a localized infection vs. a systemic one.

Just now, Foxx said:

injecting disinfectants has been done for decades. one example is hydrogen peroxide via a nebulizer.

 

try using that thing between your ears before letting the #TDS take firm hold and opening your mouth.

That’s not injection.  That’s inhalation.  

[SectionC3]

4 minutes ago, Foxx said:

i mean, what is so astounding is that after 4 years of having their idiocy bounce back on them, sometimes almost immediately, that they have not learned a ***** thing. incredibly astounding. they say #TDS isn't a real malady. my ass.

 

Comments like these are why you're on the hoax list. 

[Magox]

28 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

This is either profoundly disingenuous or stupid...One of the two.

 

Where did Europe get it from?  The Magic Coronavirus fairy?

 

And when Trump shut down China, just about everyone from the media and left were adamantly against it.  Is he suggesting that Trump should have also closed down Europe at the same time, even though there wasn't enough data to suggest it?  Last I checked, they did close down Europe but it was too late.    As if any Lefty politician would have done it before Trump.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by Magox

[SectionC3]

6 minutes ago, Scraps said:

According the the VA study I provided a link too, HCQ treated patients had more that twice the mortality rate as non-HCQ patients.  That is a fact.  You are providing anecdotal evidence.  The people you cite may simply have improved on their own.

 

Fake science and fake logic.  /end sarcasm. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

5 minutes ago, Scraps said:

According the the VA study I provided a link too, HCQ treated patients had more that twice the mortality rate as non-HCQ patients.  That is a fact.  You are providing anecdotal evidence.  The people you cite may simply have improved on their own.

At what stage were they given the treatment? That appears to be a main consideration with its effectiveness.

 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

At what stage were they given the treatment? That appears to be a main consideration with its effectiveness.

 

This is why the current studies either pro or con aren’t worth much.  We don’t know anything about patient selection, adequate controls, etc., etc.  

[Scraps]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

At what stage were they given the treatment? That appears to be a main consideration with its effectiveness.

 

I don't know but the constant mantra that it saved many lives and we can't wait for clinical trial should be abandoned by anyone reasonably sane.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Scraps said:

I don't know but the constant mantra that it saved many lives and we can't wait for clinical trial should be abandoned by anyone reasonably sane.

 

Something no one has argued -- but the voices in your head. 

[Taro T]

5 hours ago, GG said:

 

That's why you have to look at what he meant with his childish comments.  He's taking about light penetrating deeper into the skin.

 

He doesn't pull things out of thin air.  He hears a few snippets from the experts, then jumbles the topic in the PC. 

 

He also has to be exhausted by now from all of this.  When people are exhausted, they ask stupid questions or say stuff to the effect of 'there are 57 states.'  

 

Cuomo should be given a pass for telling people that want to go back to work that they should become essential workers and then they can.  He's exhausted too.  Laugh at 45 for asking a dumb question, but don't make it out to be his telling people to drink (or even bathe in, hi Mrs. Cuomo) bleach.  He asked a question.  (A few actually.)

 

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

This is why the current studies either pro or con aren’t worth much.  We don’t know anything about patient selection, adequate controls, etc., etc.  

Again, please go tell that to the patients who have recovered after using it.  I am sure that will go over well... We need to clinically test this treatment for 2-3 years, and then if we deem it works, we'll get back to you. Of course, you'll be long dead, but what do I care? I'm a scientist, *****!
 

[Foxx]

5 hours ago, GG said:

 

Actually UVC light does a pretty damn good job of killing the virus.

right.

[Buffalo_Gal]

2 minutes ago, Scraps said:

I don't know but the constant mantra that it saved many lives and we can't wait for clinical trial should be abandoned by anyone reasonably sane.

I think a clinical trial, as well as accumulating all the relative data, are extremely important. I also think saving lives NOW is extremely important.  Why can't we do both?

 

[Scraps]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Something no one has argued -- but the voices in your head. 

Oh there have been quite a few who have said that.  Doc especially.  Do you still hold your anecdotal evidence as superior to the trial I cited?

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

Again, please go tell that to the patients who have recovered after using it.  I am sure that will go over well... We need to clinically test this treatment for 2-3 years, and then if we deem it works, we'll get back to you. Of course, you'll be long dead, but what do I care? I'm a scientist, *****!
 

Sorry but this is how science and medicine works.  You don’t know if the drug caused them to recover or if they would have recovered on their own.  And in one of the trials I believe a patient or two died from cardiovascular complications.  Maybe they would have recovers from the virus on their own.

 

You are reacting emotionally.  Scientists and physicians can’t do that.  A physician can give this drug off label.  And it may alleviate symptoms or not.  But you cannot say with certainty until proper studies are conducted.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Scraps said:

Oh there have been quite a few who have said that.  Doc especially.  Do you still hold your anecdotal evidence as superior to the trial I cited?

 

You're continuing to miss the point. 

 

But that's on brand. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

Just now, Scraps said:

Oh there have been quite a few who have said that.  Doc especially.  Do you still hold your anecdotal evidence as superior to the trial I cited?

I do! If I am given a treatment that cures me, helps me to breathe, helps me get better, I do not give a flying ***** if it has had clinical trials for this particular treatment.

Thank goodness President Trump signed the "right to try"  EO. Otherwise, a lot of people would have died waiting on clinical trials.

 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I think a clinical trial, as well as accumulating all the relative data, are extremely important. I also think saving lives NOW is extremely important.  Why can't we do both?

 

I agree.  What you’re not seeing is that giving the drug may save lives, it may do nothing, and it may cost lives.  Do the studies.

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You're continuing to miss the point. 

 

But that's on brand. 

Your defense seems to always be the other person is missing the point.  Then perhaps you need to make the point clearer.

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Sorry but this is how science and medicine works.  You don’t know if the drug caused them to recover or if they would have recovered on their own.  And in one of the trials I believe a patient or two died from cardiovascular complications.  Maybe they would have recovers from the virus on their own.

 

You are reacting emotionally.  Scientists and physicians can’t do that.  A physician can give this drug off label.  And it may alleviate symptoms or not.  But you cannot say with certainty until proper studies are conducted.

One or two people vs thousands? M'kay.  Again, you go tell the people who recovered using this treatment they should not have. They need to wait around for you to conduct a clinical trial. I am certain that will go over well.



 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Starting early today.