The Big Gamble: Hydroxychloroquine

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

You know the woman's political party but not her name because it was about politics.

What? Once again, come on man! That’s correct...he’s making the point that she crossed political lines to describe her medical condition and tell her success story. Her NAME isn’t the important part of the story. Quick Gary....tell me what she was wearing in the interview....also NOT important. 

[Warren Zevon]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

he’s making the point that she crossed political lines to describe her medical condition and tell her success story.

 

So it is political? Thanks

13 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

...and?  How many things are being done for political gain during this crisis? 

 

I'm replying to someone who says he doesn't see political gain. Stay in your lane crock doc

[Doc]

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

So it is political? Thanks

 

Sure it is.  Just like the Dems/MSM naysaying is political.  The big difference is this is helping to save lives.

[Wacka]

You libtards would  deny help  to somebody  hit by a car  if Trump  asked you  to pitch in.

[Warren Zevon]

Just now, Wacka said:

You libtards would  deny help  to somebody  hit by a car  if Trump  asked you  to pitch in.

 

So full of hate on Good Friday

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

59 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

I think her comments were too. Trump was more interested in letting everyone know she was a Democrat than letting anyone even know her name. He did it for political gain.

 

IMO

Come on Gary B.  If we're going to sit in judgement of every person holding a political office making comments and doing it for political gain, let's just concede that everything that is ever said or done by a person holding political office is done for his/her own political gain.   It's much easier that way than debating back and forth over an attempt at humor and an acknowledgement that a political enemy praised someone.

 

 

 

[keepthefaith]

3 hours ago, Gene Frenkle said:

My problem with this whole thing is that it was irresponsible and inappropriate for him to gamble on this by immediately hitching his horse to the HCQ wagon for all to see. It's a gamble to gain political capital, plain and simple. It may turn out that this is an effective treatment and if so, great. I would prefer if he had let the docs do their thing and refrained from giving questionable medical advice, as he's obviously unqualified to do so. Had he just let the experts do their jobs, this would not have turned into the most ridiculous and miscast political issue of the crisis to date.

 

In my view Trump didn't give medical advice.  He simply amplified the hopeful and somewhat promising French hypothesis.  He then facilitated the drug's availability so that doctors could administer it if they so chose.  In the end doctors and patients made the call which is how it's supposed to be, right?  Sure he supported it and often those comments came in response to media questions.  A media that often chose to criticize his answer and spin the thing as a dangerous approach or one that may benefit the President financially.  The latter being a very typical example of how the media uses a lack of facts and a lack of investigative reporting to put out propaganda solely designed to attack him politically. 

[Foxx]

13 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Come on Gary B.  If we're going to sit in judgement of every person holding a political office making comments and doing it for political gain, let's just concede that everything that is ever said or done by a person holding political office is done for his/her own political gain.   It's much easier that way than debating back and forth over an attempt at humor and an acknowledgement that a political enemy praised someone.

 

 

 

quid pro quo! impeach the *****! all of them!

[Warren Zevon]

14 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

If we're going to sit in judgement of every person holding a political office making comments and doing it for political gain

 

I'm not judging I am acknowledging a fact. He did it for political gain. It was a smart move on his part - it obviously has worked. 

[Wacka]

19 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

So full of hate on Good Friday

You and others are so full of hate 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year (366 this year)n every year.

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

I'm not judging I am acknowledging a fact. He did it for political gain. It was a smart move on his part - it obviously has worked. 

 

Again, it wasn't just for political gain.  If more minds are changed on using it, more people can be saved.

[Cinga]

12 hours ago, Scraps said:

Quite frankly, if you are so sick with CV-19 that you are close to death, this drug just might kill you as it can mess with your heart rythm.

Again... you're dead anyway! Your argument is like someone goes into cardiac arrest, and I refuse to start CPR because I'm probably going to break his/her sternum! Their dead anyway! But your action might, just might, bring them back!

[Warren Zevon]

2 minutes ago, Wacka said:

You and others are so full of hate 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year (366 this year)n every year.

 

I love you Wacka

[B-Man]

 

It's a word the MSM uses to dismiss the truth.

Stop the 'anecdotal' nonsense

by Jim *****

Original Article

 

"Anecdotal" has suddenly transmogrified into a magic word with power to shut down any further inquiry, discussion, or debate of hydroxychloroquine's (HYQ) application as a Wuhan virus antidote.

 

This one simple word has reached ultimate status in the world of TDS-sufferers everywhere as the definitive slayer of arguments for the drug's use to impede the deadly path of the virus.

 

This sad fact is representative of a pernicious chasm in our society. The deeply felt antipathy and revulsion of anything Trump by TDS-sufferers are so intense, raw, and vituperative that the one, and so far, only readily available treatment modality demonstrating high efficacy in stopping COVID-19

 

 

 

.

[Scraps]

26 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

It's a word the MSM uses to dismiss the truth.

Stop the 'anecdotal' nonsense

by Jim *****

Original Article

 

"Anecdotal" has suddenly transmogrified into a magic word with power to shut down any further inquiry, discussion, or debate of hydroxychloroquine's (HYQ) application as a Wuhan virus antidote.

 

This one simple word has reached ultimate status in the world of TDS-sufferers everywhere as the definitive slayer of arguments for the drug's use to impede the deadly path of the virus.

 

This sad fact is representative of a pernicious chasm in our society. The deeply felt antipathy and revulsion of anything Trump by TDS-sufferers are so intense, raw, and vituperative that the one, and so far, only readily available treatment modality demonstrating high efficacy in stopping COVID-19

Odd.  I haven't seen anyone, including Fauci who is roundly criticized by the Trumpsters, say don't try it.  They're simply saying, it hasn't been scientifically proven.  Isn't that the meaning of "anecdotal"?

46 minutes ago, Cinga said:

Again... you're dead anyway! Your argument is like someone goes into cardiac arrest, and I refuse to start CPR because I'm probably going to break his/her sternum! Their dead anyway! But your action might, just might, bring them back!

Hardly the same.  Someone in cardiac arrest will die.  Someone with Covid-19 on a respirator may or may not die.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Scraps
typo

[Doc]

7 minutes ago, Scraps said:

Odd.  I haven't seen anyone, including Fauci who is roundly criticized by the Trumpsters, say don't try it.  They're simply saying, it hasn't been scientifically proven.  Isn't that the meaning of "anecdotal"?

 

You're also kidding, right?  What do you think the left's "but oh, the side effects!" histrionics are about?

 

7 minutes ago, Scraps said:

Hardly the same.  Someone in cardiac arrest will die.  Someone with Covid-19 on a respirator may or may not die.

 

And odds of dying on a vent are ~50%.  The odds of dying from HCQ are nowhere near that.  Otherwise it would not be in use for other diseases today.

 

[Scraps]

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

You're also kidding, right?  What do you think the left's "but oh, the side effects!" histrionics are about?

 

 

I think its about the fact that the drug has some side effects and can kill some people.  I don't see that as a left vs right issue.

[Warren Zevon]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

And odds of dying on a vent are ~50%.  The odds of dying from HCQ are nowhere near that.  Otherwise it would not be in use for other diseases today.

 

 

Of course not. We need a a study that shows how HCQ shifts that 50% (if it's right) figure.

[Doc]

8 minutes ago, Scraps said:

I think its about the fact that the drug has some side effects and can kill some people.  I don't see that as a left vs right issue.

 

The drug has rare side effects that rarely kill people, again which is the reason why it's still being used by millions on a daily basis.  The left used examples of idiots overdosing and taking fish tank cleaner containing it without consulting a doctor to fabricate a narrative that it's a dangerous drug.  Why did they do that?  The answer is obvious.

 

7 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Of course not. We need a a study that shows how HCQ shifts that 50% (if it's right) figure.

 

The studies will come in time.  Right now, we need to use it because it has been proven to work (not on everyone I'll admit) and there is no other treatment.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Doc

[Taro T]

15 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

The drug has rare side effects that rarely kill people, again which is the reason why it's still being used by millions on a daily basis.  The left used examples of idiots overdosing and taking fish tank cleaner containing it without consulting a doctor to fabricate a narrative that it's a dangerous drug.  Why did they do that?  The answer is obvious.

 

 

The studies will come in time.  Right now, we need to use it because it has been proven to work (not on everyone I'll admit) and there is no other treatment.

 

The cynical answer is because the left would rather see people die than see 45 get "a win."

 

Really believe it is less sinister than that.  The left reflexively believes that anything 45 supports is necessarily wrong or nefarious, sometimes both.  And it takes a bit of doing to get over that reflexive 'this has to be fake or bad' reaction.  That the national level media almost entirely in unison can't stand him being president and most all the people they interact with daily think like mindedly, and it isn't too hard to see why they still can't open up to the possibility that this might work.  And except in very rare cases, at a minimum it won't hurt.