The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread

[xjx388]

It wasn’t too long ago that I was arguing against prescribing HQ for Covid prophylaxis/treatment outside of emergency hospital use and trials because it’s unethical to do so: there’s no evidence of efficacy, thus no good medical reason to even prescribe it off label. Basically, I argued that any doctor who wrote a script for it was doing the same thing as writing HCG for weight loss. Worse, they were contributing to a shortage for people who depend on it, like my wife.

SkepticGinger said doctors have a right to do so, even if there’s no evidence. I even mentioned how it was odd that she was agreeing with Trump.

[Theead vindication for xjx388].

SG will get it.

 

[Shalamar]

From your link: "This research also has not yet been peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal."

CNN doesn't want you to take HCQ, without any proven scientific evidence.
This is an apple?

HCQ is an older proven drug that treats many different disorders that cause inflammation in the body.........Covid-19 causes inflammation of lung tissue to the point the patient has to be put on a respirator to breathe.......That's what kills you, no air can get in.

I'll have the banana.


Chris B.

And yet, people who take the drug, have more adverse affects.

Even saw on the local news that in one study, those who took HCQ for Covid-19 had more fatalities than those that did not.

And yet people want to believe a man without medical training about medicines.

 

[Stacyhs]

From your link: "This research also has not yet been peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal."

CNN doesn't want you to take HCQ, without any proven scientific evidence.
This is an apple?

HCQ is an older proven drug that treats many different disorders that cause inflammation in the body.........Covid-19 causes inflammation of lung tissue to the point the patient has to be put on a respirator to breathe.......That's what kills you, no air can get in.

I'll have the banana.

Chris B.

Can you provide any peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal research that concludes h-chloroquine has any beneficial effects on Covid 19?

"CNN" doesn't want you to take HCQ without proven scientific evidence? What a radical idea! Trump has been pushing a drug for a use that has failed to prove effective. Why? Because he saw one of his FOX talking head blathering on about it, put it out there as the wonder drug that would probably save us all, and when it failed to pan out, can't admit he was wrong.

That's no banana; it Kool Aid.

 

[Giordano]

My understanding is that once approved for a disorder by the FDA an MD can legally prescribe it for any purpose “off label.” But doing so can greatly increase their possible liability for malpractice charges and litigation if something goes wrong.

 

[Stacyhs]

This is interesting:

David Dennison is the name Trump used as a pseudonym in his Stormy Daniels NDA.

David Dennison is also the doctor who wrote the "bone spurs" letter in 1968 for Trump to get out of serving in the military. If he was a doctor in 1968, he'd be at a minimum 82 years old. Do you really think Trump is talking to some octogenarian retired doctor who signed his bone spurs letter in 1968 about HCQ? Get real. Trump is lying as usual.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrfan/status/991793574890045440?lang=en

I can find no Dr. Dennison connected to Trump's WH. Anyone surprised?

 

[Resume]

My understanding is that once approved for a disorder by the FDA an MD can legally prescribe it for any purpose “off label.” But doing so can greatly increase their possible liability for malpractice charges and litigation if something goes wrong.

Yeah, but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. And it sure as **** doesn't mean that a person in a position of responsibility should be pimping an unproven drug that used inappropriately can also be very dangerous. As we can plainly see, once Trump opens his mouth about some nonsense or the other, his low information sycophants jump right on board. The problem here is that reasonably rational folks motivated by fear and uncertainly might also follow his inept leadership.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It wasn’t too long ago that I was arguing against prescribing HQ for Covid prophylaxis/treatment outside of emergency hospital use and trials because it’s unethical to do so: there’s no evidence of efficacy, thus no good medical reason to even prescribe it off label. Basically, I argued that any doctor who wrote a script for it was doing the same thing as writing HCG for weight loss. Worse, they were contributing to a shortage for people who depend on it, like my wife.

SkepticGinger said doctors have a right to do so, even if there’s no evidence. I even mentioned how it was odd that she was agreeing with Trump.

[Theead vindication for xjx388].

SG will get it.

I get it that you are posting straw men again conflating the legal right to prescribe off-label with some bizarre notion that means prescribing without evidence or a scientific rationale.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

My understanding is that once approved for a disorder by the FDA an MD can legally prescribe it for any purpose “off label.” But doing so can greatly increase their possible liability for malpractice charges and litigation if something goes wrong.

Don't fall for the distortions about what prescribing off-label means.

There are some docs who would have prescribed hydroxychoroquine because a patient made a case for wanting it. Once the studies started showing (unnecessary) adverse reactions then the risk/questionable benefit ratio changed. Most prescribers would stop prescribing it for off-label use at that point.

Doctors for the rich and famous are another beast. It doesn't apply to the rest of us. Just look at Michael Jackson getting an anesthetic to fall asleep to understand what I'm talking about.

 

[xjx388]

I get it that you are posting straw men again conflating the legal right to prescribe off-label with some bizarre notion that means prescribing without evidence or a scientific rationale.

There is no strawman; you directly argued that “clinical judgement” was more important than evidence. Here are your words:

It's my clinical judgement the risks and benefits favor chloroquine. You're off on your high horse trying to override my clinical expertise with your judgmental opinion.

You had no evidence of any benefit whatsoever. You had plenty of evidence of risk. Yet you made a case for prescribing it for a patient who wasn’t dying of Covid in a hospital and didn’t even have Covid at all. The hypothetical patient you posited merely suffered from anxiety about getting Covid and you thought that it was a good use of “clinical judgement” to prescribe HQ to alleviate her anxiety. That is especially laughable now, but it was laughable then.

Don't fall for the distortions about what prescribing off-label means.

There are some docs who would have prescribed hydroxychoroquine because a patient made a case for wanting it. Once the studies started showing (unnecessary) adverse reactions then the risk/questionable benefit ratio changed. Most prescribers would stop prescribing it for off-label use at that point.

The ratio never changed. Can you elucidate the solid evidence of any benefit at all that would have tilted the risk/benefit ratio towards prescribing it at any point? Probably not, seeing as how there was none except for very flawed studies. There was never a justification for prescribing HQ off-label because the risk benefit ratio was at best, completely unknown and at worst, skewed heavily towards risk.

An ethical prescriber doesn’t allow a patient to “make a case” for a dangerous drug that has no evidence of efficacy. The only case that matters is the scientific evidence and where there is none, a prescriber does not prescribe.

Covid-19 gave us a wonderful case study where your “clinical judgement” argument was shown to be extremely flawed. There is no “clinical judgement” without evidence. It’s pure hubris. And very Trump-like. You bought into the hype and let it skew your judgement.

 

[Aridas]

My main economic lesson from this is if I stop spending money on stuff I don't really need and take care of myself so I am less likely to need medical care then I am helping crash the economy.

The amount of destructive crap we do in the name of "jobs" is staggering. Not that any of it usually protects or produces many jobs, but it does make a nice human shield for the people profiting from the perverse incentives they can engineer with this approach.

It's been fairly widely known for a while that there's far too much that is unsustainable in our economic system. What's been propping it up is people spending beyond their means.

Yes, that's a serious fundamental problem that only gets worse the longer it's not actually being addressed.

Phantom Wolf posted testing results for Arizona. Arizona cited a declining percentage of positives as justifying loosening restrictions. Yet when you look at the numbers you discover an interesting fact. Between April 12th and May3rd testing was increased three times but positives were up by almost double. It shows the virus is increasing. You can play around with the numbers anyway you want but when new cases go from 1,208 per day to 2,205 that tells me the virus is increasing.

That depends a bit on the risk of infection of the people tested, honestly. The increasing raw number of tests and decreasing percentage positive results is a good thing in and of itself, regardless, and allows more specific action to be taken to reduce the spread.

 

[Aridas]

Is it possible he tested positive for CV 19 and is lying about it?

Yes. That's pretty much been the case since the first time it was claimed that he tested negative, though. It doesn't really matter whether he tested positive or negative for his answer, we can expect him to claim that he tested negative regardless. In the not especially likely case that he were to get very sick and be unable to hide it, then he might admit it. Maybe.

The French trial was only 6 patients and has since been heavily criticized for its lack of proper procedures including a control group.

The one that removed all the patients that got really sick and had to be put on ventilators and so couldn't continue treatment and at least one person because they died and so couldn't continue treatment? That's one way to get a 100% recovery rate.

Why? Because he saw one of his FOX talking head blathering on about it, put it out there as the wonder drug that would probably save us all, and when it failed to pan out, can't admit he was wrong.

Correction - a number of them. Fox as a whole was pushing HCQ HARD as a miracle cure.

 

[carlosy]

The US Navy officer added: "After numerous discussions he and I had regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine, we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52717161

Wait a minute!

What if this US Navy officer is the real genius here!
What if he is the single one person in Trumps circle that is actually aware of how hazardous Trump is, and has found a way to help to remove him, simply be giving him what Trump wants.

A drug that might kill him.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

https://twitter.com/MattBors/status/1262496826831167488?s=20

In ten seconds Trump goes:
- many are taking it
- I'm taking it!
- when? right now!
- in fact, I started it weeks ago

If you've ever had a friend who just cannot resist one-upping everyone over drinks you will instantly recognize these classic ********ter tactics.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

https://twitter.com/OKnox/status/1262539514196758534

UPDATE: White House doctor’s note.

Document embedded in tweet.

It seems very carefully worded in order to try to give Trump's statement a veneer of credibility without actually saying that Trump is taking it.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

And yet, people who take the drug, have more adverse affects.

Even saw on the local news that in one study, those who took HCQ for Covid-19 had more fatalities than those that did not.

And yet people want to believe a man without medical training about medicines.

HCQ is being used around the World as a treatment for Covid-19. Personally I don't believe President Trump came up with the treatment plan that uses HCQ for Covid-19. I believe he relayed this information to the general public to let everyone know what other Countries were using to treat Covid-19 patients. You may believe whatever the media wants you to believe.

Can you provide any peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal research that concludes h-chloroquine has any beneficial effects on Covid 19?

"CNN" doesn't want you to take HCQ without proven scientific evidence? What a radical idea! Trump has been pushing a drug for a use that has failed to prove effective. Why? Because he saw one of his FOX talking head blathering on about it, put it out there as the wonder drug that would probably save us all, and when it failed to pan out, can't admit he was wrong.

That's no banana; it Kool Aid.

HCQ is a very old and safe drug, it has been around and has been used to treat several medical issues for over 50 years. One of the benefits of HCQ is its anti-inflammatory properties. Inflamed lung tissue is by far the greatest danger of a Covid-19 infection. If you can't breathe nothing else matters.

If you choose to not take HCQ that's fine of course but don't try to reframe HCQ as an extremely dangerous drug. It's not.
Chris B.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Florida data scientist in charge of the Covid-19 online dashboard removed from job after she refused to cook the books in support of a reopen agenda.

https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2020/05/18/censorship-covid-19-data-researcher-removed-florida-moves-re-open-state/5212398002/

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

HCQ is being used around the World as a treatment for Covid-19. Personally I don't believe President Trump came up with the treatment plan that uses HCQ for Covid-19. I believe he relayed this information to the general public to let everyone know what other Countries were using to treat Covid-19 patients. You may believe whatever the media wants you to believe.



HCQ is a very old and safe drug, it has been around and has been used to treat several medical issues for over 50 years. One of the benefits of HCQ is its anti-inflammatory properties. Inflamed lung tissue is by far the greatest danger of a Covid-19 infection. If you can't breathe nothing else matters.

If you choose to not take HCQ that's fine of course but don't try to reframe HCQ as an extremely dangerous drug. It's not.
Chris B.

Forgive me if I choose not to take medical advise from a man who, supported the lies of a 9/11No Planer, and was too dumb to understand how holes in paper Punch Cards worked!
I tend not to take advise from idiot Infowariors!
Do so at your own risk.

 

[zorro99]

Pelosi fat shamed the president.

“He’s our president, and I would rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists,” Pelosi said on CNN in a now-viral clip, “especially in his age group, and in his, shall we say, weight group: ‘Morbidly obese,’ they say.”

CNN

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Pelosi fat shamed the president.

“He’s our president, and I would rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists,” Pelosi said on CNN in a now-viral clip, “especially in his age group, and in his, shall we say, weight group: ‘Morbidly obese,’ they say.”

CNN

A statement of fact is not fat shaming, maybe he has control over his diet, and health?

 

[The Don]

Pelosi fat shamed the president.

“He’s our president, and I would rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists,” Pelosi said on CNN in a now-viral clip, “especially in his age group, and in his, shall we say, weight group: ‘Morbidly obese,’ they say.”

CNN

#FakeNews, he's not morbidly obese, he's only obese

He'd have to be 320lbs to be morbidly obese and he's only 280 (or maybe a little more).

Unless of course his claim of 6' 3" is an exaggeration.......