Coronavirus - are we all doomed? (1 Viewer)

[AccessBlaster]

Lets stick with your current misquote before moving on to your next misquote. You intentionally misquoted Trump to further your own sick and twisted view.

Trump tweeted that hydroxychloroquine plus an antibiotic could be “one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine” and should “be put in use immediately.” He cited a French study that gave the combo to six patients.

 

[AccessBlaster]

He never said take fish cleaner.

 

[moke123]

He never said take fish cleaner.

Nobody is saying he did, nor is anyone arguing that the woman and her deceased husband were rocket scientists.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Nobody is saying he did, nor is anyone arguing that the woman and her deceased husband were rocket scientists.

The important fact is that Trump went public on the idea that chloroquine was virtually a cure for Covid.

Trump never said it was a cure virtually, or otherwise. That was a misquote.

 

[Micron]

Would a case of Jack be a fair trade for a Martin knock off?

If that is directed to me, it could work provided that you also imbibed heavily upon receipt so that you wouldn't care how bad it looked or sounded.

 

[moke123]

it's a tough call

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1240672025989001221

 

[AccessBlaster]

It's about China really, they lied and not one liberal cared. They are upset with a possible cure and how it's tweeted. When Trump wanted to implement a travel ban against China he was called a goose-stepping Neo-Nazi Xenophobe. That ban saved lives BTW.

 

[Jon]

I cannot see what is wrong with someone stating that a drug combination has a real chance of attacking the coronavirus. A French doctor has promising early results. It might not turn out that it works, but it also might. Otherwise, why would they be doing a clinical trial in the US and other countries on it if it doesn't have a real chance? Should we really get hung up on the word "chance", which means "possibility"?

The hydroxychrloroquine...if that is safe and someone took something else and it killed them, is that not like saying O2 is safe and then someone takes neat CO2 and they die? You cannot blame someone else for anothers stupidity. Unless I am missing something?

 

[Jon]

Is anybody forgetting what day it is? I thought it was Friday for most of the day yesterday, and was busy working away until evening. Then it dawned on me it was Saturday evening! Then I thought, well, what else will I do? So I carried on.

As a self-employed person, you are divorced of the regimentation of employed work schedules. But being stuck at home all the time too means you are even further distanced from reality.

 

[moke123]

I cannot see what is wrong with someone stating that a drug combination has a real chance of attacking the coronavirus. A French doctor has promising early results. It might not turn out that it works, but it also might. Otherwise, why would they be doing a clinical trial in the US and other countries on it if it doesn't have a real chance? Should we really get hung up on the word "chance", which means "possibility"? Is that not altogether different than saying "might"?

The hydroxychrloroquine...if that is safe and someone took something else and it killed them, is that not like saying O2 is safe and then someone takes neat CO2 and they die? You cannot blame someone else for anothers stupidity. Unless I am missing something?

Part of the problem is that people are in panic mode and you cant fix stupid so they take it. I view it kind of like yelling fire in a movie theatre. He could have simply said there are some drugs showing promise but by naming them explicitly, saying they are safe and approved, people are buying and hoarding them. A friend with Lupus who uses it is having trouble getting it. Doctors and Dentists are writing prescriptions to themselves and relatives without needing it.

 

[moke123]

Heres another part of the problem

 

[Jon]

I understand what you are saying. My take is a little different. I don't believe in suppressing information. The internet will give alternative sources anyway. I read about the anti-malaria drug way before I heard Trump talk about it. I read it from a Chinese source, a French source, and others that I can't remember. To me, withholding information is a bit like lying by omission. All this nonsense about on the one hand how ineffective masks are, and on the other hand that there is a shortage and the medics need them. How can the government have any credibility when their advice on what works and what doesn't has such obvious flaws?

We can live in two types of world. One where the government withholds information from whom they serve, or another where they are transparent. I know which one I want to live in. China represents the less transparent one, in my view.

Just my opinion and I know views differ.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I understand what you are saying. My take is a little different. I don't believe in suppressing information.

Enjoy it while you can, we are in uncharted waters.

Will the internet be the next phase of the COVID-19 attact?

 

[moke123]

All this nonsense about on the one hand how ineffective masks are, and on the other hand that there is a shortage and the medics need them.

I guess it would depend on your definition of ineffective. Must they be 100% effective or can they just reduce the risk by 50%?

 

[Jon]

I guess it would depend on your definition of ineffective. Must they be 100% effective or can they just reduce the risk by 50%?

We may have misunderstood one another. I have my own mask because they reduce risk.

 

[moke123]

We may have misunderstood one another. I have my own mask because they reduce risk.

Got any extras? I'll trade ya some TP.

 

[Jon]

I have one of the super-duper ones. Yet to use it though as we have been advised to stay home for 3 months.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

All drugs are measured according to probability of effect. It is part of the evaluation of efficacy, which is part of drug trials. A drug that is even 50% effective is better than one that is only 10% effective, and no drug I have ever heard of is 100% effective. There are no guarantees in life.

Consider an ad I have seen in the last several months for a breast cancer treatment that is only prescribed for metastatic cancer that is positive for one factor and negative for another. That is SO specific that when compared to breast cancer in general, it must be less than 50% of the total cancer population. Yet it is marketed for those who have that condition.

The drugs for ANYTHING have side effects. For instance, I can take acetaminophen (generic of Tylenol) but because of my liver, only sparingly. My wife can take certain penicillin derivatives, but some of them give her hives. Again, the bad effect hits a percentage of the population. Doesn't stop that drug from being marketed. That is how I feel about the drugs for COVID-19.

Life isn't about black and white. It is about shades of gray. It is not about hard-and-fast guaranteed effects, it is about percentages. We talk about the ills of alcohol or tobacco or recreational drugs but none of them is guaranteed to kill you. They are just LIKELY to contribute to your demise.

 

[moke123]

3 months is a long time. I've been in hiding for the last 2 weeks and its rough. I'm considered an essential worker as my agency is designated as such but I'm the only one in my office that cant work from home. I'm safe so far till early March and hope that I can get my hands on some PPE before then.

 

[Minty]

I'm safe so far till early March and hope that I can get my hands on some PPE before then.

My friend works for this lot https://www.avon-protection.com/
They make proper protective gear. Shall I have a word?