Coronavirus Thread

[GoldZ]

> Fauci and Big Pharma gonna get nervous again.the politicians are gonna have a hard time killing this.
Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis
Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin has been used as standard-of-care in more than 300,000 older adults with multicomorbidities.These medications need to be widely available and promoted immediately for physicians to prescribe.Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut (Harvey A. Risch)


American Journal of Epidemiology, kwaa093, https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwaa093
Published:
27 May 2020

Uh-oh, how is the MSM gonna trash this ? Probably by ignoring it. DT may be like a broken clock---is this one of the two times a day ?

 

[takethepoints]

Here's a useful (as usual) post from The Incidental Economist:

https://theincidentaleconomist.com/...19-surge-its-time-to-talk-about-surveillance/

This might very well work and it is within the scope of most public health offices, particularly in rural areas. If current reports are correct, this is the way the Germans are trying to control the virus. Given the problems with ramping up mass testing in the time we have available, this could be the best use of the limited resources we have on hand. Then, if the availability of tests improves, we could start a more extensive regime.

The BIG problem = would governments that have already reopened their economies be willing to clamp down again if surveillance showed flareups that needed to be addressed? The pressure to not do so would be substantial, especially in some states we know. But the scheme won't work at all unless you stamp on the virus early and often when it flares up. One reason so many have pushed for a more comprehensive solution is that there are fears that any slackening would preclude tightening up again as a practical matter. Let's hope that won't happen and that we adopt some strategy that will control the thing, not just give us an excuse to avoid talking about it.

 

[takethepoints]

Btw, want to see a series of reports about how other countries are handling the virus? Sure you do. Here you go:

https://verfassungsblog.de/category/debates/covid-19-and-states-of-emergency-debates/

The Germans are nothing if not through. I haven't read all of these, but this strikes me as a very useful resource.

 

[bobongo]

Btw, want to see a series of reports about how other countries are handling the virus? Sure you do. Here you go:

https://verfassungsblog.de/category/debates/covid-19-and-states-of-emergency-debates/

The Germans are nothing if not through. I haven't read all of these, but this strikes me as a very useful resource.

Excellent read, especially the critique of the U.S. "response".

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Excellent read, especially the critique of the U.S. "response".

Wow, no wonder so many Americans don’t give a **** what other countries think. How do you say Fake News in German? We didn’t distribute any ventilators or other supplies from the emergency stockpile? WTH? We emptied the damned thing. How can someone be so ignorant and get published? What a buffoon.

 

[FredJacket]

Wow, no wonder so many Americans don’t give a **** what other countries think. How do you say Fake News in German? We didn’t distribute any ventilators or other supplies from the emergency stockpile? WTH? We emptied the damned thing. How can someone be so ignorant and get published? What a buffoon.

Just when I was about to read it. Is it "excellent" or not? These are trying times. #exhausted

 

[takethepoints]

Wow, no wonder so many Americans don’t give a **** what other countries think. How do you say Fake News in German? We didn’t distribute any ventilators or other supplies from the emergency stockpile? WTH? We emptied the damned thing. How can someone be so ignorant and get published? What a buffoon.

Kim Lane - yes, she's a friend of mine - doesn't say that. Read it again. What she says is that distribution from the national stockpile was delayed and that the administration told the states they were on their own in getting new supplies until late March. This is not only correct, but she has sourced it in the article. (She doesn't mention that many of the supplies finally sent were outdated and that we didn't have enough, but fault for that extends back almost a decade.)

As to getting published … well, let's just see, shall we?

https://wws.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/person/cvfiles/Scheppele.CV_.Dec2018.pdf

I'd say that scholarly opinion differs from yours. Drastically. And conclusively.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Just when I was about to read it. Is it "excellent" or not? These are trying times. #exhausted

It’s ridiculous, and yes exhausting. Not a single person went without a ventilator. They coordinated the supplies across the country to make sure that was the case. And the list of inaccuracies goes on in that article. It’s just silly - simple google searches refute all their main points.

 

[bobongo]

We didn’t distribute any ventilators or other supplies from the emergency stockpile?

Well, she didn't say that so the fake news is yours.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well, she didn't say that so the fake news is yours.

Directly from the author:
“the Trump administration has refused to authorize distribution of the stock of ventilators and masks to the states. Instead Trump told the governors that it was their responsibility to fend for themselves, even though the US was maintaining these stockpiles precisely for a national health emergency like this.”

That is all demonstrably false. A kindergartner could have googled that for the author to show an unlimited number of news articles to read to correct her. And that’s just one example of many in that article. She’s a total dunce loon.

 

[takethepoints]

That's because it is almost universally governments (men) who try to take away the natural rights of man as granted by God (or Allah or Jehovah or whatever you wish to call him/her).

The best way to think about the rights given by God is this..if you were in a remote island, with absolutely no government and no other people around ...what rights would you have?

1. It's governments that universally enforce them too. I'm not seeing the point here.

2. No rights at all. And I wouldn't need them either; I'd do what I thought I needed to to survive and I wouldn't affect t anyone else's behavior or opportunities when I did so. This is why almost all philosophers ground their defense of rights in actual human societies: no society = no rights and no need for them.

 

[forensicbuzz]

You know, the problem here is, before the post is ever made, I can tell you whether the font is attacking Trump or defending Trump just bywho the Font is. The problem here is that neither side of the argument (read: Trump) is interested in discourse. They're only interested in bolstering or defaming our current president.

I can state, with definitive certainty, which fonts are going to slam Trump and which are going to support him. Unfortunately, your minds are made up well before any definitive evidence is produced. That's the definition of Bias.

Edit: PS: my wife falls into one of these camps too. Damn shame!

 

[MWBATL]

You know, the problem here is, before the post is ever made, I can tell you whether the font is attacking Trump or defending Trump just bywho the Font is. The problem here is that neither side of the argument (read: Trump) is interested in discourse. They're only interested in bolstering or defaming our current president.

I can state, with definitive certainty, which fonts are going to slam Trump and which are going to support him. Unfortunately, your minds are made up well before any definitive evidence is produced. That's the definition of Bias.

Edit: PS: my wife falls into one of these camps too. Damn shame!

The vast majority of Americans have their mind made up on that topic. Period. Trump’s approval rating hasn’t budged in, like, the past 2 months.

 

[GoldZ]

Oh well, guess we better hope for an early vaccine success or stock up on hydroxychloroquine/zinc. Looks like long haul, huh ?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-strategy-idUSKBN22W2YC

 

[LibertyTurns]

You know, the problem here is, before the post is ever made, I can tell you whether the font is attacking Trump or defending Trump just bywho the Font is. The problem here is that neither side of the argument (read: Trump) is interested in discourse. They're only interested in bolstering or defaming our current president.

I can state, with definitive certainty, which fonts are going to slam Trump and which are going to support him. Unfortunately, your minds are made up well before any definitive evidence is produced. That's the definition of Bias.

Edit: PS: my wife falls into one of these camps too. Damn shame!

People are bombarded with inaccurate, misleading & downright false information every day. Very few have the time or inclination to seek the truth. Some assbag flings a headline out there & sides are chosen. Damn shame our media has been warped so badly.

 

[bobongo]

Bad news in S.C. and will be interesting to watch. Charleston County again only a few new daily cases. Greenville County who only has a 20% larger population had 75 (!) new cases today. They’ve been very high for a long time. It smells like the start of an uncontrolled outbreak. Will be interesting to see if the state sets new rollback restrictions on movement and commerce there, but not elsewhere. The state daily peak from early April (IIRC) was around 300 new cases and we had 330 today. Not good. Hospital capacity is still way empty, but that will likely change in the next 1-2 weeks from this. Yikes.

Conway, S.C.:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/inside-extraordinary-gop-event-pressing-142652734.html

 

[bobongo]

You know, the problem here is, before the post is ever made, I can tell you whether the font is attacking Trump or defending Trump just bywho the Font is. The problem here is that neither side of the argument (read: Trump) is interested in discourse. They're only interested in bolstering or defaming our current president.

I can state, with definitive certainty, which fonts are going to slam Trump and which are going to support him. Unfortunately, your minds are made up well before any definitive evidence is produced. That's the definition of Bias.

Edit: PS: my wife falls into one of these camps too. Damn shame!

Mostly true, but not entirely. I've said, for instance, that Trump's travel ban was right and also agreed that his guidelines for reopening were reasonable (which he later contradicted). I also said I didn't have any problem with his initial exuberance over the possibilities of hydroxychloroquine (which he later took too far after repeated tests showed it to be of no overall benefit). If he does something right in my view, I'll say so. Scant instances of it, though.

 

[GoldZ]

Mostly true, but not entirely. I've said, for instance, that Trump's travel ban was right and also agreed that his guidelines for reopening were reasonable (which he later contradicted). I also said I didn't have any problem with his initial exuberance over the possibilities of hydroxychloroquine (which he later took too far after repeated tests showed it to be of no overall benefit). If he does something right in my view, I'll say so. Scant instances of it, though.

Do Oxford University Press and Johns Hopkins equate to legit sources on hydroxychloroquine/zinc ?

 

[bobongo]

Do Oxford University Press and Johns Hopkins equate to legit sources on hydroxychloroquine/zinc ?

Well I reckon. What do they say? The reports of studies done that I've seen are quite negative. Studies have been halted because of an increased death rate. But the study of hydroxychloroquine or any other drug shouldn't be politics, it should be about the science. Science is always changing, always discovering, and should always be free of any political influence or bias.

 

[MWBATL]

Do Oxford University Press and Johns Hopkins equate to legit sources on hydroxychloroquine/zinc ?

Educate me please...why is there any argument about this?

if someone wants to take, it, shouldn't hat just be a decision between them and their doctor?

And if they don't...same thing?

Why should anyone ELSE care whether a person wants to take a specific drug or not?

What am I missing?